Obama does not need to pander to "Clinton Democrats"

[mudesi]

I'm sorry, but I'm tired of this idea that the Democrats always have to pander to the conservatives out there in order to win an election. For once, I'd like to see the liberals who never bother to vote in elections (since the choice is always between a right winger and a right right winger) have the opportunity to finally begin shifting the Democratic party to the center, and then eventually to the left.

I don't want the "Clinton Democrats" in the Democratic party, and frankly, we don't need them. There are millions of liberals out there, and it's time for them to have a party. The conservatives already have a party. If they don't like it, they can join us or they can stay home. By joining us, that means they accept our principles, even if they don't agree. It's not a "civil union", it's called marriage. Sex education works and should be government funded. Ditto stem cell research. Capital punishment is uncivilized, doesn't work, and needs to be abolished. Gun control. Etcetera.

I realize that Obama is hardly a liberal on many of the core issues. But maybe 8 years from now we can have all those young new liberal Democrats he has energized come back and vote Edwards in. Then 8 years after that, they can vote Gore in. Then 8 years after that, Dean. Then 8 years after that, they and some of their children can vote Kucinich in. You see where I'm going with this?

It's time to remove that DLC cancer. The Democratic party is going to become a true opposition party to the conservative ignoramuses. That has to be the ultimate goal.

So if you support Clinton, and you will not vote for Obama no matter what, even though he is the Democratic nominee, then you're excused. We don't need you.

[Deja Q]

1. I think any candidate would be interested in getting as many voters as possible.

But if Clinton supporters want to vote McCain or even for Mr. Whipple as a write-in, that's their choice.

And if Mr Whipple is too esoteric a reference, replace his name with the creator of disposable Pampers plastic diapers...

[maddiejoan]

2. Okay!

Al Gore will be 75 years old

Howard Dean will be 83 years old.

Dernnis Kucinich will be 93 years old.


Good plan!

[mudesi]

4. I was being rhetorical

:eyes:

[hardcore artist]

3. We need to woo conservatives

Otherwise we won't be able to win Southern states. It's politics.

[crankychatter]

11. welcome to DU - "it's called "politics" is desultory and insulting

nice start

Many people smarter than both of us believe the west and southwest are the new south... the "southern strategy" is a left over from before the exodus of Southern Racists to the Republican Party.

It is no longer viable.

Nevertheless, I'd advise you to do some reading. Albeit, against their will, Southern culture is the adoptive culture of African American people. Obama's not a traditional African American, nevertheless, his orientation to that culture has served him very well so far in southern primaries.

And take another long look at a culture that is evidentally, unfamiliar to you.

Given education and exposure beyond their parochial origins, White southerners are proven to be more capable of recovery from racism, than their northern counterparts.

I'm optimistic. Maybe you could take a less condescending tone, and go register some voters.

[mamalone]

15. and it's also the right thing to do...

I am in contact with a whole lot of very conservative folk. Folks that would never have dreamed of voting Dem in their lifetime... they think the term "liberal" is an epithet, lol. But I seriously believe Obama has a chance at winning them over. The last 8 yrs have been so bad, and I think they feel betrayed. Obama's integrity, intelligence, and personal competence will be very very appealing to them. Honestly I don't know how exactly he could go about drawing them into this tent, but if anyone can do it he can. Just the possibility of this type of unity is such an exciting prospect!

[boppers]

22. We don't need to woo racists.

If we lose the south, fine, as long as we don't go back in time.

[AznLittleBile]

37. I agree

They do not deserve our respect

[VotesForWomen]

65. so clinton supporters are racist, is that what you're saying? start telling the general electorate

that anybody who doesn't support your candidate is a racist. see how that works out for you.

[wvbygod]

76. Can you narrow down which racists you are talking about?

<img src="" border=0>

[NorthernSpy]

