I will never vote for Hillary Clinton in a GE

[Joe the Revelator]

I have said, from the beginning, that I was a stem cell voter this year, and unless a competent pro stem cell candidate was running against her, I would vote for Hillary Clinton in November. I have changed my mind.

The reason I am a Democrat is because republicans make me ill. One of my main problems with republicans is there steadfast and wholly fascist thirst for power. Their win at all costs mentality is bad for the country. So it goes with Hillary Clinton.

Throughout this campaign it has been clear that she fancies herself as Karl Rove-lite. I could almost give her a pass on her political ju-jit-zu and her constant whining and victim card playing. But no more.

Not only has she allied herself with John McCain in some deal with a devil strategy to tear down Obama, she's also sullied a great woman's career with her "poor wittle me" belly aching. This kind of behavior can not be condoned by the party and should not be supported by voters.

Hillary Clinton can take her chances with November and 2012. She has lost this Democratic voter forever.

[NightWatcher]

1. you wont have to, so dont worry

[OhioChick]

6. You Beat Me to It! n/t

[hueyshort]

98. wanna prove you're a democrat?

[BringBigDogBack]

63. let's hope

[jlake]

2. You and your ilk make me ill. An Obama nomination = Bush's 3rd term one way or the other.

[azmouse]

5. Wahhhhhh.... how childish.

[jlake]

10. Hillary will be president! Obama NEVER will!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

60. ...and trees will turn into lollipops!

[jlake]

66. Why do you run on sheer hatred for Hillary?

What did she do to you?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

67. It has nothing to do with Hillary.

[jlake]

69. Then what is it all about? You know the stuff you post is not true.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

76. You question lollipop trees?

:grr:

[jlake]

77. Are both Hilly & Obama too corporate for you?

[WillyT]

82. More Miles Per Snap...

:evilgrin:

[Hepburn]

100. Just curious....

...but WTF are you smoking?

:rofl:

[Skidmore]

8. Guffffawwww!

Hillary as President definitely insure Bush-Clinton III and the burying of war crimes.

[Zueda]

17. Yes. Bill did it for George Sr RE: Iran Contra.

so... I guess it does take a Clinton to clean-up after a Bush.

[Skidmore]

25. If cleaning up means sweeping ithe dirt under the carpet and

dumping the ashtray into the plant stand.

[Renew Deal]

9. Hillary will never be president

So you might as well find another hobby or get on the winning team.

[jlake]

13. Obama will NEVER be president. If he steals the nomination, McCain will stomp him and

Hillary will win in 2012. Count on it!

[scheming daemons]

23. How does one STEAL a nomination that they are leading?

...

[jlake]

27. By using the tactics he is using. Disenfranchising states, making dubious

claims that he is a "mathematical lock" on the nomination in order to cast despair upon, and disenfranchise voters, strongarming superdelegates (especially black ones) to support him.

[scheming daemons]

44. He didnt disenfranchise ANY states.... quit lying....

What, exactly, did Obama have to do with the punishment doled out by the DNC to MI and FL?


All Obama did was the EXACT SAME THING Hillary did.... that is, PLEDGE TO ABIDE BY THE DNC'S DECISION.



Now... because Obama has kept his pledge and Hillary has broken hers, you say HE has disenfranchised FL and MI?


You can make an argument that Howard Dean has... but not that Obama has.



As to your other "points":

- He does have a mathematical lock on winning the pledged delegates. Hillary would have to win every state remaining by a 70-30 margin to catch him. I'm sorry the truth of this causes you so much "despair".

- As for the superdelegates... they are grown people. He has no capability to "strong arm" them. He can ask, and they can say yes or no. What pressure can he EXACTLY put on them? All he can do is say please.....

[LSK]

16. based on what?????????

[jlake]

21. McCain will either win, or we will be stuck with Obama - expansion of the military

wants to attack Pakistan and Iran, no universal healthcare, hates gays, pro nafta expansion, Cheney energy policy etc etc etc.
Obama is not a progressive or even a good Democrat.

