Why "Call it, Skinner" May Very Well be the Wosrt Idea That We Will Come to Regret

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

The idea of a Trump presidency makes me very unsettled.

I don't like Clinton, and I cannot say if I would or would not vote for her, because I have not considered that issue while Sanders is still technically in the race. I know. Do the math. Not yet.

I would NOT vote for Trump. 3rd party, perhaps. But that is not the issue here.

That being said...

A Trump presidency.

Worst case scenario? Well, we had better get ready.

Better to have a plan and not need it, than, well you know how that saying goes...

If that happens (Trump), nothing that has been discussed here, nothing about Sanders, nothing about Clinton, nothing...

...will matter anymore.

Talk about bringing the party together.

- The environment

- A path to legal residency/citizenship

- LGBT

Etcetera, etcetera.

We cannot afford to jettison ONE PERSON, we cannot afford to lose ONE CONTRIBUTOR...

Who believes in the issues that are important to us.

Two pipelines and several (very toxic) compressor stations were planned to run from PA to VT via upstate New York.

All of the above projects were either cancelled or suffered a major setback due in part to...

Community involvement.

There is a thread parallel to this one, in which a poster insists that DU is not an influential source of information.

I don't believe that for a minute.

To borrow a term from my Navy brethren...

It's time for all hands on deck.

Have a good 'what's left of the weekend' (raining here) and think about keeping as many contributors under this tent as possible.

Happy Sunday

It's May 1st. While you were sleeping, November just got one month closer.

CFS

[Trenzalore]

1. When Clinton is the nominee

The right wing style attacks on Clinton should stop

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

2. Again....

....there has to be a plan...

....for people to present themselves as, to use a British term...

'The Loyal Opposition.'

An echo chamber does no good.

[Demsrule86]

33. I will not prepare for a Trump presidecy

As if anyone could. If we fight hard enough we will defeat Trump; he is both dangerous and an imbecile...not a great combination...funny how you all can prepare for Trump but can not fathom saving us from Trump by voting for the Democratic nominee.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

42. Interesting and valid point...

...in order to vote against Trump you have to vote for Clinton. (Considering Bernie does not win the nomination)

It's a situation many people do not want to be in.

They did not create the situation and they don't like it.

But it's what you have, especially if you stay busy in the Primaries section of this website.

he is both dangerous and an imbecile..

No argument.

[Demsrule86]

57. Thanks

As I noted in a later post, I was not sure what you meant.

[puffy socks]

111. "...funny how you

all can prepare for Trump but can not fathom saving us from Trump by voting for the Democratic nominee."


Apparently that's "voting their conscience" .

[Progressive dog]

40. The Loyal opposition are members of other parties

who are loyal to the US government. There is one US government, there could be hundreds of political parties. If you oppose Democrats, there is no point in you belonging to the Democratic party.
Democrats are not forced to be Democrats, they are Democrats by choice.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

47. Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition

Is the full terminology.

It's a British term. I was using it as a literary reference.

"If you oppose Democrats"

Many here oppose Clinton because they feel she does not support Democratic values.

We still need them to fight the good fight. Not be dictated whom to vote for.

[Progressive dog]

148. If you choose to use a term as a "literary reference",

if that's what you think you did, then you should still use it correctly.

[Demsrule86]

58. That is a great point

I should have seen that immediately.

[earthshine]

127. Independents who wanted Sanders were FORCED to be Democrats.

Truth is we only have two viable political parties. This results in a lot of voting for the "lesser of two evils."

[Progressive dog]

146. They could lose somewhere else

[earthshine]

152. Oh, aren't you verbally clever?

And insulting. You contributed nothing to this discussion.

[Demsrule86]

54. I don't know what you mean

If you mean the loyal opposition to Clinton as our nominee then it can't happen on DU...in my opinion; there is no such thing as a loyal opposition to our nominee. We do not help Republicans and that is all you would do. If you mean ...Trump will win ...I disagree and have no intention of preparing for Pres. Trump- as if you could. I will fight as I always do in the trenches- to elect Pres. Clinton. All loyal Democrats who don't want the Republicans to destroy this country should do so.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

59. People who will not vote for Clinton...

....THEIR WORDS not mine....

....should be encouraged to stick around and fight the issues after the election.

[Trenzalore]

130. There is plenty of room for opposition

in December of 2016

[B Calm]

6. If Clinton is the nominee we need to keep her feet in the fire and make sure she

has the interests of We The People in her platform.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

9. Yes....

....that's another reason to need everyone.