83. From hillaryis44.com: "IT'S TIME TO HAVE A 'WHITE UNITE FOR HILLARY' UNDER THE RADARE"

curiosityhasme Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 11:19 pm
hEARD bRAZILE EARLY ON CNN SAY THAT DEMOCRATIC PARTY HAD EXPANDED THEIR BASE, AND IT WASN’T JUST WORKING CLASS ANYMORE - AGAIN, KICKING WHITE AMERICA TO THE CURB. THIS IS CONTROVERSIAL, AND I’M NOT TRYING TO DEFEND OUR FELLOW AA HRC SUPPORTERS, BUT WITH THE AA DEMOGRAPHICS 90+% FOR bho, I THINK IT’S TIME TO HAVE A “WHITE UNITE FOR HILLARY” UNDER THE RADARE, AT ANY RATE. THIS IS RIDICULOUS THAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS BEING HELD HOSTAGE BY THE AA IN THIS COUNTRY WITH THREATS OF RIOTING AT THE CONVENTION. WE ALL BELIEVE HE IS RAISING ZILLIONS OF DOLLARS FROM OVERSEAS (DIRTY MONEY) AND SHE HAS DONE AMAZINGLY WELL CONSIDERING THE DNC IS AGAINST HER, THE BIG MEDIA BLASTS HER, AND SHW IS RUNNING AGAINST HOME-GROWN TERRORISM. I’M READY TO CALL IT LIKE I SEE IT.
BHO IS A DANGEROUS ANTI-AMERICAN WITH TERRORIST TIES, INEXPERIENCED, POOR SENATE RECORD. THAT’S IT. WE HAVE TO PUT IT OUT THERE BIG TIME THAT WE WHITES WILL NOT IN ANY WAY SUPPORT HIM AND MAKE OUR CASE GO PRIME TIME. IT’S BEYOND RACE - IT’S TERRORISM AND ANTI-AMERICANISM, AND WE’RE TIRED OF THE WELL-HEELED LATTE’S AND NATION OF ISLAM-TYPES HIJACKING OUR PARTY.

Another remark by the same author:

curiosityhasme Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
WHY ARE THE MAJORITY OF WHITE DEMOCRATS STANDING BY AND LETTING THE AA HIJACK OUR PARTY?!?
WRONG BOB BECKEL. WE WILL NEVER, EVER VOTE FOR HIM AND YOU CAN TAKE THAT TO THE BANK.
NOT ELECTING BHO WILL SET THE PARTY BACK DECADES? LIKE ELECTING BHO WON’T?

Others chime in:

dot48 Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
how can American’s still vote for him after they hear this wife. I just don’t get it. The AA bloc voting is going to change the landscape of America and the whites just don’t get it.. WAKE UP

basil9 Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Dot, My only consolation is that “The AA bloc voting is going to change the landscape of America and the whites just don’t get it.. WAKE UP:
that it will never happen. They will implode. the backlash will be swift. the stampeded to mcCain will be deafening. And the AA voting block can say by by to affirmative action, to quota systems, and all the other leveling strategies implemented because white democrats believed it was the fair thing to do.

confloyd Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 11:41 pm
Its getting closer and closer that I will become a republican. I will never throw this country away on the black liberation movement. I used to work in the prisons of Texas and the Moslems have been working those prisons for a long time converting Christian black men. I personally believe this is an assault on America by Islamic fundamentalist and helped by the idiots like Ayers!

djia Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
BO can become Hill’s chauffeur
“Driving Ms Hillary”

hallow Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
JAS - Maybe Hillary Clinton will hire him as like a doorman or something.
But, that isn’t political. He won’t have a political future.

wagner1jc Says:
May 6th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
Faith. Have faith. Then have a drink. And Harold Fucking Ford park my car.

http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=608#comments

[BlueCaliDem]

94. Dayum! They're as nasty as Freepers! Ugh. eom

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zhade]

29. Not at the expense of civil and human rights. Fuck that.

We don't need you.

[Catherina]

49. That was quick n/t

[Blue-Jay]

50. One and out! LOL

Is it Zombie Night?

[WillyToad]

59. So, abandon half the democratic party and try to make up for it wooing republicans???

Now that is a brilliant fucking plan!!!

Hate really really distorts a persons sense of reality!

[New Dawn]

93. We need to engage in ideological education, not pandering.

America might seem like a right-wing country currently, but nothing is permanent in politics. Over time, we can convert a large enough percentage of the population to our side, if we put the time and resources into doing so. That is more important than winning or losing any particular election in the short term.

[FrenchieCat]

5. Who is McCain's Base that will GOTV for him?

Hillary supporters turned NeoCons/pro-life?

Just asking? :shrug:

[Olney Blue]

6. I supported Hillary Clinton- so you don't want me to vote for Obama?

[boppers]

24. You won't vote, unless pandered too?

Is that what you're saying?

[Olney Blue]

46. Is this the pandering you are talking about?

"I don't want the "Clinton Democrats" in the Democratic party, and frankly, we don't need them."

