Clinton fans, I get your elation over getting to kick us while we're down a little more.

[VulgarPoet]

But we've been getting told by the Clinton campaign for the past three months what we can go do, where we can go do it, and what we can go do it with. What the actual, everliving fuck makes y'all think we'd come out for them other than the weaker willed who are easily swayed by fear? Her and her kind have been saying they'll win without us, okay, I have no problems taking them at their word. She won't get a dime, or a second in campaigning from me, and she'll be LUCKY if I can bring myself to vote for her. Because if I do, the blood of my brothers and sisters in arms-- a loyalty I hold over loyalty to this political jackass and pony show-- will be on my hands when she gets them killed.

If I vote for her, the ailed thanks to run-off tainted water from fracking, which has been presented as a "greener" alternative to coal, will wind up rising. Which will do next to nothing for our planet, which I distinctly remember our last president talking about funding green solutions. I see no windmills, I see no solar panels, I see no goddamn water wheels-- we're right where we were in 2008, except a little worse off. It snowed in El Paso this past winter. Snow, in Texas-- in South-West Texas, no less. What next, are Democrats gonna start saying climate change doesn't exist too?

If I vote for her, more jobs in a sector I planned to make a career in will get practically auctioned off to H-1B visa holders. Oh, and even better, skilled American workers in these fields will be made to train their replacements before getting laid off-- so said H-1B visa holders can be hired on for less than what the American worker was being paid. In a world where more and more things are getting automated, we're just going to say "we know you spent an arm and a leg on a STEM degree, but there are people who can be hired for cheaper than you"? And you wonder why people were pushing for 15 an hour-- cause you've got people with comp sci and software engineering degrees working a goddamn McDonald's.

If I vote for her, I get to watch a new era of political correctness for opposing Clinton march into the world. Just like calling for Obama to be primaried in 2012 was seen as "undermining the first AA president"-- funny, that, opposing him on ANYTHING was seen as "undermining the first AA president"-- opposing Clinton in any way, or calling for her to be primaried in 2020(which I will be doing) will be seen as "undermining the first female president". And before the hordes of Clintonistas rise up out of the brackish seas of their own making to furiously protest, "no, how could you think so little of us", I remember saying something to my mother a couple years back(full disclosure, she's where the black half of me comes from) about regretting the fact that I'd voted for Obama again because any attempts to get anything done were falling through, and I couldn't help but think that if we'd had someone more forceful on our side, maybe we wouldn't have watched a sequester hit, maybe the government wouldn't have shut down twice, maybe my paycheck wouldn't have been in jeopardy twice-- and the look she gave me suggested that I'd just kicked the family dog and shat all over the carpet.

If I vote for her, I am giving my tacit approval to lauding the Reagans as crusaders for an AIDS cure(big fuckin laugh there am I right), tacit approval to removing the only thing keeping a nation prosperous(Gaddafi was a dictator, yes, but under him, Libya was prosperous, and y'know, not a terrorist ridden hellhole of our own creation), tacit approval to the concept of universal health care being an impossibility(we all know that's bullshit), tacit approval to mass surveillance("Manhattan Project against encryption", fuckin' really? Good for me, not for thee horseshit again?), tacit approval to the Inner Party, Orwellian math that somehow zero minus zero is equal to one(I guess to them, two plus two can be three or five dependent on what they need it to be to suit their argument?), there's just-- so much wrong that if I listed it all off, I'd need another twenty to twenty-five paragraphs just to write it all out.

And the whole time, I'm here thinking-- this is effectively an election between an Oligarch and a Fascist. And the only thing that comes to mind is the famous quote from Star Wars, which I've never seen as more apt in my life.

"So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause."
--Padmé Amidala

[Demsrule86]

1. You should vote for her

because Trump is a monster who could hurt many people...as for 'winning ugly' I am excited. I don't see how my excitement hurts you.

[HerbChestnut]

3. There you go.

Don't vote *for* somebody, vote *against* somebody else. Great campaign pitch.

[Demsrule86]

6. She has a 93% liberal rating

You can vote for her after you get over the bitterness of the primary and you should. I voted for Kerry, but I was a Deniac. It hurts to lose a primary...but to lose an election to a person like Trump is unthinkable.

[Matt_in_STL]

8. And the missing 7% got people killed. Lots of people killed.

Not to mention her work at State in killing more people.

[Dem2]

21. Exaggerated propaganda

This is actually why y'all get so much guff - this calling her a mass murderer is a childish name-calling lie. Perhaps you would be happier joining the passivist party, because both political parties in this country have been bullied into being aggressive, for better or (mostly) for worse.

[Matt_in_STL]

28. Oh, I am not calling her a mass murderer

I am saying her votes and policies led to the deaths of thousands, if not more, depending on whose numbers you take. Just because she and her supporters are not willing to take responsibility for it while still calling out Bush on it, doesn't make it less true or unfortunate.

[Dem2]

41. She was already the commander in chief?

News to me!

(See, these lazy attacks are exaggerated propaganda, as I just said, easy to mock.)

[Matt_in_STL]

47. Oh, so the Secretary of State has no pull in anything related to pushing military intervention?

So that's another lie on her part, right? She said she was involved in the Libya decision. So, is she a warmonger or a liar? Or, really, both?