[KPN]

108. Hell, the GOP can't do that! How in the hell are we going to?

Just another "Fuck the liberals".

[earthshine]

128. It's why Bernie must go all the way to the convention and with as many delegates as possible. nt

I feel very strongly that the purpose of two-party system is to perpetuate the two-party system. Thus, voter options are generally limited to voting for the lesser of two evils.

[Demsrule86]

136. Have you ever studied the outcomes in countries with multiple party systems?

No system is perfect but often as in England...they end up ruled by a conservative minority.

[earthshine]

139. Yes. When there are too many parties, the popular vote becomes diluted.

This allows the establishment to concentrate their power on a single party.

That having been said, there are many including me, who are not happy that the final vote is solely a choice between Clinton and the Republican nominee.

To many, this is the usual situation of having to choose between the lesser of two evils. And by evil, I mean specifically, a president whose allegiance will be to the big-money interests and not to the people.

Unfortunately, those very same big-money interests have funded both sides of the aisle.

We have a right-wing party and a center-right party. There is no viable progressive-people party.

[Trenzalore]

131. The time to do that is in December of 2016

[VulgarPoet]

151. But do you *really* think she'd care? I can't see it happening. Matter of fact,

I see any kind of correspondence from we the people trying to get her to hold to her platform getting sent to a clandestine shredder in a Chappaqua basement.

[Betty Karlson]

14. The attacks on DU come from the left. - stop smearing and lying please.

Also: nothing is as yet certain - Clinton may well enter the convention with LESS pledged delegates than Sanders.

[Garrett78]

19. She will not enter the convention with fewer pledged delegates.

And there will not be a contested convention.

How are there still folks who believe otherwise?

[Betty Karlson]

22. If Sanders manages to get over 64 % of the remaining pledged delegates, he WILL overtake her

in pledged delegates that is - and then the unpledged ones would have to do a whole of of explaining as to why they go against the majority wish expressed by the pledged ones.

[Garrett78]

29. There's no reason to believe that will happen, though.

[Betty Karlson]

43. No reason you would WANT to believe, certainly.

[Garrett78]

50. More than half the remaining delegates are in CA and NJ.

Explain to me how Sanders is going to win 65% of the remaining delegates. I don't mean repeat your assertion that it could happen. I mean demonstrate it with delegate math. Here's a calculator you can use: http://54.85.212.73/demdelcalc/index.cfm

And this doesn't have anything to do with what I want or don't want to have happen. This is about accepting reality.

[Betty Karlson]

71. Sanders tends to outperform the polls by about 10%, especially in states with open primaries, like

California?

[Demsrule86]

35. No she won't

That is a certainty.

[Betty Karlson]

46. Nothing is as yet certain. Remember her +99% chance of winning Michigan? eom

[Trenzalore]

132. I've seen quite a few linkings to 1990s right wing manufactured scandals on here the past month nt

[Baobab]

39. But, bad policy

...

[Katashi_itto]

82. Bwhahaha! You simply eliminate DU as a platform for any discussion.

The views about Clinton don't simply magically stop.

[Demsrule86]

106. At lease we won't be helping the Republicans

And that is a good thing

[KPN]

105. Hahaha. No, that's when they will actually begin.

[northernsouthern]

116. Wait?

Then red baiting ones, the attacks on her religion, the racist attacks, the sexist attacks, the attacks on her looks, ...oh wait that is what her team has been doing. But I am pretty sure by just talking about her record you are basically attacking her from the left...so unless we avoid talking about her then it will be hard to not attack her.

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. What is "Call it, Skinner", anyway?

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

5. There have been several threads after New York and Northeast Primary days...

I which people have been asking this website to declare Clinton the official nominee.

It sounds as if those people also are pushing for Bernie supporters to be silenced for party unity.*

Many in response feel that this site would become a much smaller, much more party line Clinton echo chamber.*

Bernie supporters may migrate elsewhere to keep their voice heard.*

*All of the above are my opinions, understand that I used the term 'seems like' often.

[TheCowsCameHome]

12. Thanks. So Skinner "calls it" - I'm not

at all liking what I see in Clinton - how can he purge the site?

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

20. "How can he purge the site?"

Right now, it seems to be only talk.

The real talk should pivot to issues-based discussions.

Holding a President Clinton to a progressive agenda.

Holding a President Trump (ugh) to not paving entire states to serve as parking lots for his real estate.