If you knew me at all, you would have noticed that I have posted repeatedly in a positive way about Obama, and that I would vote for him. In spite of you.....

[boppers]

54. I don't know you at all.

However, I would agree that certain kinds of "Clinton Democrats" do far more to hurt the party than help it.

[wrando]

74. what do you know about "the party"?

How many times have you voted for a president?

bill from ct

[boppers]

84. How many times?

I've been voting since 1990, so four. However, there's these cool things called books, which have done much to inform me about Dixiecrats and the shame they brought upon the party, the ugly union corruption that had to be fixed... heck, all the way back to the democratic-republicans we've had a measure of less-than-admirable characters that we could do without. Sometimes they gain control over the platform, even.

Why do you ask?

[aquart]

86. How is someone like you running the country different from Bush?

Because I really need to know. Bush purged Republicans. You are here eagerly advocating a purge of Democrats.

The Obama camp continues to be the totalitarian wing of the Democratic party. Smug, lying, entitled scum.

[Kittycat]

7. You know - I trust Obama to do what he needs to do.

Part of the basis of his campaign is getting unlikely groups of people to work together. I have no doubt that he has a plan to heal the rift - provided Clinton gets her tail in gear when the time comes. I'm really entirely too mentally worn out, carrying about it. My plan for ME - is to canvas my entire neighborhood this summer, and work out a plan to register as many new voters (and update) in my area as possible. I'm in a new neighborhood (construction started 3.5 yrs old) that is still under construction. 750 single family homes, plus condos. That's a lot of doors to knock on. I hope to get some college kids, HS Seniors and other SAH Moms to help me knock it out. Our laws are different here, so we have to do it twice. Once to canvas for Obama - once to register for the county (can't campaign at the same time). I'm thinking about sending teams ahead of me on the block, marking addresses that need to register or update. Then I go to those homes and register them on behalf of the county (you also have to be a trained deputy registrar to register voters - so it's more controlled here).

That's my plan - what's your's?

[ruggerson]

8. Since when is same sex marriage a core principle of the Democratic party

read the '04 platform. It's right there in black and white. The official Democratic line is that they support civil unions.

And it isn't going to change this year either, so your post makes no sense.

[mudesi]

10. Since I say so

That's my point. It should be a core principle.

If you're against it, tough. Gay marriage is a liberal value, and the Democrats are (going to be) a liberal party.

[ruggerson]

16. But the "Clinton Democrats" position on it is identical to the "Obama Democrats" position

he doesn't support same sex marriage either.

Me, I'm kind of in favor of it. As long as my partner of eleven years doesn't get to choose the music at the wedding.

[Darth_Kitten]

9. Bye bye women and working class people, world doesn't need you!!!

But girls, stick around cause we need coffee and sandwiches made, and somebody to serve them......

[bowens43]

23. Don't be ridiculous. Obama can and has won the votes of the working class

despite the lies and rants of that race baiting, fear mongering sociopath hillary.

[Darth_Kitten]

45. I'm never ridiculous, honey.........

so Obama can't win the votes of the working class all on his own? :sarcasm: Mean, big bad Hillary gets him again, huh? Wonder what will happen when the nasty Republicans get ahold of him? He's the eternal victim who needs to be treated with kid gloves?

Thanks for the opening, by the way..........

[VotesForWomen]

66. some, yes, but hardly enough to win the GE. get a clue, O did not win in a blow out,

and this is the democratic primary we're talking about; if he barely wins that, he damn well needs every vote he can get in the GE.

[ronnykmarshall]

95. I'll a ham on rye sweet cakes.

:sarcasm:

Actually you just sit down, rest your feet and I'LL be happy to wait on YOU!!

[sueragingroz]

12. o gee thanks

you know... i was worried there.... but now that i'm excused...

well then that makes everything ok somehow...

[WA98296]

13. I agree that the party needs to move back to it's populist roots!

[crankychatter]

14. keeping the party small helps the conservatives retain power

half the eligible electorate does not vote... many are registered independent and third party due to justifiable cynicism.

Obama can address that. We are doing an almost unprecedented end run around the corruption that has driven so many people from the process.

If not us, then who? If not now, then when?

[msongs]

17. yeah death to everybody who doesnt believe everything JUST like you nt

[Catherina]

18. Since when is a refusal to pander a death threat?

Up the oxycontin if you need to but chill.