Additionally, she voted for Iraq, which puts those lives squarely on her head, as well as anyone else who voted to allow Bush to go to war on obviously false intelligence.

[Demsrule86]

83. It is always the president's decision

And I love Obama, he talks softly but is lethal. he has killed way more terrorists than Bush. It helps that he is smarter. As for Sec. Clinton, she did as he wanted...he set the goals.

[Matt_in_STL]

93. So then Hillary had nothing to do with foreign policy because it was Obama's decision

Got it.

[Demsrule86]

99. She implemented Obama's policy

I don't think we had a choice with Kadafi...and he killed my neighbor's kid in that plane over Scotland...I used to live in Connecticut. In case, you have not noticed, Obama runs the show.

[Matt_in_STL]

100. So she didn't make any of the decisions, she just did what she was told

Same for the Iraq vote - just doing what Bush told her?

[Dem2]

106. You're flailing

Nobody cares as much as those attempting to slander her.

Can't you see that your rhetoric is stale and repetitive to the point that nobody gives a f*** any longer because your side went to the well 1000000 times too many?

[Matt_in_STL]

107. That's what you said - she was just implementing what Obama told her to.

Your words, not mine. She personally said she voted for the Iraq war authorization because Bush convinced her to. So, if her skill in foreign policy is just doing what she is told, as you say she did, what's her experience? You can't have it both ways.

[Dem2]

108. When all you have left are weak logical fallacies

It's time for a new hobby.

[Matt_in_STL]

109. Repeating what you said is a weak logical fallacy?

In other words, you can't answer it so you will call it illogical. She either did what she was told or she pushed her own policies. You state that she was just doing as she was told but she says she was in the middle of the decision making process. Hmm...who to believe...

[Dem2]

110. I never said that

Somebody else did.

[Matt_in_STL]

111. Duly noted. I got the Dem names mixed up on that. My apologies.

[Dem2]

112. :)

Here:


(that's a beer-hug)

[Demsrule86]

144. Bush lied

And it was in the middle of 911 hysteria... and why did this never come up when Kerry run...bull shit argument from people who want to use it to further their candidate's chances. It is not nor ever was about Iraq...it is about wanting Bernie to win.

[MyNameGoesHere]

118. So you're saying the first black president allowed a coup in his administration

And the secretary of state was running the show? You're saying Obama was a stupid and weak black president because he allowed others to make his decisions?

[Matt_in_STL]

119. Jesus, why is it Hillary supporters always inject race

Race has nothing to do with this. Hillary has insisted she was crucial on what our policy was in our actions in Libya and such. The poster stated she was just implementing policy. Which is it?

P.S. I knocked on doors and GOTV for Obama in 2008 in the extremely segregated areas of St. Louis so your race baiting is a double fail.

[Demsrule86]

143. the president decides policy

The SOS implements it which is why Powell quit in the Bush administration.

[arikara]

123. It goes as far back as her co-presidency with her husband

Over 500,000 dead children in Iraq, we think it was worth it yes... the words of one of her people. And don't think she had nothing to do with it, they were billed as a 2 for the price of one that time around. She was involved in policy all the way. Then came Bush and she voted in favour. She's not averse to deadly sanctions or wars. Then there was the appalling We came! We saw! He died! HAHAHAHA

She might not be a mass murderer herself, but her humanity is lacking something vital.

[okieinpain]

131. Doesn't bernie support guns. N/t.

[Matt_in_STL]

133. To the point that he gets a D- from the NRA.

[okieinpain]

135. But he supports guns. He doesn't have

Any thoughts on gun regulations.

[Matt_in_STL]

138. Here's his policy:

http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-gun-policy/

Meanwhile....

In 2008, Clinton Defended The Second Amendment As A Part Of America's "Culture." “'You know, my dad took me out behind the cottage that my grandfather built on a little lake called Lake Winola outside of Scranton and taught me how to shoot when I was a little girl," she said. 'You know, some people now continue to teach their children and their grandchildren. It's part of culture. It's part of a way of life. People enjoy hunting and shooting because it's an important part of who they are. Not because they are bitter.'" (Peter Hamby, "Clinton Touts Her Experience With Guns," CNN's Political Ticker, 4/12/08)

In 2008, Clinton Sent Out A Mailer That "Attacked Obama For First Coming Out In Favor Of A Ban On Handguns" And For Saying That Small Town People "Cling To Guns." "The mailer attacked Obama for first coming out in favor of a ban on handguns while speaking in Chicago, then for telling an Idaho crowd that he supported the Second Amendment, and finally for a comment he made about 'small towns in Pennsylvania' who 'cling to guns or religion.' The campaign sent out the mailer in May, a month after Clinton called Obama's 'cling to guns' remark 'elitist,' saying that guns were 'part of culture,' and telling the story of how her father taught her to shoot in her childhood.&quot Christopher Massie, "That Time Hillary Clinton's Campaign Attacked Obama In 2008 For Flip-Flopping On Guns," BuzzFeed, 10/12/15)

[okieinpain]

150. That's pretty good on bernie. I think he and hillary

Have the same stance on guns. I see your article with hillary attacking ingredients president Obama and it doesn't upset me that she did that.

