2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: More and more this primary has distilled down to one thing for me: [View all]senz
(11,945 posts)to the reasons you've noted for Hillary's support, both of which are emotion-based. I get the impression they predominate here on DU.
The first is a strong personal identification with Hillary based on her story and gender, an identification propelled by projection. Those who hold this view of Hillary read themselves, their history, and their personal struggles into her. She represents, for them, the wounded female trying to survive against terrible odds; a victory for her would be experienced as a victory for themselves. The projection is so strong that they can't see her for who and what she is. I'm positive that the Hill campaign is aware of this phenomenon and deliberately plays to it.
The second is a shallow notion of "Democrats vs. Republicans" as a team sport with little, if any, meaningful content. The party is the team, and all that matters is "our team" winning. There is no content beyond a distant, golden history in which Democrats stood for the rights of oppressed minorities. But now, it is considered sufficient if a person has a "D" after their name. It's nearly a conditioned reflex, very Orwellian, incredibly sad. Hillary's campaign has recently begun to use this one too, as we saw at last night's town hall.
Each of these "reasons" bypasses any kind rational thought; they are totally ripe for manipulation.
I would love to express my contempt for the holders of these rationales but shall refrain in the interest of avoiding a hide.