[djean111]

24. A President Clinton will not be held to a Progressive agenda.

There really is no way to do that/

There is no way to hold her to something that she is quite explicit in not being interested in - Progressive or liberal policies.
I think her agenda - the wars, the fracking, the TPP, means-testing Social Security - are quite in line with the GOP. All the rest is campaign blather.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

25. We have to.

Somehow, we have to.

We have a (fake) Republican with right wing values going against a Democrat with right wing values.

Progressive values (as well as our children and the planet they inherit)

WILL NEED ALL OF OUR VOICES.

Yes, I'm shouting.

[KPN]

110. How we do it is we hold her accountable in 2020 if she wins the nom and GE.

[Demsrule86]

51. You will have no chance of affecting Trump

And that is a fact. I think Clinton is progressive and will certainly have to consider a Democratic party that has moved left in her decisions.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

56. "You will have no chance of affecting Trump"

Tell that to the environmentalists, artists, and other assorted granola heads* in my area....

Who went up against Kinder Morgan and Cabot Oil and Gas....

...and won.

*I say that lovingly.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/277110-major-northeast-gas-pipeline-cancelled

[Demsrule86]

87. Trump will be a GOP president if we (gag vomit) lose

He won't give a damn what any of you think.

[Miles Archer]

141. She won't be "held" to any agenda but her own

I see no evidence that what we'd get from her varies significantly from what we've already gotten.

Which means that is she were elected, it wouldn't be President Trump.

That's where my support ends. I don't like her, I don't trust her, and if she ends up being anyone other than who she is right now, I'll be the first to admit it.

[Demsrule86]

62. This is a Democratic site

Once Skinner calls it...we support the candidate.

[KPN]

112. Which is why Skinner won't call it until the convention is over.

Of course, some here don't like how Democracy works.

[Demsrule86]

137. I read that he will call it after the last primary.

That would be in June.

[KPN]

138. Link?

[Demsrule86]

144. Link to what

Lots of people speculate that Bernie will get out when all the delegate have been won or lost...in Bernie's case...and the supers have indicated that they will vote for Hillary Clinton. It is when she got out in 08. Google it yourself. He certainly should because he only makes himself look bad in my opinion. He is quite old, I suppose he may be retiring from the Senate then he could go to the convention where she wins on the first vote and he is politely ignored. No matter what he damages himself in the process...in terms of credibility.

[KPN]

145. Duh! No shit!

Link to your reference re: having read Skinner will "Call It" immediately after CA primary results.

[Fumesucker]

133. Skinner, Elad and EarlG are the owners and operators of the site

It is their call whether or not there is even a site at all and their call on who is privileged to post here, it's that simple.

Skinner tends to manage the "people" aspect of the site and posts more than the other two.

[Demsrule86]

37. After California

Du will be called. Clinton will officially be the nominee. DU will be on election mode. In my opinion, all negative posts against Clinton need to cease.

[artislife]

53. You know that will only be DU but the real world will still

be hashing it out? I think California, who has been living with Climate Change, may surprise a few incrementalists here.

[Demsrule86]

88. California will not go for Trump

As for the real world 'hashing it out' ...if you mean bashing Hillary...let them. But we should not help them.

[Capt. Obvious]

154. I haven't seen any of those threads

[djean111]

7. It means the Hillary supporters want Skinner, the owner of DU, to kick out those who

do not support Hillary. When Skinner calls the nominee as certain, then the purging will begin. I think it will be more of an exodus. No "purging" required, although it appears some here are licking their chops.

[Andy823]

10. No

It means that people on DU want to get rid of right wing trolls that only come here to spew BS and try and get Democrats to NOT vote for the nominee. Those who can never post anything but hate filled shit, are the ones that need to leave. Playing this victim care all the time about purging everyone who was a Bernie supporter is wrong. Many Bernie supporters are great people, but many are not what they claim to be either.

[pipoman]

15. LOL...So there are people here who advocate and support Bernie

Who are right wing trolls? Riiiiight....they support the farthest left candidate to run in the election cycle? No, it is true Democrats who know Hillary isn't....some will vote for her...some will stay home....none are republicans in disguise....

[Demsrule86]

38. They support Trump in reality

And either want Bernie as the weakest candidate or naive Bernie voters to vote for Trump.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

52. "They support Trump in reality"

You read minds?

Cool.

[Demsrule86]

65. It is not difficult to stop them

They are very familiar with right wing hates sites...have followed and hated the Clintons for years. You can tell.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

68. "They are very familiar with right wing hates sites..."