[Demsrule86]

48. some of the missing 7 % was gun votes

How many have died because of votes on guns? Often, Bernie voted with the GOP. Also Bernie voted for Afghanistan and Yugoslavia and none of you were ever bothered by the fact Kerry voted for Iraq...that is just an excuse...you are angry because your candidate lost.

[Matt_in_STL]

53. The gun vote you refer to had nothing to do with control and instead was civil liability

And I am completely sure civil liability is something people think about before they pull the trigger. And yes, I was/am bothered by Kerry voting for Iraq, and everyone else who did as well. As ex-Army with a son of military age, I cannot sit back and watch someone send our troops into unnecessary wars, using a business case as their model for doing so.

[Demsrule86]

86. Oh really

You mean giving the gun industry blanket immunity is a good thing? No one else has such a thing. Every industry can be sued including autos ...except the gun industry. And there is no doubt in my mind if that bill had not passed, we might have seen life-saving R&D from the gun manufacturers. Bernie voted with the Republicans. And, this was not the only vote either.

[Matt_in_STL]

92. This just shows how little you know about the bill in question.

The bill in question would have allowed gun manufacturers to be sued if their firearms were used illegally. It still allows them to be sued for defective products.

So, based on what you have said, you believe auto manufacturers can be sued if a drunk driver kills someone while driving, which is not the case. Do you believe the knife manufacturer should be responsible for a stabbing too? How about Louisville Slugger if someone uses their bat to bash someone's head in? You obviously have no clue what the bill covered and thus can't be expected to have an educated conversation.

[Demsrule86]

101. I read the entire thing.

Actually, yes auto manufacturers can be sued for any reason...it is left to the courts to weed out the silly suits...Gun manufacturers can not be sued...that is wrong. Why should they have immunity...they might have made a safer product had they faced lawsuits...I will give you an example. Years ago car keys could be removed when the car was not in gear...so a person could out of the car and the car could roll...still in gear. A number of kids were killed by this...car manufacturers changed that because there were lawsuits. This made cars safer for kids.

[beachbum bob]

56. I wonder how many people sanders got killed? He never filibustered a bill that could have

stopped some measure or manner of war....and death

[Sheepshank]

146. you make this clearly false, impassioned plea in the OP, then stoop to this.

Just so you know, your pain has nothing to do with being kicked when you are already down. It's about being soundly rebuked when you spout idiocy.

[Matt_in_STL]

158. I didn't write the OP, but thanks.

[Demsrule86]

157. Over the top and completel untrue nt

[bkkyosemite]

11. I don't know which poll you got that percentage but remember she was a moderate

before she was a liberal and loved the TPP before she didn't and on and on...she is not 93% liberal.

[redstateblues]

22. You are wrong. Hillary was One of the most liberal senators in Congress.

[yuiyoshida]

31. ...

[mythology]

44. You can laugh, but the claim isn't wrong

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-05/is-hillary-clinton-a-progressive-depends-on-whos-asking

By the most commonly referenced measure, known as DW-NOMINATE, Clinton was the 11th-most liberal member of the Senate, based on her votes. In the 110th Congress, her final two years in office, Clinton was to the left of then-Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and then-Illinois Sen. Obama. The scoring also puts her much closer on the spectrum, ideologically, to Sanders, the most liberal, than to the most conservative Democrat, Florida Sen. Bill Nelson.

[yuiyoshida]

54. ...

[HerbChestnut]

15. Here's the thing.

I was never supportive of Hillary Clinton. Ever. I wasn't even going to be involved in the Democratic primary until Bernie announced. I don't trust her, and I don't agree with her positions on many issues (current or otherwise...). There are a lot of people like me.

[Demsrule86]

49. I hope not

But if you don't vote for her...it is on your head what the Donald might do.

[HerbChestnut]

55. Nice guilt trip.

I vote for who best represents me. Whether that's Hillary or somebody else I have yet to decide.

[SammyWinstonJack]

80. NO, it's not.

[Demsrule86]

149. So Trump is your guy?

Because the reality is that if you don't vote, vote for a Green traitor or write in Bernie (could be mickey mouse for all the difference it makes), you are still voting for Trump.

[laserhaas]

25. 93 percent pussed off..real liberals

Nothing she does is liberal minded

Nothing!

[Demsrule86]

87. All that comes from you is anger and spite.

Trump is way worse but you want to argue about 7%...please.

[tk2kewl]

45. the ratings are baloney

[QC]

98. Humans and chimps share over 98% of their DNA.

That other 2% makes some big differences.

[larkrake]

129. HA! take foot from mouth

[glowing]

153. That "liberal vote" is a comparison of voting records.

Our congress is anything but liberal in any of their actions; just look at the ACA, 80% of Americans would gladly take Medicare fo All, yet they couldn't even get the public option added in.

My guess is the 7% difference is due to free trade agreements, Iraq war resolution vote, and a handful of other items that were actually bad for most Americans, but great for the already too wealthy and powerful.

At somepoint it would be nice if Clinton supporters recognized that they have literally banked billions of dollars via self and Foundation. Their influence in govt is one of the reasons they are the 1%. And I doubt highly they care about the ones who are struggling today because of their disaster policies of the 90's.

[bkkyosemite]

7. The OP should vote for her against what they believe is right because of Trump. Bill Clinton

asked him to run according to Trump. I find that interesting. Remembering that pic of all of them. You don't vote for someone because someone is worse. You vote your conscious and your ideals and on issues that you truly believe in.