[NeedleCast]

Do you visit our planet often?

You appear confused.

[LSK]

65. you need help

Jack Murtha said we should expand the military. He also says we should get out of Iraq.

Obama wants to hit Al Queda bases in Pakistan if Pakistan does not want to do it for us. Oh yeah, Al Queda is in Pakistan.

Who voted for Kyl-Liebermann?? Where the hell did you pull this point out of? Your ass?

Pro-NAFTA expansion? Except its the CLINTON CAMPAIGN that told Canada not to worry. Oh and whos husband SIGNED NAFTA?

Ok so you got one thing right. Maybe.

If you wanted a Progressive, you should have supported Edwards better. However you support THE DLC CANDIDATE. So why the hell would you even bring that up?

[jlake]

72. Is Jack Murtha God? I am comparing Hilly to Obama..... talk about a red herring.

[angie_love]

95. You're an idiot.

[TahitiNut]

46. You and your ilk make me ill.

The perpetual threat of the "centrist" Democrats to abandon any progressive candidate and herd the "middle" to the GOP has a long history in the Democratic Party. This history took roots in the 70s and was manifest in the "Reagan Democrats" ... and became an organized and deliberate force with the creation of the DLC. Prior to that time, the "centrist" and conservative Democrats (mostly "Southern Democrats") only threatened to go Third Party (i.e the Dixiecrats or George Wallace's American Independent Party) or not show up. They didn't form a power base that extorted support and voted GOP when they didn't get their way. Even though a small minority, their willingness to make a 2-vote difference rather than merely withhold or go third party betrays their basic corrupion. Even the traditional "Blue Dogs" didn't go that far and swore to support the Democrats in any eveent. No longer. The "Blue Dogs" are now part of the Quisling coalition ... and have stolen the support of progressives with abandon.

That wasn't good enough. Now it's a faction that's well-funded by the corporatists and has for nearly 30 years overtly attacked liberalism and New Deal Democrats for the sake of selling out the interests of PEOPLE to the interests of PROPERTY.

What REALLY irks this Quisling Coalition is that true labor and human rights supporters who see the corruption of global wealth and power are finally stopping apologizing for being "liberals" and succumbing to the Big Lie of "tax and spend" liberals. Enough is enough.

We DESERVE the government we get ... and it'll get worse before it gets better. Only complete fools and those greedy for more power and privilege fail to see the steady lurch to the fascist right as benign.

[Psyop Samurai]

59. Ya pack a wallup, TN... Well said. .nt

[TahitiNut]

62. Thanks. I sure wish more DUers were aware of how the public is being played.

The social "wedge issues" are merely a MEANS to stampede the people into their corporate corrals. It takes a survey of the last 30-50 years of political alignments and big money involvement to see the strategy.

[Psyop Samurai]

74. They might be aware if they would read more and post less.

They have every opportunity right here on DU (or at least did before this primary circus). And many would do well to venture beyond DU as well. But what are the chances of that happening? It's their playpen, and they're looking for the most toys, not an authentic narrative. It's disheartening, and this primary spectacle has been the capper for me.

[TahitiNut]

92. It was nowhere nearly as bad as this back in 2002-2003.

The handful of "runs with scissors" were known and kept under control and the occasional "doesn't play well with the other children" got taken for (inscribed) granite sooner or later. The vast majority actually tried to maintain civility and read far, far more than post. Most would hesitate to make a point that had already been made in the thread and we kept the 'attaboy' and 'agree' posts to a minimum - we didn't really have 'kick' wars and many duplicate threads since it was possible to actually read most of the major forums without spending a whole day doing it. I remember when I actually was able to traverse the "next thread" chain and read 90% of the posts in an hour or two. It started getting bad in late 2003 and it was so bad in 2004 that we tried a whole set of software assists and more draconian rules (like forbidding insulting epithets to refer to a candidate's supporters) to keep the disruption down. It improved for a while and we found the tightened rules to be too restrictive. 2006 wasn't really TOO awful ... but now we've really lost it, I think. Civility is nearly a joke. Where clumsy snark would once be removed as uncivil it's now lost in the noise and overt insults and name-calling.