Such as?

I've honestly never been to one, please tell me what they are like.

The only other website I go to has to do with Pro 2A policies, and I have about 8 posts there.

I also follow a hiking website, but do not post. All the other members have more experience than me.

"have followed and hated the Clintons for years"

The only anti-Clinton thing I ever did was hope Obama won against her in the primary.

[Demsrule86]

74. Look through the Bernie posts

You will see them. When someone sends a link, I always look it up. Bernie supporters have been posting Hillary bashing articles from right wing hate sites.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

76. Is Fox a Right Wing Hate Site?

I thought it was a right-leaning news site who's 'fair and balanced' tagline is highly inaccurate.

They do editorialize too much, too much opinion, too much agenda.

Sure, they lean right. No doubt.

I don't like them very much.

I don't like MSNBC for the equal and opposite reason.

I read The Economist and listen to NPR. About as balanced as I can find.

They have discussed Clinton's woes as well.

[Demsrule86]

98. Fox news is right wing hate site.

They are not a news organization but a propaganda machine.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

99. OK

I don't watch them anyway.

If I 'surfed' channels back when I had cable, I would watch for a few minutes at a time.

Later, I would skip right passed them.

As I said above, they did not seem, as they put it themselves: 'fair and balanced.'

Yes, I suppose I did notice an agenda. Thank you for the clarification.

BTW I don't have cable anymore.

Recently, my preferred news sources were actually Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report.

I miss them both.

[Demsrule86]

113. I miss them too

I like Samant Bee's show Frontal...something. Very funny. I wish she would have gotten the Daily show. We have kids...when they leave so does cable...waste of money. But the kids love it.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

115. My favorite was Colbert's 'Sweetness' (his handgun)

I have thick enough skin that I can take a joke.

His right wing 'schtick' was wonderful.

[Demsrule86]

119. The funny thing

I lived in occupied territory in Georgia...we didn't even have Democratic candidates. The righties in my neighborhood...thought that Colbert agreed with them. Colbert is hilarious.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

121. "thought that Colbert agreed with them."

That's the genius in his act.

He lulls RWs into a false sense of security and skewers them in plain sight.

He always has, however, shown impeccable respect for the military. That is not an act.

(The show where he had a business suit made of ACU camo - which was filmed in country - that was priceless)

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

18. There are many people...

...who have openly said here that they would not vote for Clinton.

My problem with her is that she is to the RIGHT on many issues.

Therefore it's not right wing troll-ism, it's LEFT wing values..

The oddball stuff, you know, like drinkable water and breathable air.

Oh, and did I throw in NO WAR....? There, I said it.

Bernie people tend to be LEFT of Clinton, as I am on several issues (see above).

They need to be recruited to work on issues-based discussions, not to be convinced how to vote in the GE.

[Demsrule86]

67. No

If you won't vote for our nominee than we do not want issue based discussion with you. All that means is more criticism of our nominee which should not be tolerated. We need to elect a Democrat...if it was in my power, I would purge anyone who harms that effort.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

70. Я согласен с тем, что вы сказали,

ни одна тюрьма для меня

[Demsrule86]

75. Thanks!

I often agree with you too.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

80. Translate...

the second line.

Changes everything.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

92. For those wondering...

The post above (in Russian) loosely translates to....

I will agree with you...

Please don't send me to jail.

[Kittycat]

16. It's not just purging for disagreeing with the nominee though

Any pushback on policy. We're being yelled at for wanting "free stuff", not being realistic, not supporting policies that are too far right leaning. So in the opinion of some, if we don't do the full buy in and shut it on our beliefs/stop pushing back, we would should be shut out. There is not debate or discussion allowed. Which is the likes of which I've never seen at DU in my 12 years as a member here.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

23. Bernie people do not want...

...free stuff....

....as much as Clinton people don't want war.

Neither side is as extreme as they have been accused of recently.

[djean111]

27. If people don't want war, then they should not support a candidate who revels in war.

War is what she does. If her supporters think she won't push for wars and regime changes they are delusional.

[Kittycat]

78. Whenever we attempt to have a discussion on changing

The way we view education as k-12 or prek-12 to include college and universities, trade schools and higher education learning centers, yes - many (not all) have thrown in our face that we just want "free stuff". That phrase is a disgusting RW talking point, that has no place on DU!