[Matt_in_STL]

12. Yep. The lesser of two evils is still evil.

Nobody should have to compromise their principles to vote for a candidate.

[laserhaas]

27. It's so disheartening

[PJMcK]

58. And self-defeating (n/t)

[Sheepshank]

147. There was a whole thread refuting any Bernie Supporter calling Hillary Evil..thanks for the proof

this evil vs holy shit does not belong in politics, it's a religious designation and no such thing exists. Of course Bush raised the "axis of Evil" bullshit and you are using the same religiosity terminology. Grow up and find your own words.

[tonyt53]

2. Idle minds create idle thoughts. Put your mind to work so you can stop thinking. You are wrong

[bkkyosemite]

5. Very right on!

[bkkyosemite]

4. Your last two paragraphs are right on. Hillary supporters will ignore what you have just

thoughtfully said.

TRUE so VERY TRUE: "so much wrong that if I listed it all off, I'd need another twenty to twenty-five paragraphs just to write it all out."

[NaturalHigh]

9. I'm getting sick of the bullshit "Clinton fans" posts like this.

Look, I've been a "Clinton fan" since this whole thing started, and I have never once posted anything derogatory about Bernie Sanders, no matter what I might think of some of his more rabid supporters. I'm in the majority of "Clinton fans" who respects Sanders but supports Clinton in this primary, and I frankly think we've behaved a lot better than a lot of "Bernie fans" here.

[bkkyosemite]

13. And I disagree........so much personal attacks towards Bernie and his supporters is

enough to make people vomit.

[puffy socks]

39. you have all been so thoughtful

Nope! the Berners thought they were being really cute and clever and now that its finally obvious to Berners that Bernie isnt going to win, Berners want to cry and pout about the winners giving it right back. BoBers are thin skinned as they come.


Sucks to be you.

[renate]

97. for me, as a fellow Bernie supporter, it's the gloating that's really offensive

It's so damn rude--the kind of behavior I'd expect from the other side, but not from within a community that has come to mean so much to me over the years. Even with all of Bernie's incredible and unexpected success, she's always been the presumptive nominee--especially with the superdelegates' votes included--and that "sucks to be you" attitude from above is really offensive and, what makes it even worse, completely unnecessary.

[Bettie]

148. They act as if Sanders got 1% of the vote

and has just been hanging out to annoy the "popular" girl.

[VulgarPoet]

14. Well, hey.

When your side can quit painting our women as "sluts with a special place in hell who clearly are just supporting Bernie to go after (nonexistent) Bernie Bros", our men as "misogynistic, nihilistic anarchists", and the movement as a whole as "wanting nothing but unicorns and trophies", maybe then I'll consider it.

Till then, bye.

[Miles Archer]

29. Yep, and now you know how I feel about the "Bernie Bros" posts.

It's not so much a matter of numbers ("I frankly think we've behaved a lot better than a lot of "Bernie fans" here.") as it is the fact that many of the "Clinton fan" posts have been vile, condescending, confrontational, accusatory, and drew conclusions about people that the original posters don't even know in "real life."

I'm not a "Bernie Bro." I find the term childish, clueless, and derogatory.

If given a choice between Clinton and Sanders, I choose Sanders.

This might be the first time I have responded directly to you...so I take what you say at face value.

What I can't do is nod in agreement about the "good behavior" of the Clinton Group, because all it takes is a random sampling of posts to know that the "good behavior" isn't wide-spread and universal.

I have to put up with crap because of what some Sanders supporters have posted here. You have to put up with crap because of what some Clinton supporters have posted here.

It's the "rabid" Clinton supporters and the "rabid" Sanders supporters who have lowered the level of discourse here into the swamp. I'm through doing battle...I am using the "hide threads" and "ignore" function more than I have in the entire time I've been here.

So I thank you for your civility, but just take a look around...the Clinton people give as good as they get.

[Andy823]

52. And most of those rabid posters are trolls

The trolls have taken positions on both sides of this race and they have done a hell of a job of causing problems, dividing the board, and just all round stirring up shit, day in and day out. My own view is that more of them have taken to "claiming" they are for Bernie in order to piss of both sides at one time. They know if they post absolute BS about Clinton it will piss of the Clinton supporters, and encourage other Bernie supporters to fight with each other. The one thing I have seen is far, far more of those who "claim" to be supporting Bernie say they will NEVER vote for Hillary no matter what. I have only actually see one or two Clinton supporters make that claim.

The bottom line is the boards have been used by the trolls to cause problems, and it's working. The fact is the right wants to divide the left just like they are divided, in order to try and pull of a win in November. No matter who wins, and I have said this since day one, we have to support them or else we lose everything Obama has done for us in his 8 years in office. Anyone who wants change should be able to see that allowing Trump to win is not going to get us there, if fact if he wins it will be worse than George W. Bush's time in office. Even Bernie has said Hillary would be 100 times better than trump on her worse day.

My advice is don't fee the trolls. It's pretty obvious who they are when all they do is post negative things day in and day out.

[Miles Archer]

61. I take that into account too, and thank you for pointing it out.

For me, it's not a matter of "not voting for Clinton, no matter what."