It is what we make of it ... and too many just can't desist in making it personal. It's a shame. There are still, however, some extraordinarily informative DUers who put a great deal of effort in composing clear, well-formatted, and nicely referenced posts. They make it worthwhile.

[Spider Jerusalem]

81. That's one thing that continues to puzzle me, I have to admit...

how someone can claim to be 'progressive', on the one hand, and on the ohter can ardently support the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, whose '35 years of experience' includes her husband's presidency.

Speaking from a realist, not a partisan viewpoint, Bill Clinton, despite being the first two-term Democratic president since FDR, was, to be brutally honest, not especially effective, nor especially good for the Democratic Party. He was incapable of getting the most progressive parts of his domestic agenda through a Democratic Congress, while he had one, and was continually hamstrung by scandal (a fair part of which, to be honest, was caused by his own behaviour and indiscretion); his 'acheivements' are all of a decidedly economic rightist nature (welfare 'reform', free trade measures such as NAFTA, etc). And he inexplicably gets credit for the performance of the economy during his presidency; not only was he not responsible for the tech bubble, but it wasn't necesarily a good thing, either. The market returns generated by overinvestment in developing and maturing technologies are something we've seen before; in the '90's it was computers, in the similar environment of the mid- to late-1920's it was aviation, automobiles, refrigeration, etc. The only reason the net result of the tech bubble's bursting wasn't as extreme as the 1920's crash was that the economy had grown and diversified to the extent that the (relative to its greatest expansion) collapse and consolidation of a particular economic sector was more contained.

Not to mention that Bill was the poster child for 'third way' neoliberalism, and his and the DLC's success in moving the Democratic Party to the economic right served as inspiration and model for other left-of-centre political parties in major industrial societies; most notably by influencing Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, the two principal architects of 'New Labour' in the UK (and ask any British leftist how they feel about that; most of the ones I know look at Blair et al as neo-Thatcherite).

Yet, inexplicably, a good portion of Hillary's support comes from people who harbour a warm and fuzzy nostalgia for the pre-Bush Bill clinton era, neglecting his faults or perhaps not even aware of them, while at the same time allowing themselves (some of them, anyway, to judge from opinions I've seen expressed here) to believe that Hillary is a 'progressive'.

[TahitiNut]

94. I certainly agree.

I'm inclined to think that the insanely over-reaching attacks from the far right served to muster a defense of Clinton from folks who'd otherwise not regard him with much favor. The innate sense of fairness of many was violated. While Bill has some incredible stump political talents (he could charm the buzzards off a gut wagon), the "accomplishments" of his administration were mediocre at best. Between the 3rd party candidacy of Perot and the villainy of the far right, Clinton got far more credit from the progressive left for being a "good guy" than he deserved.

I have a fundamental objection to any relative (including a spouse) taking credit (particularly on their "resume") for the work and experience of another. I was married to an RN but I'd never even try to give someone an injection. In my career, I saw far, far too many attempting to inflate their resumes by crediting themselves for work that they themselves were only remotely associated with. Where it gets to be almost a pet peeve of mine is when it comes to combat military experience. I was actually there and got more than a taste of it - but I'd NEVER even begin to claim a comprehension of what the tunnel rats and LRRP grunts went through ... but I see spouses and their relatives anoint themselves with faux expertise all the time. Hell ... if there was one person who didn't have a clue about what I experienced it was the gal to whom I was married at the time - and from whom I split immediately after coming back and dealing with her adultery.

The mythical "third way" is a total scam ... nothing but an orchestrated (and well-funded with corporate dollars) corruption of profoundly valid progressive values and principles. The abandonment of labor (war against the working class) in particular is appalling to me. The bankruptcy deform legislation is an example of just one abomination against working people.