And when advocating for Medicare for all, another benchmark program that many democrats have wanted (either M4A or SP type programming), we're now being told its wishful thinking, pie in the sky. We should settle for incrementalism because 90+% are insured, let's just get more in, expand what is covered, and with more in the rates will go down. That does nothing to improve the situation of rising pharma, or that people can't even afford the copay's or dr fees. Insurance is not healthcare.

As for the statement about supporters not wanting war, I will take you at your word. I joined DU 12 years ago, and that was a consensus issue. But we do know now that Hillary lied for Bush on that issue. She was also involved in Honduras, poorly advised Obama and pushed hard for Lybia, Syria, and who knows what else she is planning in the name of mineral rights, gun sales or corporate profits. Because in each instance, the Clinton foundation was there swoop in with its investors to make a profit and land grab, or worse. And the last impact everywhere was devastating.

No, I don't believe all her supporters her are bad people at all. I just don't think they want to believe the truth in front of them. If there's one lesson we should have learned from Reagan to GWB, is question everything in regards to stepping on foreign soil. And her professed friendship and advice from Kissenger should have set this party on fire, and sent us running and screaming in to the steers. Instead we're standing in the tent watching it burn down around us.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

83. Affordable education...

...is not 'free stuff.'

You still have to work your butt off.

But in the library or the lab, not at Burger King.

Thank you for your post.

[Demsrule86]

69. That is not true.

If you are a member then you know when the primary is called what happens. We are in general election mode and do not go after the Democratic nominee period.

[Kittycat]

81. I've been here far longer than you have.

So don't lecture me on what I know or remember.

It's not about going after the nominee, it's about policy disagreements. We will have down ticket candidates running that won't even agree on the same issues across congressional lines, let alone with her. If we can't have honest debates on democratic issues, that's a problem. This is democratic underground, not president underground.

ETA: and just in case your post wasn't a typo, we aren't in general election mode right now. This is still primary season.

[Demsrule86]

84. I hope you don't go after the nominee

But if you use the discussion meme as an excuse to attack the Democratic nominee-Hillary Clinton- then you need to stop. I don't care how long you have been here. I have seen horrific things posted about Hillary. And it can't continue into the general. The end game is to elect a Democrat.

[Kittycat]

86. Unity threats. Bless your soul.

You should make a list, check it twice. ❤️

[Demsrule86]

96. I am not threatening anyone and never would

It is my fond hope that you would not help the Republicans by going after our candidate even if you don't like her.

[Kittycat]

104. It is my fond hope that certain HRC supporters

Would stop insulting 1/2 the liberal base and a great number of independents. I'm sure there were a number of greens that also supported Sanders, too. All these people he drew in to our party have options other than Hillary, who was less than kind in her remarks at the last town hall. Not just to Existing dems, but new dems when it came to adopting any of Sanders policies. And the time here, and just about everywhere has been a vocal slap, we won/you lost, too bad. When this is politics, and that's now how it goes. Especially within the party. Many of us accepted that when Hillary was brought in to Obama's Admin. So, a little gracious professionalism would go a long way about now, if you think you've truly got this wrapped up.

[Demsrule86]

117. I do think Hillary will be the nominee

My focus is on the general. It is my hope that everyone will join together and beat Trump because Hillary on her worst day is 1000 times better than Trump. I like Hillary and always have. I know others may not feel that way.

[Demsrule86]

89. Do you remember 'pumas'

Were they tolerated?

[Kittycat]

91. And you should read ATA

We aren't talking about nominees, we're talking policy discussions, which should be completely acceptable here, always! This is the big tent party, not the third way party. You can cheer lead her winning or cry over her losing, I don't care, but we can freely discuss policy. Where we would like to see things change, where we want it to stay the same, how we want laws introduced or modified.

I'd also like to point out that DU as a majority supports Sanders, so cutting 70-80% of the members so you can have your echo chamber, may not do well for site revenue.

[Demsrule86]

93. I have read it

There is a fine line. Again, people should conduct themselves in ways that help Democrats win. I want a Democratic president in the Whitehouse...Bernie has seriously annoyed me, but had he won, I would have worked tirelessly to get him elected. I don't understand how you could fathom a GOP in the Whitehouse...how you would not do everything in your power to prevent this...you have been around a while... and the courts are at stake. If a GOP wins the presidency...we are done for years with the courts...lifetime positions. You ready to see women jailed for having abortions,Gay and Trans people locked up because they love someone. My daughter is gay you know. How many people will die if Obamacare is repealed? How many more kids will go to bed hungry under a GOP president? I don't see how only supporting down ballot races ,bringing up issues, and not supporting the Democratic presidential candidate helps anyone. You have been here longer than me for sure...and that makes me think you should know better.