We have five months between here and the election and I don't think that, in good conscience, I could sit on my hands and watch Trump get elected.

But yeah, I have stopped feeding the trolls...I just hide those threads and put serial trolls on ignore.

I think that if more people take the tone you've taken here, we have a shot at getting DU back to being a community again.

[angrychair]

57. Really?

Because I didn't see any Sanders supporters post neo-Nazi, Holocaust-denying hate sites to attack a Democratic candidate of Jewish heritage.

No, faux news or whatever is not the same as posting and/or recommending OPs using links and conspiracy theories from hate sites like tomatoebubble.

[Nye Bevan]

10. If the two major candidates in November are Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton,

look at each of their policies, and decide which of the candidates you agree with the most. If that candidate is Trump, vote Trump; if it's Hillary, vote Hillary; if you have no preference between the two candidates, then don't bother voting.

It really is that simple.

[pinebox]

16. In other words, vote for who best represents you

Sound advice.

[HerbChestnut]

18. Don't bother voting?

Now there's an inspiring message. There is always someone to vote for even if it means writing them in. Nobody should stay home on election day.

[Demsrule86]

51. Writing someone in

is the same as voting for Trump...as is third party...why lie to yourself?

[HerbChestnut]

59. Because that's how the two party system survives. That mentality. Right there.

If I vote for someone other than a Republican or a Democrat, I'm voting for that person. Your mentality implies that 3rd party candidates aren't even people and that parties other than the R's or D's might as well not even exist. I disagree. Strongly.

[HooptieWagon]

65. When both parties represent corporate interests, then voting is just an illusion of democracy.

Voting for the lesser of two evils only enables evil to continue.

[Lord Magus]

89. The two party system "survives" because we acknowledge the reality that it exists? -nt-

[Miles Archer]

40. Absolutely true.

Bitching about the final selection won't make a bit of difference. I believe most of the people here understand that, but the road to that final two has not been without pain. It's a matter of gaining trust where trust is not present, and in the absence of being able to do that, voting for the candidate who is most likely to hold the office in the most appropriate manner.

I can't speak for any Trump "moles" who are here, because I'm not one of them.

I have a pretty good idea of what four years of Trump would look like, and if the choice comes down to voting for Clinton or not voting at all, not voting would be a grievous error.

That doesn't make me pro-Clinton...I am not, in any way, shape or form. It just makes me someone who understands the fallout from a Trump presidency.

[democrattotheend]

124. I wish we could just keep Obama

He's been such a steady hand these past 7.5 years. He may not be as progressive as I want him to be but I trust him as a leader. I don't really trust Clinton or Trump.

If I were voting just on policy positions, like you suggest, I might actually be torn between Hillary and Trump, because there are issues I agree more with Trump on, like trade. Luckily for Hillary, I am also looking at personality, and I think Trump is nuts, and way too unstable and unpresidential to be trusted with the nuclear launch codes, not to mention his appalling racism. I don't fully trust Hillary on foreign policy either, but at least she's not crazy and unstable. But if I just looked at a bunch of policy proposals on a website, I might be torn.

[Happyhippychick]

17. My elation has nothing to do with kicking anyone, I'm just elated.

And I'm sure that it's not easy for the other side, it's very hard to believe in something and work for it when it doesn't pan out. For that I am truly sorry.

[Miles Archer]

42. I can handle elation without kicking.

I'm not part of the elation, but I respect those who are.

If we can ditch the kicking aspect of DU, we'll be back to where we were before this whole thing started.

We're not there yet.

[Happyhippychick]

69. Absolutely!

[peace13]

137. We can never get back to where we started.

Too much has been done and said. Too many have been sent away or left. It will be....but not where we started from.

[onecaliberal]

78. Yes, it is hard to believe in something, and have the other side literally not have one clue what

their candidate stands for because she changes by the day. She has flipped on one particular issue I pay close attention to this primary season at least 4 times. Also, folks can dismiss the email scandal all they'd like, but the fact remains she broke rules and laws and it's only a matter of time until we see if her position in life gets her out of the consequences or she will be held accountable like the rest of us would be. Either way, it's NOT good for her. The IG, report was stinging....

[Happyhippychick]

81. Hillary is not a perfect candidate.

Bernie is not a perfect candidate.

Both are worlds better than anyone in the other party and I would vote for either one.

[onecaliberal]

96. Im not going to vote for someone who endangers the lives of those serving

overseas to hide secrets about her personal foundation.

[Happyhippychick]

104. okay

[TimPlo]

95. I would have had no problem with Clinton

That was until SC primary when she and bunch of her bought and paid for surrogates like Rep Lewis did. First it started with lie about claims that BLM was against Sanders, then a CNN reporter posting a article about how Sanders Civil Rights photo that was being spread around was a lie(which was proven 100% false report that the reporter had to back off of). Then the whole BernieBro bullshit came out trying to paint Sanders and his supporters as just rich young white men who where racist. This was the start of what set off such a negative primary cycle. Started by David Brock who is a known dirty attacker, he did same thing to Clinton years ago till they bought him out to work for them. This right here was turning point in this election for me and why I don't give a crap if Trump wins over Hillary, one liar is just as bad as the other. Clinton will do anything to win as proven by the whole racist smear she and her people did.