[bowens43]

25. You really are off the deep end.

[TahitiNut]

19. Liberalism is about social and economic equity for EVERYONE. Conservatism is about a PRIVILEGED few.

I'm sick and tired of the "Me first! Fuck you!" right, whether they call themselves "Democrats" or "Republicans," that're threatened by people seeking simple JUSTICE in governance.

[mirrera]

20. I agree. I also hope my donations do not bail out Hillary's campaign.

I have gone from admiration to dread with the Clintons. All those years of defending them and the she crosses the line and does the deal breaker for me, misinformation. Congrats Hillary! I always admired the Dems for at least using truth and facts. She ended that. I really hope Barack does not bale her out of her campaign debt. I sent my hard earned cash to Obama, and nice as the gesture is, she can recoup from her bad decisions quicker than most of us. Send Bill to a few more countries. My husband hammered nails and I waited on tables and built web sites for the money I sent. Barack is no "progressive" much as I wish he were, but he is beyond labels. You read his two books and all you can say is "better him than me". Really, better him, because he is really something. I shook his hand and witnessed him up close and he is the real deal. History will write about him.

[BlooInBloo]

21. Fuck them and their extortion.

[ruggerson]

47. I can see the spittle drooling out of your mouth from here

[VotesForWomen]

64. yep; the O-ists have truly come unhinged, and they are in for a serious reality check in the GE.

their rabid, race-baiting thuggery is not gonna fly with GE voters.

[AZBlue]

26. "Clinton Democrat"

What an oxymoron!

[aquart]

87. Well, you got the second two syllables right.

[ClassWarrior]

27. Of course not. The real Dems will vote Dem. The rest are trolls.

NGU.

[Jim Sagle]

28. Raving idiocy.

[Skittles]

30. they knoweth not what they do

it's pretty pathetic

[Skip Intro]

34. That's the only explaination. Tho I have to wonder if it's what they do at this point, or

what they've done.

[Skip Intro]

31. Gee, I wonder where that arrogance label comes from...

Who the fuck are you that you get to decide who is acceptable and who must leave? Who is this "we" for whom you presume to speak?

I don't need your approval or acceptance or your declarations. I would love to buy your supposed superiority for what it's really worth, and sell it for what you think it's worth.

[ClassWarrior]

32. The rules will decide who is acceptable and who must leave.

And if you oppose the Dem candidate, you will leave, whether you want to or not.

Fucking arrogant rules.

NGU.

[Skip Intro]

33. Your take on the rules is not accurate.

Per Skinner, one may not advocate for another candidate other than the Democratic nominee. I'm sure you'll be saddened to hear that no pledge to Obama is required. No mass. No kneeling at the altar.

Knowing what you're talking about goes a long way in being taken seriously.

[ClassWarrior]

39. Please show me where I even mentioned Obama's name. I said "if you oppose the Dem candidate."

How is that different from "one may not advocate for another candidate other than the Democratic nominee?"

Fucking arrogant words.

NGU.

[Skip Intro]

41. Really? That's it? You had the rules wrong, and are now apparently engaged in deflection

okay, you said Dem candidate, not Obama. Ok. You're still wrong as to what the rules stipulate.

One symptom of arrogance is not being able to admit one was wrong.

[ClassWarrior]

42. Who do you think you're fooling? Anyone can look back and see for themselves.

Kind of reminds me of how Bill Orally can't quite come to grips with the fact that people can record him.

NGU.

[Skip Intro]

43. Nice "call them a repuke" maneuver. To the topic at hand, maybe you should look back. Skinner quote:

Skinner, in response to being asked if a statement of intention to not vote for Obama in the GE would be in violation of the rules:

"Having said that, here is the answer to your question: A sincere, non-disruptive statement of intention that does not advocate others do the same would probably not be a problem. If it goes beyond "non-disruptive" or goes into advocacy, then it would likely be a problem."


It's in the pinned thread at the top of this forum.



So I guess that means you were wrong.

Fucking arrogant rules.


What now, call me a racist?

[ClassWarrior]

48. Again, how am I wrong?

"If you oppose the Dem candidate, you will leave, whether you want to or not."

"If it goes...into advocacy, then it would likely be a problem."

Fucking arrogant Skinner.

:rofl:

NGU.

[Skip Intro]

55. Opposing is one thing, advocating is another.

I feel it would be unfair to you to continue this discussion.

Good luck to you.