[roguevalley]

55. how is that so? McCain can't raise squat dough, the party hates his

guts, Obama has brought millions of people to the party and even moderate republicans will vote for him. You are wrong about old man McCain winning. He won't. Obama beats him by 12 points in the latest national polling, 6 points more than Clinton. ANd after the dems of this country digest what Hillary is doing, even more so.

[Bigleaf]

3. Welcome. You're not alone.

[Maddy McCall]

4. No one really cares. But thanks for sharing.

:eyes:

[Joe the Revelator]

7. I'm sure Queen Clinton can win in November without the help of good democrats

Good luck to her.

[Fredda Weinberg]

You've just announced your disloyalty to the party. Can't you see that?

That's why we go over these things ... (credit to Paula Poundstone)

[Joe the Revelator]

26. So when Hillary endorsed McCain over Obama she was being "super loyal" to the party?

Give me a break.

[Fredda Weinberg]

28. She's running for office and pointing out the competitition. If that bothers

you, it should.

[Joe the Revelator]

38. By endorsing the republican?

Are you really this dumb??

[Fredda Weinberg]

41. You call it an endorsement. She merely stated facts that bother you n/t

[City Lights]

48. If he's as inexperienced as she claims, she should look elsewhere for a

running mate. Surely there is a Democrat out there somewhere who can bring more than a speech to her ticket.

[11 Bravo]

102. She didn't endorse McCain, but you know that, don't you?

You argue exactly like a Repuke.

[NaturalHigh]

91. Yes, forget voting your conscience...

Loyalty to the party is everything. :eyes: :puke:

[ldf]

83. you see, that can be a real problem...

if supporters of either democratic candidate take that tact, and decide to stay home and not vote, and we STILL win...

then you have just removed yourself completely from the equation.

no candidate will EVER have to address your needs.

no true democrat would want that.

[NMMatt]

11. Believe it... there are millions of us just like this poster

The Clinton/Bush divide and conquer strategy is imploding before your eyes.

[Maddy McCall]

49. I'm sure there are. They're called Republicans.

Thanks for outting yourself.

[NMMatt]

71. Whatever

I've been voting Dem since I was able. I even put her husband back in the white house in 96. That was probably a mistake in retrospect.

[Not the Only One]

107. a message has to be sent

Politicians have to learn that we won't tolerate the kind of politics that the Clintons and Bushes offer. America deserves better. If we keep accepting a third rate style of politics and governance, that's what we will continue to get and we will have ourselves to blame for it.

[seabeyond]

12. i would have until about wednesday of this week. n.t

[Dogmudgeon]

14. You tell 'em!

If Barack Obama doesn't get the nomination, we DESTROY the Democrat Party!!!!!

--p!

[Joe the Revelator]

18. If Hillary gets the nomination employing the strategy she is currently using..

there will be no party to destroy.

[LSK]

15. I will, even thou she is using every trick in the Rove playbook

[polichick]

19. The main reason I would is to avoid a draft. nt

[David__77]

20. Thankfully, that's not a choice we'll have to make.

While there is a slim chance Obama will not be the nominee, there is NO chance that Clinton will be. I am glad that I don't have to hypothesize about this one.

[Demit]

22. What a principled stand you're taking! Enjoy your Republican president.

[Joe the Revelator]

24. If the choice is between two friends cut from the same cloth...

why vote for either?

[Hepburn]

101. That is how I see it....

...Hillary....or McCain = not much difference.

[Bigleaf]

30. Well, he is more experienced!

[sellitman]

29. Why stay on DU?

You are not a Democrat if you allow McCain to win.

WTF are you doing here? Take your pity party to Free Repignic where you will fit in better.

[specimenfred1984]

32. Well said.

I fully agree.