[CrowCityDem]

19. Calling for peace by attacking. Take your own advice.

[djean111]

20. Well put, indeed!

This is why I cannot vote for her.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. Your cohorts are all sunshine and roses

Your cohorts are all sunshine and roses:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512136936


I rest my case.

[BobbyDrake]

30. Isn't it hilarious, though? Watching them tell us to treat them better as they double-down on

their attacks on us?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. Like the kid who kills his parents and then asks the judge for leniency because he's an orphan.

[Miles Archer]

46. "Them"

You understand that even if you are getting "double down attacks" from "them," that "them" doesn't represent every Sanders supporter, right?

Take a look at some of the other responses I've posted in this discussion.

Clinton is not my candidate, but I see where this is all headed, and if she gets the nomination, that's that.

But no, none of this is "hilarious."

It's childish and petulant and it really is more of the "party unity my ass" thinking.

If the decision to stop attacking means that you wait until all attacks on you cease, it's not "hilarious."

[BobbyDrake]

68. Feel free to ignore me then, Bro. I am not concerned whether or not you are upset.

Especially not after finding this on your Journal.

"It sucks, but hopefully the assholes will sustain Skinner's financial targets. If you held a gun to my head right now, with the trigger cocked, I would not become a "star donor," not while these confrontational little shits are being handed full run of what is said here."

So, please, spare me your crocodile tears. Other people may be gullible enough to fall for them, but not me.

Enjoy pretending to be above the fray though! I'm sure it makes you feel superior (even if it's not true in the slightest), which is all that matters, right?

[Miles Archer]

71. Yeah, well...

Okay. Bye.

[Bobbie Jo]

63. Yeah, been watching this for months

Now they're crying foul?

Unbelievable.

[upaloopa]

24. We are not evil nor is Hillary. You made your statement now take responcibility for your self

What you do in the general election is your decision. Nobody is making you do anything.

It comes down to this, Trump or Hillary.

Now please make another long OP about how bad it would be if Trump were President.

[BobbyDrake]

26. Quoting the worst Star Wars movie? Now I know I don't want you on my side.

You'll need to get your attention fix somewhere else.

[Nye Bevan]

35. Yoosa should follow me now, okeeday? (nt)

[LanternWaste]

32. Not that I'd kick anyone when they are down, but if they tripped over their own shoes and blamed oth

Not that I'd kick anyone when they are down, but if they tripped over their own shoes and blamed others, I'd giggle when I observe them holding others to a higher standard of unity and civility than they hold themselves to (see below for partial list of "unifying" rhetoric)... and then rationalize their behavior as righteous.

"we've been getting told by the Clinton campaign..."
"She won't get a dime, or a second in campaigning from me..."
"are Democrats gonna start saying climate change doesn't exist too?"
"I get to watch a new era of political correctness..."

[yallerdawg]

33. "Hillary Hate" is strong with this one.

I'm going to put you in the "Anyone But" or "Someone Else" camp.

And wave a happy farewell!

[stevenleser]

34. Ahem, yes, um, I guess that is what you think this is???...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2130315

You and your fellow Sanders supporters seem to be doing a lot of attacking right now.

[anotherproletariat]

36. I think you're confusing the Clinton Campaign with the Hillary supporters on DU.

I've never heard the campaign say anything close to "what we can go do, where we can go do it, and what we can go do it with." But certainly those things have been said by people on an anonymous online forum. Quite a difference.

[Tal Vez]

38. Maybe the best strategy is for everyone to decide to do what they feel is best

rather than permitting themselves to be manipulated by the good or bad conduct of other voters. What I do in November will have nothing whatsoever to do with what other folks say to me or how they treat me.

I will control my own vote. Unless something very unpredictable happens, my vote for president will be going to the Democratic nominee. But, that's just me. Everyone should do what they feel is best.

[Miles Archer]

50. Best advice I've seen on this site today.

" Maybe the best strategy is for everyone to decide to do what they feel is best rather than permitting themselves to be manipulated by the good or bad conduct of other voters."

[Ned_Devine]

64. You and I support different candidates, but you have been the most civil...

...new member to the DU community I've seen so far. Thank you for that.

[Tal Vez]

113. Thank you for the nice compliment.

I have tried to be civil. Maybe it is a bit easier for me because I could easily support either candidate in the general election. But, it has been like that for me every four years.

[treestar]

128. Exactly!

Some people put their own best interests second to their feelings of anger towards people who didn't vote the same way!

[SidDithers]

43. Some of you are a lost cause, in terms of trying to get you to support Clinton...

There's no point in trying to convince posters like you to vote for Clinton, because you've made it abundantly clear from your posts over the past 6 months that you absolutely won't.

Thankfully, the majority of Bernie supporters will vote for Hillary in the General Election.

I'll be happy if the rest of you at DU simply cease shitting on her. And on June 16, that's going to happen, whether by your choice or not.

My question to the most vocal of the anti-Hillary posters at DU is - will you betray your principles and go quiet after June 16, or will you have the courage of your convictions, and continue posting as you have been for the past months?

Which is more important to you? Your posting privileges or your principles?

Sid

[HooptieWagon]

60. We were told our votes weren't needed.

Cool. Wasn't planning to vote for a rightwinger anyway. I'm sure there's a liberal candidate who will earn our votes.