[ClassWarrior]

57. Ahhh, is that sort of like "denounce" vs. "reject?"

:eyes:

NGU.

[DemGa]

35. I'm a Clinton Democrat - not a conservative

[ccharles000]

36. I am liberal and a Hillary supporter.

I will vote for Obama if he is the nominee.

[RBInMaine]

38. Making a stronger case to working class small town and rural voters is NOT "pandering".

These voters are important to a Democratic win and new Democratic majority. We can and should work very hard to win them over mainly on the economic issues, but MANY of these folks are also very concerned about education, healthcare, energy, and the Iraq War. AND, there is no reason why Obama can't to them about Christian values, respect for legal and safe sport shooting and hunting, and our common desire to find ways to reduce the incidence of abortion. That is NOT "pandering". Howard Dean and MANY Dems talk a lot about finding ways to win over this important constituency. We need a BROAD 50-state party tent, not a narrow one that abjectly concedes large voting blocs to the R's. Many rural and small town culturally conservative registered Dems and I's can be won over with the right messaging, and we should be doing exactly that.

[KaptBunnyPants]

40. If the price of having them in the Party is having them in control, then it is not worth it.

It seems obvious to me that a vocal minority of the Party that demands that its philosophy be dominant and attacks the rest of us with the same arguments that Republicans use should not be acquiesced to. Hillary Clinton had the Democratic establishment behind her, and she still couldn't hold off a no name Senator whose previous national exposure consisted of a single speech made at the 2004 Democratic convention. She had name recognition, she had the former and very popular president campaigning for her, she had all the institutional advantages. The reason why she could not seal the deal is because she is the head of deeply unpopular faction within the Democratic Party.

Think of the coalition of supporters that back the DLC - who does it include? Hillary is a successful high profile woman and the defacto "head-feminist" as a result of years of Republican attacks, many blatantly sexist. Her back story brings in the committed activist corp of her campaign. I'm convinced many of these people think Hillary has fooled the boys and is going to sneak into office then back a radical agenda of change. If only that were true. And what about her working class supporters? They certainly aren't there to back the pro-war, pro-free trade, and pro-business faction of the Democratic Party. Many of these people don't know about the history of the DLC and are voting on name recognition and as a result of local political machines. Hillary herself has run from the DLC as hard as she can. The head of the DLC was trashing Dems who wanted out of Iraq 4 years ago as cowardly hippies. Now getting out of Iraq is her first priority. Hillary is swearing to enact no new free trade agreements and fix NAFTA, another policy gem from the grown ups at the DLC. Seriously, every major issue that the DLC has, Hillary has sworn to oppose. The DLC has added nothing to her campaign, in fact they seem to be keeping as quite as possible. Everyone hates them, they are toxic. They ruined a sure fire shot at the nomination for Hillary.

[lumberjack_jeff]

44. Good thinking. 1/4 of voters is a great winning coalition. n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

51. Kucinich will be like John McCain's mother's age by then

Just saying...

[Gore1FL]

52. We can befreinf them though.

I just added my first friend at DU (and I've been here since 2001.

And she is a Clinton supporter.

We have more in common than we have differences.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5921611&mesg_id=5921611

[JCMach1]

53. So Democrats don't need Democratic votes?

There's a formula for victory! NOT!

[Hoof Hearted]

56. Wow, you really thought this one through didn't you? GENIUS.

[McCamy Taylor]

58. That's right. To hell with the poor. If they don't vote Obama they deserve to starve...

I am just appalled at what is happening at DU these days.

[graycem]

61. Ah, well

if they don't vote for the Democratic nominee and sit this one out, or even worse, vote for John McCain, then yes, they do get what they deserve. I mean really, what the hell do they think will be the outcome? If the last 8 years hasn't proved what Republicans do to our economy, look back at the first Bush, then Reagan. You get what you vote for. I won't be happy that they lose their jobs, or pay $10 for gas, BUT they will have absolutely no right to complain about their situation. Like I hear from members of my own family, although they voted for Bush twice, they have the audacity to complain about the economy, but yay, they liked his personality. It's no different. It's really great to have principles but when it affects everyone, then it's just downright shortsighted and selfish.

[McCamy Taylor]

68. Calling the poor "selfish" takes the cake. I have no response to that.

[graycem]

69. Read more closely..

I am not calling the poor selfish. The poor who vote against their own economic interests well, are quite gullible, and they won't have a right to complain if they enable their own situation by voting for John McCain over the Democratic nominee. Just as those in my family hardly have a right to bitch about Bush now after they voted for him TWICE. You cannot keep banging your head against a brick wall and expecting a different result.

I call anyone who doesn't stand up and vote against the Iraq war selfish. People are DYING for Gawd sake, and so many are sitting around just trying to find any reason they can to justify NOT voting for the Democratic nominee, the one who wants to end the war. That IS selfish. Whether you find it offensive or not, it is still selfish.

[Maddy McCall]

60. Obviously, you're a political neophyte...

as is evidenced by your opinion that the Democratic Party can win without Clinton Democrats.

That's the most assinine thing I've heard on DU in a long time. And it takes a lot to be in the upper eschalon of assinine on this website.

[MattBaggins]

67. Take it from Maddy

Maddy is right at the top.

[Auntie Bush]

98. Bravo!

[VotesForWomen]

62. i'm sorry, you think O is 'liberal' and hill is 'conservative?' another silly naive O supporter.

FYI, *Kucinich* (my first choice) is liberal, and therefore he is out of the race. your man obama is a moderate, corporately approved candidate, hence the powers that be saw no threat in elevating him to front-runner status from the very beginning, even though he was probably the least qualified of all the democratic candidates.

[VotesForWomen]

63. well, he can either pander to them, or to people further right than them. i guess it's his choice,

but he's not winning the GE with just you people. sorry.

[ClassWarrior]

72. No, he's not Progressive, but he represents an OPPORTUNITY for Progressives...

...that an entrenched Washington insider could never represent. According to CUNY Professor Frances Fox Piven on a recent Democracy Now!:

You know, in 1932, FDR didn’t run with a good program; he ran with the same program the Democrats had run with in 1924 and 1928, and that wasn’t a good program. But nevertheless, his rhetoric encouraged people who were suffering as a result of the Depression—working people, the unemployed—and helped to fuel the movements, which then forced FDR to support initiatives which he otherwise would not have supported, including the right to organize...

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/2/6/super_tuesday_roundtable_with_bill_fletcher

NGU.

[Indi Guy]

70. Bill Clinton was to "Liberalism" as Bush is to "Conservatism"...

Each whored out his party to the control of global $$$...

De:puke: & Re:puke:

[semass]

71. Do some people think before they write?

What shrinking the Democratic Party to about half the present size means: return to minority status in the Senate and House (permanently), a return to not being competitive at the Presidential level (permanently), and no more liberal Supreme Court Justices. How do you expect to bring about change under those conditions?

[Marrah_G]

73. This OP is incredibly politically ignorant and it is a good thing you aren't running Obama's camp

If you were we would definitely lose in November.

This is nasty flamebait.

[invictus]

75. n/t

[Catchawave]

77. How is this helping Obama ?

Not only is he going to have to "pander" for Hill Dems, but Republicans and Independents too.

Believe me, you're going to see a whole "new" Obama in the GE. Panderfest 2008 :D

[aquart]

88. Didn't he promise to reach across the aisle?

But his acolytes are too pure to apologize for being lying, sexist, ageist, class superior, entitled scum?

[LulaMay]

78. Hillary is the liberal. Barack puts down the 60's & praises Reagan. No uni health care 4 him!

[LulaMay]

79. I guess you can always stuff to ballot box to make up for half the 'old' party you have no use for.

[niyad]

80. this OP, and others in the same vein, bring to mind the bumper sticker"

lord, deliver me from your followers"

this post, and others like it, along with obama himself, make me cringe.

[tandem5]

81. So how does "you're either with us or against us" dovetail with hope and unity again?

I forgot how that part goes.

[ClassWarrior]

82. Actually, it's more like "you're either with us or not with us, your choice...

...and that's okay."

NGU.

[aquart]

85. I am not now nor have I ever been a fucking conservative.

Your premise is wrong. Big surprise.

[Evergreen Emerald]

89. I am not a conservative

I am a progressive, liberal who supports the progressive SEnator from NY.

[Goodnevil]

90. I was going to disagree with you

but your words convinced me. We need to be an opposition party...a true one.

[jbm]

91. Clintons base is not conservative

it is pragmatic. But good luck with the theory you have going there. It is as logical as the theory that led you to your candidate in the first place.

[New Dawn]

92. K&R!

[Beacool]

97. Which conservatives??????

Oh, you mean the moderates in the party? That would be the majority of Democrats, not the left wing of the party.