[srobert]

118. I fully anticipate being purged from the site.

With my advocacy of "Bernie or Bust" I imagine that I will be disallowed from posting here anymore, if and when Hillary becomes the nominee. That's unfortunate because I think the site benefits from hearing from those who say it's important to elect a Democrat who is not a Democrat in Name Only. Incidentally, the domain progressiveunderground.com is not claimed.

[Demsrule86]

120. I think it is important to elect the Democratic candidate

After the primary, why not just stop? Do you really think President Trump is better? If the Gop gets in ,everything Bernie wanted will never happen. I know some of you think things would get so bad that there would be a groundswell for Bernie and the revolution ...not if we lose the courts which we undoubtedly would. I hope you don't get purged and help us to beat the Republicans.

[srobert]

123. There Are Several Possible Futures from this Point in Time

1. Hillary is the candidate and defeats Trump. After her first four years, in 2020 Americans begin evaluating why things aren't getting better. Answer: we shouldn't have elected "liberals". Let's go find another Ronald Reagan to save us from "Liberalism". Democrats respond by moving further to the right.

2. Hillary is the candidate, but Trump wins. After his failed Presidency, in 2020, Democrats begin evaluating why we didn't win in 2016. Answer: we should have supported the candidate with a better chance of defeating Trump. We shouldn't have thrown the progressives under the bus by backing the "third way Democrat". Let's not make that mistake again.

3. Bernie is the nominee and wins the Presidency, in which case we begin embarking on a process of bringing real progressive change starting next year. His coattails manage to flip the Congress over to more progressive Democrats if not in the 2016 election, then in the 2018 election.

When I see the number of young people supporting Bernie, I know that we will eventually have more progressive government that Bernie is advocating, if not in this decade, then in those to follow. It is simply a matter of when. With Hillary as the nominee under either of the first 2 scenarios, it will take longer. But even longer yet if she should win, locking in the 3rd way approach of the Democratic party establishment most likely four years longer. I don't want Trump to become President. But party loyalty is a two way street. And the party has not been loyal to my kind for decades.

[Demsrule86]

134. First of all

Bernie would be 80 years old. So that won't happen. Also, most incumbent president's get re-elected. And they would have all branches of government if Trump wins...and you forget the courts...if Trump wins the courts are history...and finally does the welfare of average Americans mean anything to you? Do you know how many people would suffer under Trump and the GOP? I often wonder if Susan S. ever thought about Katrina victims...and her role in helping elect Bush.

[srobert]

142. Seriously?

"Does the welfare of average Americans mean anything to you?"
Get serious, I could ask you the same question. Of course it does. That's why I think it imperative to change the direction of the only one of the two major parties that ever represented the interests of average Americans. If it keeps drifting to the right, there won't be a party to represent the average American.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

13. Some of us believe "Skinner" is really DWS in real life.

And it's obviously Debbie's job to "call it", hopefully before any of that messy convention nonsense.

"Skinner" is DWS, right?

Darn, it's probably against DU rules to identify a DUer's real identity. Sorry, "Skinner".

[Garrett78]

21. I was wondering the same thing. DU calling the race means nothing.

DU makes up a miniscule percentage of the electorate and is not, overall, representative of the electorate. Besides, virtually everyone already knows Clinton is going to be the nominee.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

31. I have read articles....

...that use similar wording as some of the posts here.

And the DU stuff came first.

People read.

Don't underestimate.

[Garrett78]

44. Similar wording somehow indicates DU has influence?

Sorry, but DU could disappear and it would have zero bearing on election results.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

49. I respectfully....

...disagree.

[Demsrule86]

135. I would bet lots of people

Lurk here...I know I did...for years before joining. And yes posting crap out our nominee does matter.

[Garrett78]

143. What percentage of the US voting population even knows DU exists, much less is influenced by it?

1/10th of 1 percent?

[djean111]

4. Another unity OP.

And for myself, hanging around here if Hillary is the nominee will not lessen my hatred of war and cluster bombs and fracking and the TPP and increased H-1B visas and other things that Hillary proudly stands for. I cannot vote for that.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

8. No, not unity yet....

We can squabble all we want, IMO.

Unity under Trump.

If that happens, we are going to need everyone we have now.

[Demsrule86]

41. Yeah because

Trump would be so much better.

[In_The_Wind]

11. I will not vote for Trump or any republican. My car is decorated with Bernie 2016.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1018862384

[In_The_Wind]

101. Maybe ...

[pampango]

17. Those of us in purple states (Ohio for me) have a different calculus than

those in deep red or blue states. You can be damn sure I don't want Trump carrying Ohio.

[Demsrule86]

45. Trump could win Ohio

He has some support. However, Clinton is well liked in Ohio. The Clintons came to Ohio in 12 and save it for Obama. I believe she will beat Trump. Bernie would not win Ohio.

[Demsrule86]

100. I live in Ohio

I want Trump to lose Ohio...landslide style...ah what a pleasant thought.

[Trust Buster]

26. Skinner should call it. Sanders supporters outnumber Hillary supporters on this site by a wide

margin. Now that Hillary has won, her supporters are sitting ducks on this site. We have our posts hidden with ridiculous frequency for the sole sin of supporting the winning candidate. There's nothing Democratic about what's being perpetrated on DU by Sanders fanatics. Call it already Skinner. (Please read this post quickly because it's bound to be hidden)

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

30. "Please read this post quickly because it's bound to be hidden"

Even though I disagree with your opinion, I believe hiding it....

...would be unjust.

You have a right to your voice, even though you are advocating others losing theirs.

[artislife]

60. ...and now some a little art

[bvf]

107. That sums it up nicely. n/t

[Contrary1]

140. Yep...only the umpteenth time he's whined about posts getting hidden. n/t

[apnu]

28. No 3rd party in America is in any position to win.

That is the reality we have right now. There is no ground swell rejection the Democrats or Republicans. People are not flocking to the Greens, Libertarians, Constutionals, or any other party or independent person.

Therefore, a 3rd party vote, if one is Liberal or Progressive, is throwing away the vote and possibly helping Trump.

That is a reality all Sanders supporters, like myself, must face. I'm already prepared to vote Clinton for the following reasons.

1) It denies the Republicans.
2) Clinton's liberalism is without question.
3) We, Democrats, Liberals, and Progressives have better odds influencing Clinton and getting some of the things we want than we do with Trump.

Just because Sanders is probably out, does not mean the struggle for justice ends. And if Sanders were President, the struggle does not end. The work is the same, as far as I am concerned. I pledge to stay in the fight and will not sit it out, give up, an/or pout.

[Demsrule86]

48. I agree

And I would add giving the GOP four or five court picks would end any chance for Bernies's vision to happen.

[apnu]

55. Aye, good point. (nt)

[artislife]

61. If you vote and your candidate loses, then it is wasted?

Oh...I wasted my vote in 2000 and 2004? Thanks for letting me know.

By the looks of how many republicans have voted, then I should vote for their nominee....by that standard.

[apnu]

64. Nah, not rising to your bait.

Decide for yourself.

[artislife]

66. I have in the past and will continue to do so.

And there are many who will also vote FOR someone and not strategize their vote. Because when we do that, one vote, one voice disappears into the ethers.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

32. Please stop...

....underestimating the number of people who come here to read.

Not post, just read.

Your words mean more than you think.

Clinton or Trump, it's time to start working the issues.

[Demsrule86]

122. I lurked here for years

I mostly posted on Huff...not as good as it once was. So yes people read stuff.

[NCTraveler]

34. Outside of one instance, "purges" are nothing more than a self fulfilling prophecy. Nt

[NurseJackie]

36. I doubt it ...

... the haters have had thier "fun" now it's time fire them to step aside. Hillary will take it from here.

[Tarc]

63. Sanders had a good try, but it wasn't quote good enough

If you're no longer interested in electing Democrats, no one is forcing you to be here.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

73. Ever heard the term....

Last edited Sun May 1, 2016, 12:12 PM - Edit history (1)

"A Nation of Laws not Men" ???

It's to remind us that laws (and issues) transcend personality.

Clinton supporters can be the team that works for her election victory.

Sanders supporters can be the team that works the issues.

Both groups can be respectful of each other as they do their jobs.

[Demsrule86]

77. I hope Sanders people

stay and help win the general election. However, if by exploring issues you mean ...sniping at Hillary...then no. Support the nominee period.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

79. "Support the nominee period."

You are not going to get that, I base my opinion on what I read here, nothing more, nothing less.

[Demsrule86]

85. Then why are they here?

If they want to work on down ballot races and all...I guess. However, without a Demo president that is pretty pointless. If they post crap about Hillary, they threaten the general and need to be purged. I want a Democrat in the Whitehouse in January.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

90. "they threaten the general and need to be purged"

Are these the values of the Democratic Party.....?

"If they post crap about Hillary"

In this great nation of ours, truth is the ultimate defense against a suit for libel.

If what they post is true*, why punish truth tellers?

*Lies are a different matter. Proven lies should not be tolerated and are not protected under the 1st Amendment.

(However so-called erroneous statements seem to be protected as inevitable breathing room in debate)

[Demsrule86]

94. first of all

Often what they post is right wing lies...secondly, yes, we are not the government. If they post shit about our candidate they need to go. We need to elect Democrats at every level.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

95. Moved to next post.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

97. "If they post shit about our candidate, they need to go"

What if it (the shit they post) is true?

Don't argue the point of fact: "well none of it is true...."

Forget for a moment who the people are, and what the facts surrounding them are.

Argue the point of policy - what you are saying is:

Even if something is proven to be true, it should be suppressed.

Proven as in preponderance of evidence - links, quotes, videos, etc.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

103. Go to your FB and look for Van Jones and his video "Trumpzilla" and post it somewhere

I dont have access but have seen it.

[egalitegirl]

109. Worst case scenario

The worst case scenario is that Trump becomes part of the "bipartisan" establishment and implements their agenda which has already been planned. In this scenario, all arguments you make are moot because the establishment's agenda is fixed regardless of whether a Democratic Party nominee wins or the Republican Party nominee wins.

This means all the issues on which they try to instill fear are just fear mongering tactics. The issues include appointment to the Supreme Court, environmental issues and so on.

The solution for the environment advocated by Al Gore is strangely identical to the 'solution' proposed by George HW Bush and which was implemented by Mitt Romney in MA. This solution is profits for Wall Street through the trading of pollution licenses (carbon credits) which will be sold to the whole world by an organization on the lines of IMF and World Bank. It beats me how people fall for Wall Street profits being a solution for the environment.

In other words, the worst case scenario is not something unknown. It is just the continuation of the existing "bipartisan" politics.

The best case scenario in the event that Trump becomes President is that he exhibits narcissistic behavior and completely destroys the Republican Party.

Meanwhile, we need to figure out a way to take the party away from the bipartisanists.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

114. This is good. (The above post)

I read somewhere that said that there are really two political parties, INSIDERS and OUTSIDERS.

1. Insiders are divided into two camps: Republicans and Democrats

2. Outsiders are divided into two camps:

a. Those that can be influenced by offering them 'insidership.' Today we are calling them 'incrementalists'

b. Those that cannot be influenced via the above. Today we are using Don Quixote as a comparison.

Think about it, most bickering here on DU can be (this is a 'think about it' not an accusation) attributed to a fight between 2a and 2b above.

Clinton's group feels it is best to get inside and do what you can from a position of strength, Sanders' group wants to take on the establishment via a full frontal assault.

Neither of the above is a criticism.

[Rob H.]

124. Not mention that "Call it, Skinner"

seems like a giant "Fuck you" to those of us who live in states that have not yet held their primaries. The state I call home likely won't go for the Democratic nominee in the GE no matter who that nominee happens to be, but that isn't the point. At least let us have our votes counted rather than blatantly blowing them off before they've even been cast.

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

125. Good point.

Equally valid.

Thank you.

[oldandhappy]

126. yep

[NurseJackie]

149. So "calling-it" here prevents you from voting, how?

[Rob H.]

153. It doesn't, and you know that

The last sentence of my post seemed pretty clear to me, but if not, what "calling it" seems to say is that the views of people who haven't voted yet don't matter in the least since Skinner "calling it" will immediately shut down any and all debate. Should she win the remaining contets, she's still not the official Democratic nominee 'til the convention in July, in case her supporters here have forgotten; she wouldn't even be the presumptive nominee 'til after the final primaries early next month.

[oldandhappy]

129. This thread illustrates well the point of the post.

If the 'call it skinner' movement had waited until the convention, not so many people would feel nagged, pushed, lectured. As it is, some have made declarations which are not flexible. Suspect that was not the intention. Some of us voted long long ago. Some of us have been waiting for the primary process to reach us. When we were kids we wished to speed the process towards a birthday or summer vacation or family trip or winter break. We always got there.

[brooklynite]

150. This might be true...

...if DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND (with all due respect to Skinner and the users) had the slightest impact on voting in the real world.