[Joe the Revelator]

36. Why even have a democratic party if we're going to nominate people who act like republicans? nt

[sellitman]

110. Now you sound like Ralph Nader

Remember when he said there was no difference between Gore & bush?

You loose the argument if you go down that road.

[Thepricebreaker]

51. There are a lot more issues then president going on.

[galaxy21]

31. true....

Hillary decided she would be president 30 years ago.She just forgot the voters had to agree with her.


Those damn voters! They ruin everything!

[barack the house]

33. Cant see her career sullied especially when reality soon dawns on her voters the truh will out.

[Texas Hill Country]

34. This is why Democrats loose.

[superkia]

35. She isnt in a deal with McCain, its just that they are both bought...

and paid for by the elite, they share the same agendas. Look at the Iraq war vote, that tells you where their agendas are and who they share them with. The elite needed a D in office to put the Americans back to sleep so they could continue their agenda, McCain was their second choice because he shares the agenda but Americans are pissed at republicans and it would keep Americans upset and paying attention. I cant imagine Obama actually winning, I think the American people will vote for him but I don't think the elite and corrupt will allow it to happen. We will probably have a president Clinton, President McCain or dictator bush will use martial law and stay in power as a last resort.

I have this feeling if Obama doesn't win, there will be people getting arrested for civil disobedience in record numbers. The constitution doesn't really exist anymore so anything goes now in the land of the free.

They are even ready for all of the younger children that are out supporting Obama and Paul, the new mosquito weapon only effects younger people and it works very well. The older folks will still get the spray, clubs, high powered pellets and the new laser that gives the sensation of a extremely bad burn where ever its pointed up to mile.

So far, the Mosquito has been road-tested in only one place, at the entrance to the Spar convenience store in this town in South Wales.Mr. Stapleton gave him a Mosquito for a free trial. The results were almost instantaneous. It was as if someone had used anti-teenager spray around the entrance, the way you might spray your sofas to keep pets off. Where disaffected youths used to congregate, now there is no one.

At first, members of the usual crowd tried to gather as normal, repeatedly going inside the store with their fingers in their ears and “begging me to turn it off,” Mr. Gough said. But he held firm and neatly avoided possible aggressive confrontations: “I told them it was to keep birds away because of the bird flu epidemic.”

Coming to a town near you!

Good luck to all.

[msongs]

37. not likely you were ever gonna vote for clinton. nt

[Joe the Revelator]

39. I've never not voted for a Democrat.

Can you say the same?

[Hepburn]

I can say the same....

...until Hillary. I am pretty sure I will NOT vote for her if she gets the nom. I will not vote for McCain either. I really see no difference between neocon DINO Hillary and Insane McCain. They are just two different ways of spelling the word "disaster."

[noonwitch]

40. Hope you're okay with McCain making the next USSC pick

Stevens, a liberal, is going to retire at some point in the near future. If a conservative president picks the replacment, you can say goodbye to:

1. Civil rights
2. Women's rights
3. Any right to sue a business who sold a faulty/dangerous product

And so on.

I'm a Hillary supporter, but I will vote for Obama if he gets the nomination. The only difference is that I will send Hillary money if she gets the nomination. I give no one money until after the convention, though.

[Joe the Revelator]

42. Just as comfortable as I now am with Hillary making it

1. Her and McCain are apparently great friends
2. She admits that she is more like McCain then she is like Obama
3. She can be bought and paid for

[Hepburn]

104. Sooooooooo

....you think either of them would NOT pick some shill for corporate America?

:eyes:

[Jersey Devil]

43. The one thing no one should ever say is "never"

especially when they are very, very angry, as I am with Hillary right now. I am tempted to make the same statement you made, but I know that sometimes things change and boxing yourself into a corner is not a good idea.

[woolldog]

45. Not that it matters because after all how much does 1 vote count?

But I agree with you and will never vote for her. It's a matter of principle to me.