[Ned_Devine]

62. You must have struck a nerve with the swarm

I can only see 4 of the 38 posts so far

[Surya Gayatri]

66. "Clinton fans, I get your elation over getting to kick us while we're down a little more."

[BobbyDrake]

74. +1

[LongTomH]

102. You should listen to your own rhetoric!

[saidsimplesimon]

67. Recommend VulgarPoet to offset the herd.

The are a couple of blogs where reasonable adults can have a civil discussion. Ask you friends who support Senator Sanders for the sites. I hope to see you writing on one of the blogs continuing the political revolution. till we meet again

[LiberalFighter]

70. While Bernie supporters were kicking Clinton every chance they could?

[Miles Archer]

76. While Clinton supporters were kicking Sanders every chance they could?

It was a two-way street.

[Demsrule86]

88. That is not true.

Just because the GOP has not chosen to go after Bernie and Clinton ran a clean campaign...does not mean we have not heard stuff...there is plenty that could have been posted here...but it wasn't. Right now we have a post called Clinton's brother in law Roger gets a DUI on GDP so spare me. And in the early days of this campaign, Hillary voters were alert stalked with the express purpose of getting them tossed out of DU, and it worked. I saw it happen. And then we have Bernie supporters who rigged the juries...which seems to have been fixed lately. So for you to complain about unfair treatment, in my opinion,is ludicrous.

[azurnoir]

75. expect it to amp up exponentially once Bernie's supporters are muzzled

[Miles Archer]

77. The impending muzzling is a gray area.

What Skinner has posted is basically that Clinton can't be bashed and Sanders...or any other individual...cannot be promoted as a candidate if Clinton becomes the "presumptive nominee."

Pro-Sanders posts are not prohibited, as long as they do not promote him as a potential nominee.

Obviously, there is a gap between June 15th and the convention. No one has an accurate picture of what will happen on that date. If Sanders somehow emerged as presumptive nominee, it's obvious that everything would change. I'm not speculating or predicting, so even though it may seem an invitation for people to pile on with "it's a fantasy" or "you're dreaming," all I am doing is reaffirming Sanders' intention to participate in a contested convention.

I'm guessing that DU will go "alert happy" on the 15th any time Sanders' name appears in a post.

C'est la vie.

[Adrahil]

82. Expect WHAT to "amp up?"

Frankly, I can't wait to get beyond this mess and unit with my Bernie supporter brothers and sisters to take on that Massive Trump.

I have no interest in rubbing it in, or spiking the football. Will I be happy when my candidate gets the nim? Sure. But it's time to let go of resentments and grudges and get on with it.

[Demsrule86]

90. We have no interest in attacking Bernie

Only Trump. Oh and Greens and other spoilers of course.

[azurnoir]

116. and when Bernie doesn't come to heel and drop out as told, then what?

silence?

[Maedhros]

79. For my own part, I'm not down.

Democrats have shown their true colors, which means that more and more people will start calling them on their bullshit. That's a good thing.

[SammyWinstonJack]

85. +1000000!

[Lord Magus]

91. Are you saying democracy is bullshit?

The voters' choice in this election hasn't been muddled. We know who's winning.

[mac56]

117. Is your reading comprehension that bad?

He did NOT say that democracy is bullshit. Grow up.

[Orsino]

84. Another goddamned "supporters" thread. n/t

[brooklynite]

94. Perhaps the "kicking" wouldn't happen, if you didn't continue to kick at the Party's nominee...

...as well as keep insisting that there's a way for Bernie to win.

[thucythucy]

103. More restraint from the supporters of both candidates would definitely be appreciated.

The vitriol here from both sides is pretty disheartening.

[okasha]

105. Stop biting our ankles, and we'll stop kicking you.

[Miles Archer]

114. Once again, that kind of response will get a KMA response in turn.

Referring to Sanders supporters as dogs and making a "conditional" truce is going to get you nowhere.

And as I have said elsewhere, this is far more than poor, innocent, civil Clinton supporters being attacked by Sanders mongrels.

It's been coming from both sides. I don't care if you believe that or not, it won't change the truth.

[okasha]

115. I don't kick dogs.

They are intelligent, loyal, affectionate and patient.

[snooper2]

140. Hey, ferrets are ankle-biters as well, those little bastards can be evil!

don't put it all on dogs!

[CobaltBlue]

120. VulgarPoet—I think it’s about them wanting Hillary for POTUS…

and if a deviation in voting pattern makes it happen, so be it.

If Donald Trump were to lose 30 percent of self-identified Republicans (and most of them were neocons who flip Democratic to Hillary)—while Hillary loses around that many of Bernie Sanders primaries voters—so be it.

What ever it will take.

It’s not like the issues matter.

[actslikeacarrot]

121. I would feel a hell of a lot better about voting for Clinton...

...if there was one instance of her not supporting the "war option" every time a decision had to be made.

[Tarc]

122. The BoBs are not needed, we have everyone else

[Maven]

125. You're kidding right? This place has been Hillary Hate Underground all day every day

For at least the past 6 months. Probably longer.

Stop playing the victim. It's not a believable role for you.

[Demsrule86]

145. How many Clinton supporters were pushed out at DU by alert stalking?

I saw it happen and was appalled.

[apcalc]

126. I am a Clinton fan.

Let me apologize as best I can for any Clinton supporter who kicked you while you were down.
That should not be happening. Of course it should not be that neither Clinton nor Sanders supporters should be saying nasty things about the others. Not now, not ever.

[seabeyond]

127. Look at the nasty of your post to Clinton and supporters. No respect, no reasoned, just nasty.

Why would you expect anything better?

[okieinpain]

130. Hey are you ok. N/t.

[VulgarPoet]

132. Well, vehement, blistering, lucid fury has chilled into a frozen over cynicism

With an itty bitty, super-dense core of fear for my little brother at the center. It's going to be a coke and rum night, I think, and then the point where I stop fucking with politics entirely, because at this point? I'm half certain my ex-boyfriend was right-- this is kabuki theater, plain and simple.

[Hiraeth]

134. I totally expect The Rs to start an impeachment process from Day One ~IF~ she beats Trump

which I highly doubt.

[jamese777]

152. Who cares...

if Hillary Clinton is elected, there's no way that the Republicans will have the 67 votes in the Senate needed to remove her from office. So as far as I'm concerned, they can draw up and pass 100 Bills of Impeachment in the House. They will fail in the Senate.
They will also have forgotten that Bill Clinton's hghest ever job approval ratings came the same week that he was impeached by tbe House.

[Hiraeth]

154. there's no way, you say. prepare to be amazed at the R grassroots machine.

you are not familiar? you will be.

[snooper2]

136. Damn, you should fly over Texas sometime...we have windmills out the ASS!

Even some baby ones

[VulgarPoet]

139. Well, excepting the ill-fated trip to El Paso I took last October

(And severed ties with most of the rest of my family), I haven't been home in... Three, four years? And never ONCE did I see those-- what cities are they near?

[snooper2]

141. This gives a pretty good idea...I fly from Dallas to Phoenix a lot...See shitloads from the plane :)

[VulgarPoet]

155. Huh. Maybe if I go back (highly unlikely) I'll actually TRY to get one of the window seats.

Some reason, I'm aisle'd like 60% of the time. Definitely interesting though... Wonder when they were put up. (Those parts of Texas would be pretty good parts of the state to stick 'em in, too...

[moriah]

142. I'm late to the party here, and I don't know if you'll get to this one.

I, for one, was expecting something extremely different today, back in January. I was expecting to be telling my fellow Hillary supporters that it was a good try, but now we had to support Bernie. Like we did Obama in 2008. That I knew what my candidate would do and how she would act at the Convention because she'd done it before.

But as a Hillary supporter, I can't tell you that. Even if I embraced Obama (which I did far more because I liked him than necessarily disliked McCain -- I was working my ass off phonebanking for Obama but compared to other R alternatives, as long as they kept him alive so Palin never became President I figured the alternative could be far worse... which contributed to McCain's loss, too many Rs felt he was too liberal, yay), I still can't tell you to embrace Hillary.

And I really didn't like the voter turnout implications of announcing supers clinching a nomination before the candidate gets a pledged delegate victory, even though she only needs 214 pledged delegates today and could get to the PD majority even losing California 70/30 as long as she ties in New Jersey, regardless of any of the delegates from the other four states. Obama had a PD majority earlier (May 20, thanks to Oregon, regardless of how Michigan or Florida delegates would be seated), and that's when I said I was taking my break to gear up for the General but would be supporting our Nominee. Sure, mathematically it's nearly impossible for her to not get a PD majority today, but she didn't have it yet.

I honestly don't think the Hillary campaign would have wanted this, as it has turnout implications for Hillary supporters almost more than Bernie supporters (who are obviously angry and hopefully will go to the polls no matter what if they haven't already voted early, but anger is a better motive than complacency). I think her immediate Tweet about there still being primaries was the appropriate response.

Tomorrow or tonight, I hope we can have one or two honestly "love and kindness" threads saying good things about each candidate. Bernie has, if not won the top spot on the Democratic ticket, proven that it's likely Hillary will be the last Nominee who doesn't speak more clearly for the louder, more left voices in the Party. In 8 years, the electorate will be different. It might even be in four. That's a victory just as much as Hillary's "millions of holes in the glass ceiling" were in 2008.

And I hope that the people who supported Bernie's vision keep working to make the things he stood for reality, even if they have to do the work under a Clinton administration. His vision shouldn't stop just because his campaign may.

All I ask is that when you go to the voting booth in November to vote for downticket candidates, ask yourself what you can vote within your conscience at the top of the ticket one more time before you choose a third party or leave it blank. Things may change a lot by then, I don't know. I can't tell you what your conscience should say, and either way you won't lose your "real true whatever" status.

And I really can't persuade you. I was all prepared to sway people over to unity with Bernie, but...

Just forgive even me, please, for being happy my candidate, who I didn't expect would win, will most likely be the first female nominee of a major party ticket. I don't want my happiness to come at your expense, and I would have been thrilled to nominate the first Jewish nominee if that's how the voting had went.

I'm really sorry that the AP couldn't sit on this just one more bloody day.

[VulgarPoet]

156. Honestly, part of me *wants* to hope that things change that would allow for that event.

But I'm not holding my breath. I don't believe people change their spots-- not without a complete, paradigm shifting event that completely destroyed everything that a person believed prior. Basically, I'm not holding out for a miracle.