[billyoc]

47. I heard she was a monster!

:evilgrin:

[TahitiNut]

50. Well, that's just a Keen Sense Of The Obvious.

:shrug:

[Thepricebreaker]

52. I with you. Ill vote for congress and leave the president spot blank.

[LizW]

53. I'll check back with you the second week of October.

One of two things will be happening (if you're still around DU). Either you will have changed your tune and decided that even the hated Hillary would be better than McCain, or you will be praying with all your heart that the Hillary supporters can see their way clear to vote for Obama.

Either way, your declaration going to come back to haunt you.

Never say never.

[Breeze54]

54. Clinton, McCain & Obama support stem cell research.

But McCain has nonetheless twice voted in favor of a bill that would overturn the Bush policy regarding the funding of stem cell research. ... www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/19/editorial.htm

Roll Call Vote #118, 5/11/2006, Senator McCain voted – YES. EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH HR 810,
The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, ... www.usavoter.com/mccain_stance.html

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton has urged President Bush
to loosen restraints on money for embryonic stem cell research.... www.medindia.net/news/

An outspoken supporter of stem cell research, Clinton cosponsored
the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005.
President Bush vetoed the bill, ... www.catholic.org/politics/issues.php?issue=Stem

Obama supports relaxing federal restrictions on embryonic stem cell research.
He voted for the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, ...
pewforum.org/religion08/compare.php?Issue=Stem_Cell_Research

[Unsane]

56. A-fucking-men

Agree wholeheartedly.

[azmouse]

57. Since I live in AZ (and McSame will obviously win here)

if Hillary gets the nomination I won't vote for her either. It will be the first presidential vote I've sat out and I've been able to vote since 1979.

[Utopian Leftist]

58. Anyone but Hillary!

In my entire voting life (24 years now) I have NEVER voted for a Republican. And until a few weeks ago I would have voted for whomever won the Democratic Nomination. No more.

Then came the fearmongering. Then the McCain endorsement. Last straw was her ludicrous attempt to change the PRE-AGREED UPON RULES in order to seat Florida and Michigan. As Hillary has now thoroughly demonstrated her absolute contempt for the good of the party and the nation, should the impossible happen and she steal the nomination, I will either not vote for President OR TAKE HER ADVICE AND VOTE FOR THE CANDIDATE WITH MORE EXPERIENCE: MCCAIN!

I would rather have the Devil who admits he is a Devil, in office than have another eight years of a Rove-posturing Devil.

[boston bean]

61. good, go away then. nt

[Utopian Leftist]

64. I'll go

wherever and whenever the hell I want to.

As I suspect millions of other Democrats will go too if Hillary manages to succeed in scorching the entire planet.

[Joe the Revelator]

68. Last I checked, it was mathmatically impossible for Hillary to become to nominee....

why don't you and your candidate take your advice?

[bilgewaterbill]

79. It's not impossible.

Just damned unlikely. She needs 70% plus wins in ALL remaining states. OR a big shift in the superdelegates.

[11 Bravo]

103. All that demonstrates is that your checking skills are comensurate with your political acumen.

[Mme. Defarge]

70. Ni moi non plus, mon brave ...

me neither.

[BigDDem]

73. Flip flop

[rosetta627]

75. If, gawd forbid, it comes down to her vs her pal Mcain

I'll vote for Kucinich.

[Fox Mulder]

78. I'm close to feeling that way, but...

I'll hold my nose and vote for her. I'd rather see her as President over McCain.

[RememberWellstone]

80. good

don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.

[annie1]

84. omg, again with the 'win at any cost' meme about the mean monster. enough already.

[Johnny__Motown]

85. Three times she has said McCain is more qualified than Obama, she will try to win at any cos...

and her actions are monstrous

[annie1]

86. murdering someone is monstrous. please get a hold of yourself.

[bilgewaterbill]

87. Wolfson's "Eww, Obama is Ken Starr!" cinched it for me! FUHC!!

[bilgewaterbill]

88. Wolfson's "Eww, Obama is Ken Starr!" cinched it for me! FUHC!!

[Blondiegrrl]

89. I will never vote for her either, for the same reasons you mentioned.

If there were ever any doubt, her latest shenanigans -- aligning herself with the Republican opponent -- have sealed it for me. She doesn't care about anyone but numero uno.

I'm not sure I would vote for McCain, either. If (God forbid) Clinton were to somehow finagle her way onto the ticket, I'd search for an acceptable third-party candidate, on principle. (Nader? Not sure yet.)

Before anyone labels me a bad Democrat (cue chorus screeching of "SHAME ON YOU!!!"), I'll head that off at the pass by freely admitting that I don't believe in voting a straight-party ticket; I vote for the most qualified person with whom I approve. I'd estimate my voting record is 90 percent Democrat; the remaining 10 percent is a mix of Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, etc.

[annie1]

90. then maybe i'll cancel your absent vote out by not voting for obama if he gets the nom.

[angie_love]

96. I'll cancel yours out by never voting for Hillary.

[Pisces]

93. I can't believe I am now unwilling to vote for a Dem candidate.

She will never get my help winning the election if she somehow hijacks it from Obama. She is despicable. I don't care what anyone says. I am a woman ashamed of her tactics. I will not vote in this election cycle if she is
on the ballot.

[MonkeyFunk]

97. awww....

poor wittle baby.

[Orsino]

99. President McCain would thank you.

Fortunately, I think he doesn't stand a chance, so you may have the luxury of sitting out the GE without having to live with a McCain Supreme Court.

[Dinger]

105. Then You Won't Be Voting

[ClericJohnPreston]

106. To Hell with you Obamaton

I already am on record as being anti-Obamaton, for the very reasons you prove here. Most of you blind cattle, as malleable as silly putty, parrot whatever corporate-inspired mantras are doled out, along with your MSM talking points.

Just a little while back, you drones were "taking names".

Well, make sure YOURS is at the top of the "to be banned list". No matter who the Dem candidate is, even if it is that empty suit Obama, I have to vote Democratic to save this Nation.

Maybe next time, you'll learn to appreciate who the REAL Democratic candidate was, JOHN EDWARDS.

[Arkansas Granny]

108. I have seen several posts like this and I have to wonder if the people

claiming they won't vote for the Democratic nominee are really Democrats at all regardless of who they claim to support. There is too much at stake in this election to think about not voting.

Some of the reasons you give for not voting for her are not valid.

She has not allied herself with John McCain. She compared his experience with hers and Obama's. Some people prefer to twist her meaning, but that doesn't make her statement an endorsement of McCain.

She did not sully a great woman's career. Powers made a derogatory remark. Clinton is not going to stand by and wait for someone else to defend her in situations like this like Kerry did with the swiftboaters, she is going to call them out on it herself.

If we are going to make any changes in our country, we have to take the power back from the Republicans. They have done too much damage in the last 8 years and can't be allowed to continue. I will vote for the Democratic nominee in the GE, even if it is not my preferred candidate.

[Honeycombe8]

109. It will take more than Dems for the Clintons to win the GE. They will need Indies like me.

And I can tell you that if the Clintons are the nominee...hordes of Republicans, who otherwise wouldn't bother to go vote for McCain, will show up to vote for the express purpose of voting against the Clintons. And also, many Indies like myself will either do the same, or will not bother to vote at all, but in any case, will not vote for the Clintons.

I don't think many of the Clinton supporters realize how much the Clintons are reviled by half the population in the country. They are the flip side of Bush. You know how Bush is hated by half the country (and barely stomached by half of the other half)? His supporters cannot see it, and they don't believe it. But the same is true about the Clintons. And their supporters apparently cannot see it, and they likewise can't seem to believe it.

But it is true. The Clintons will never be President. Take it to the bank. Cha-ching.

[Beacool]

111. Fair enough.............

There are plenty of us Hillary supporters who have no intention of voting for Obama unless she's also on the ticket.

:shrug: