So many anti-Hillary threads!

[tavernier]

I have to wonder if that animosity isn't just fueling the repugs to push Jeb even harder.

I understand the desire to have a stronger progressive candidate, but the more we display our fractured support to our "present" front line candidate, the stronger their resolve to run someone whom his mother couldn't even accept in the early days.

Why shoot ourselves in the foot long before the contenders are even announced?

[cwydro]

1. Hey, my fellow Keys friend...

I gotta agree with you here.

[tavernier]

3. Thank you!

I was prepared to get shot out of the game with the first reply, but I think all opinions count here, so I had to state it. 😘

[cwydro]

6. Hey, you and I

know Jeb better than most.

[roguevalley]

44. she hasnt declared. no one cares what we think. only poli junkies care. i think

She's awful and I say so. People are pushing jeb because he's for sale. Hillary is getting criticism because she deserves it. Its that simple.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

86. No, you make a valid point. But I don't think Hillary ends up running once backers realize she's a flawed candidate & can't possibly win...

So, no harm, no foul.

[DrDan]

113. all candidates will be flawed in some way -

has there ever been a more flawed candidate than rick scott? With enough money thrown at a candidate, these flaws can be overcome.

Of course she can win . . .

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

115. U make another valid point. Rick Scott is corrupt as they come who committed criminal fraud, so yes, Hillary certainly has a "chance" 2 win 2, just not much of 1 is all Im sayin.

[merrily]

128. Democratic donors are going to donate to the Party's choice.

Plus, the Clintons are influential apart from the Presidency or they would not have made hundreds of millions of dollars since 2000.

[FSogol]

2. Isn't it obvious? n/t

[merrily]

4. I don't think the RNC, the GOP or the donors are making decisions about a POTUS choice

based on DU posts.

People have been talking about getting Jeb to run since his brother was in office.

[Agschmid]

33. Yup.

[William769]

5. That only seems to be the case on DU & not America in General.

Thank God!

[msongs]

7. yes it's odd considering there's hardly any substantial differences between her and obama nt

[Bobbie Jo]

42. Again

One could only hope. You seem to make this comparison on every HRC thread.

[msongs]

49. because it is true. and most everything hillary did as SOS was implementing obama policy, so

people complaining about her actions as SOS are blaming the wrong person

[cheapdate]

52. It's true.

In 2008, I looked long and hard at the modest differences that divide them. I went with Obama based on my foreign policy expectations. The differences are slim. They're both very conventional in outlook.

[cascadiance]

83. I still think Edwards was "allowed" to run as long as he did to syphon off progressive votes...

... so that when it came time for him to "leave" the primaries, then there would be only two candidates left (Obama and Hillary). Who knows what might have happened if Edwards had pulled out a lot earlier. Maybe someone like Kucinich might have gotten a lot more support, and been a greater voice to challenge Obama to open up in more specifics about what "Hope and change" really meant in terms of what he'd do later.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

89. Yeah, that Iraq War vote, Social Security reform, dealing with Iran, tax reform, the Syrian civil war...(could go on and on)...sure are minor differences.

[bigwillq]

8. Posts on a message board have little influence

in determining which candidates may or may not run, imo.

[tavernier]

15. I think there are members of each party

who are interested and assigned to taking the "pulse" of the people in the opposing party. This is why we get so many sudden strange names and "silent lurkers", who now have very vocal opinions.

Just IMO, mind you!

[dissentient]

9. Maybe there should be a quota, only 3 negative Hillary threads allowed at a time

but seriously, man up. If Hillary really does run, you ain't seen nothing yet. I expect there will be nothing but anti-Hillary threads covering page one of DU at times, it is just the nature of things, lots of duers don't like her.

It is what it is.

[catnhatnh]

18. 3 sounds about right...

...after all we only allow 1 group where any criticism of Clinton-even if deserved- will get you banned.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

90. I could go along with limiting the number of anti-Hillary threads, but 5 seems a more reasonable number.

[daleanime]

20. It's not a matter of dislike, I don't even know her....

but I would like some better choices.

Is that approved for discussion?

[dissentient]

25. I don't see why not, make a thread about whatever you want to talk about regarding Hillary

or another candidate.

But I am not in charge, that is for sure. I'm a newbie here.

If some pro-Hillary people want to make positive threads about her, no one is stopping them that I can see.

[daleanime]

38. Then why ask for limits?

[dissentient]

40. I was joking

about that part.

[daleanime]

45. Humor is hard.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

91. Yes, but they should be limited to no more than 5 positive Hillary threads too.

[rhett o rick]

64. I would love to see a pro-Hillary thread that had substance. nm

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

92. Okay, now that really made me LMFAO. Good one!

[rhett o rick]

93. I am serious. HRC supporters have only ad hominem attacks against those that don't follow

the Oligarch choice in lock step, but never once offer a substantial argument as to why.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

98. You're absolutely correct in what you say, and, like most humor, it's often based in truth.

[winter is coming]

94. A lot of them have substance.

Fortunately, I have a good shoe-scraper.

[rhett o rick]

95. Don't want to track it into the house. nm

[99Forever]

10. In other words...

Shut up and do as the 1% orders.

No thanks. I'll think for myself and speak my mind.

[DonCoquixote]

11. because

a lot of people are trying to skip the initial step of a primary and say Hillary IS the only one. If she wins the primary, even I will have my stickers, but let's actually HAVE a primary.

[MohRokTah]

16. I think you're on to something here.

It's mostly due to the fact that nobody appears ready to give her a real challenge in the primaries.

I think a lot of that has to do with the money required to mount a challenge and how much her fund raising capabilities intimidate any potential challengers.

[sulphurdunn]

46. She's definitely Wall Streets

Golden girl $$$$$$$.

[cascadiance]

79. John Roberts and his gang of five are smiling at your comments, along with the Kochs, etc.

... who want money to still control who runs our government.

It's up to us to ensure that we have a primary where we really air out the issues that people want to hear potential leaders take stances on, in a way that makes it difficult for the corporate media covering these primaries to hide these issues that they continue to do.

[MohRokTah]

80. .

[tavernier]

21. There ya go!

[rocktivity]

26. DING DING DING! DonCoquixote, you're our grand prize winner!

...(P)eople are trying to skip the initial step of a primary and say Hillary IS the only one...

And because they've forgotten how well that worked out four years ago!


rocktivity

[Agschmid]

35. No one is doing this...

Literally the only "actual" candidate we have so far is Webb...

Pretty sure he isn't a Clinton.

[brooklynite]

50. "A lot of people are trying to skip the initial step of a primary and say Hillary IS the only one"

Care to point them out? I haven't seen any.

[DonCoquixote]

76. so you do not read threads that say

Hillary is the only one that can win and that yell "Liz is not running!" despite the fact that Hillary herself, is not runnign at this point, no matter how many "I'm ready for hillary" bumperstickers are made? Of course, if I brought out the Blue Links, that only will get the inevitable "we hate blue links" chant on here...

[brooklynite]

81. I do read them... what's your point?

What does discussing whether a candidate has the ability to win have to do with claiming the candidate is inevitable? And who has suggested that Warren should be able to run is she wanted to? (btw - she doesn't).

[Caretha]

111. HoHo Hehehe

how about this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6213800
And WTF is this third way that no one else talks about except here. It doesn't matter anyway. She's the next prez. It's her turn. And all the trutherism about her wont change that.

*bolding is mine

[brooklynite]

120. I see...1 post is "a lot of people"

[Caretha]

121. Actually

this poster was blatant, the others, which I'm sure you are quite aware of are much more nuanced.

As I have a job and am on my way to work, I do not have time to post all the threads that accidentally let their ass show.

[Beacool]

12. Par for the course around here.

Best to ignore them or do what I did: leave. I only come around sporadically.

[Ykcutnek]

13. It's just folks being outspoken for the sake of being outspoken.

Anyone who truly thinks Clinton will be the death knell of America is too far gone to participate in our envied political system, anyway.

[sulphurdunn]

48. And too far gone to buy

another pig in a poke corporatist democrat.

[MohRokTah]

14. If Warren had declared and was the frontrunner currently, I think you would see as many...

anti-Warren threads as you currently see anti-Clinton threads.

It's a matter of the current perceptions, IMO.

[cwydro]

17. ...

I think you're right.

[cascadiance]

82. And they'd be a lot better funded by the 1% money lobbies too to do this sort of trolling too.

Warren has THE MOST to lose of any potential candidate to announce or even give a hint that she's running at this time before a movement organizes that is a lot harder to squash than just the corporate media going after her on her own. Corporate lobbyists and spin machines will do a lot less to stand in the way of Clinton than they would Warren.

[SheilaT]

19. If you dare criticize Hillary on

the Hillary forum, you get booted off so fast it'll make your head spin.

The pro-Hillary/won't listen to a word of criticism about her contingent have plenty of room to assure each other all is well in Hillary land. A little criticism shouldn't hurt.

[William769]

22. Try reading the SOP.

You might learn something.

I am sure all of these Groups are the same way.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1099

[sheshe2]

28. Bingo!

[William769]

29. Common sense.

[SheilaT]

58. No, not all groups.

I've been known to post my total antipathy toward guns, to the point of stating I'm in favor of taking them away from people, and I post on the gun forum. They argue back at me, quite vociferously, but I've never been banned there. Amazingly more tolerance. The Hillary people cannot abide anyone saying she is not The Second Coming. They refuse to listen to reasoned arguments about why she is neither inevitable (remember 2008? Her inevitability then?) nor the best possible person the Democratic party could possibly nominate.

[William769]

65. You must have a problem with reading the link is to Groups of Democrats.

But your continued blather of the Hillary Clinton Group explains that.

[hrmjustin]

30. You do realize that the forum is for Hillary supporters only?

[SheilaT]

62. As I said above, I have posted highly critical things

in many forums, and the Hillary one is the ONLY one that banned me. Remarkably thin-skinned.

I do understand how the forums work, how DU works, I've been around for a while.

It genuinely bothers me that the Hillary supporters actually want to live inside a box that does not allow the slightest dissent.

[hrmjustin]

67. with all due respect we do not live in a box.

It is a safe haven for Hillary supporters so that we don't have to hear the vitriol spewed towards Hillary we see in GD everyday.

The HRC room is not a forum but a safe Haven. If you have a complaint on how we run it you can complain to skinner.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

97. I understand & respect ur desire 4 a "safe haven" 4 Hillary supporters-tho its then unclear why they also come here if they seek 2 avoid hearin so-called "vitriol" (aka truth).

[hrmjustin]

105. DU or GD?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

114. "Here" meaning GD, of course.

[hrmjustin]

116. Sometimes I question why I bother but I feel that it is important to be here as a Hillary

supporter.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

118. I understand that and respect Hillary supporters' desire to defend their candidate...

For the most part, they're all good people - okay, maybe a lil delusional (just a joke) - whom I respect who come here in good faith to articulate (sometimes) valid points and try to change minds by sharing those opinions. I think that's partly why we all come here and why this website was created in the first place. Such dialogue should be celebrated, not mourned.

[pnwmom]

85. The question is, why do you make a point of going to interest-groups and fighting with people

you find there?

Why not just make your points in GD and Politics 2015?

[SheilaT]

99. I don't make a point of going to interest groups.

I read DU by looking at the Latest Threads. I don't always pay attention to the group or forum when I read a thread and decide to post a reply. Apparently most people here only read specific threads, which is a huge mistake. They get ensconced in whatever little area they prefer, and often refuse to understand that others may object to their narrow view.

I happen to be VERY opposed to guns, to the point where I cheerfully advocate confiscating them. This is not a very popular stance, especially in the gun forums. Interestingly enough, I have not been banned there, even though what I post is highly objectionable to may there. They are vastly more tolerant than, say, the Hillary supporters who totally freak out at any hint that she is not The Anointed One.

I've expressed my appreciation to the wonderful posters in the gun forums, and they have been very gracious in return. Meanwhile, I can't post in the Hillary forum. Hmmm. How interesting.

[hrmjustin]

106. Because we don't want to hear it.

And you agreed to the terms of service of this site so you should have respected our safe haven.

Seems like you are the one freaking out instead of Hillsry supporters like you claim.

[zappaman]

32. Duh.

You don't understand how DU groups work?

[tavernier]

34. I'm not pro or con

I only posted because every third thread appeared to trash her. I see her strengths and experience. I see her missteps and faulty alliances. I see Warren as an amazing potential runner, as well as Sanders. I just don't see why we have to trash any of our people at this point. Shouldn't that be Morning Joe's job? Or "Get Off My Lawn" McCains? Can't we just like our candidates until its time to choose one?

[Beartracks]

66. "Can't we just like our candidates until its time to choose one?"

Sounds like a good plan to me, for what it's worth.

I generally like all Dem candidates... and as we move forward, there will be some I like more than the others.

I don't HATE any of them -- and that may be because I: a) don't think anyone's perfect; and b) don't utilize a litmus test to automatically remove any of them from consideration.

=======================

[hrmjustin]

39. BTW , we do listen to plenty of criticism of Hillary in GD.

We don't want it in the HRC room.

[pnwmom]

84. So? You are free to criticize her everywhere else. Why shouldn't there be one place on DU

where her supporters can get together and not have to deal with people who loathe Hillary?

[winter is coming]

96. It's not unusual for candidate-oriented groups to be echo chambers.

Last edited Mon Feb 16, 2015, 09:26 AM - Edit history (2)

on edit: Apparently some places echo more than others.

Barack Obama group: 345 subscribers, 116 blocked
Hillary Clinton group: 78 subscribers, 30 blocked
Joe Biden group: 40 subscribers, 0 blocked
Elizabeth Warren group: 160 subscribers, 6 blocked

[Maedhros]

23. I'm not interested in a political movement based upon loyalty to the leader.

Last edited Sun Feb 15, 2015, 10:21 PM - Edit history (1)

If Hillary had something to offer liberals and progressives, you'd see fewer anti-Hillary posts.

[bvar22]

43. ^This^

Its easy to spot the wannabe Hall Monitors.

[zeemike]

53. Politics based on loyalty to the leader scares me.

Nothing good has ever come from that...and it is not what democracy is about.
But it sure seems to be happening here now.

Actually the GOP will help us decide who we run against them by keeping us focused on the one they want...they attack that person and we defend and soon start to think that is the one they don't want when that is not the case at all...child psychology I think they call it. And it seems to work.

[HereSince1628]

73. Yes, and politics stripped of loyal opposition is just the politics of P.U.M.A.

We -need- alternatives. We ought to cherish having alternatives instead of pressure to close off all alternatives before anyone has even announced.

[winter is coming]

107. ^^ This. We *want* to have a deep bench.

If all we've got is one megastar player, we're gonna be screwed if something happens to them.

[HereSince1628]

109. If the top of the party is monolithic, it's no longer a big tent.

It'd be just another phony free-speech zone with all the diversity caged where it has no influence

[winter is coming]

110. Very good point.

[winter is coming]

24. So discussing candidates is now "shooting ourselves in the foot"?

At what point are we allowed to honestly discuss our party and its candidates without being accused of helping the enemy? Ever??

[TreasonousBastard]

27. There is a certain group of people who find the need to talk...

far exceeds their ability to think about what to talk about.

I suspect bashing Hillary at this stage is just another symptom of this condition.

[Agschmid]

31. Remember DU does NOT represent the Dem. party...

More like a fringe of it.

[Fumesucker]

56. Yep, the fringe where the Iraq war was a bad thing

Arguably the worst foreign policy disaster in American history.

I mean aside from Benghazi.

[hrmjustin]

36. It is sunday. GD is always anti-Hillary central on Sunday.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. Tsk. Tsk.

[cwydro]

41. I cannot imagine what I will do if there is a Bush in the White House.

I need Happy Me's little hair on fire person.

Gah!

[LWolf]

47. And so many aggressively pro-HRC threads.

The primaries haven't even begun. Battle lines have been drawn.

If we don't fight back NOW, then when? When it's too late, and she's been officially crowned?

[jimlup]

51. It won't affect the rethugs...

you are vastly overestimating the intelligence of the rank and file rethugs. And the puppet master rethugs already know the score.

[rhett o rick]

54. Those posting the anti-Hillary threads agree with you. Let's

get unified behind a progressive candidate and not be fractured if HRC wins the nomination.

If you want to unify the Party go with someone other than the one with the huge baggage.

It's really very simple. Some say, "I will vote for whatever candidate gets nominated." While others say, "I won't ever vote for a person that voted for the IWar." This is easy to solve. Nominate anyone but HRC.

If you want a repeat of 2000, nominate HRC. But you won't have Nader to blame, just yourselves.

[zeemike]

59. Clinton v Bush, the perfect way to say to America

Nothing is ever going to change so give it up already...and many will and just stay home and look at cat pictures on the internet.

Buy I will bet that Jeb will sound rational and compassionate and Hillary will be constantly facing her baggage and Jeb will win by hook or by crook...then too late we will see that we failed again...and probably still have not learned a thing about why.

[rhett o rick]

61. Jeb will just ask, "Didn't you think that my brother and the Republicons were 100% right

on Iraq?" And HRC will have nothing to say.

[Fearless]

55. Ahh... if you're not with us you're against us. Gotcha.

[JackRiddler]

57. So many anti-anti Hillary threads

And the only selling point they've got for the Lady from Goldman Sachs is... Jeb Bush!

Good luck on your inevitability derailing.

Someone will step up. That someone may be as nobody today as Bill De Blasio was a year before the NYC mayoral election.

Someone will be the anti-Hillary, and once that someone is established, I don't expect it will take as long as it did as with Obama to settle the issue.

Hillary has name recognition. That is all. When an alternative coalesces, she's done.

That's why you guys are trying this inevitability bullshit, but it's a lot less convincing now than it was eight years ago.

[Cryptoad]

60. Seems that the Koch Bros ,,,

are funding Hate Hillary covert internet operation thru the Papa Paul Org ,,,,,,, and looks like some are getting alot of overtime!

[JackRiddler]

63. Indeed, what's the need?

Her supporters are doing such a great job tearing her down already. Like the other thread where they're reminding everyone that, unlike 23 other senators, she cast a spineless (and very important in PR terms) vote for the war of aggression in October 2002. Oh, and there was apparently a reason to murder all those people in Iraq, right?

[RoccoR5955]

68. Boo hoo. n/t

[wolfie001]

69. Maybe if she was more of an FDR-type Democrat.

I mean, would FDR have ever served on a BODs like Wakmart, for instance? "Not in a million years!" says FDR from the grave.

[Mindfreak7]

70. I know I'm ready for Hilary!

Can't wait!

[calimary]

74. Welcome to DU, Mindfreak7!

Glad you're here! I certainly am. YES she is not perfect. But she's pretty smart. I'm hoping she's noticed the revival and new vitality of the Left - as embodied by the existence of a certain Elizabeth Warren. I, too, am ready for Hillary. I've always felt that if any woman was ready and able and likely to break that last big "glass ceiling," she'd be the one.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

71. Jeb doesn't stand a chance.

[tavernier]

72. I haven't announced for a candidate

nor have I lock stepped, nor have I suggested that other options aren't welcome. I merely stated that our first viable candidate shouldn't be eviscerated in front of our foes before the contest has begun. That is just bad form and sets us up for being a very fractured group before the race has begun.

We give too much ammunition to the other side long before we have formed a game plan.

WTF, are there no poker players in this party??

[NorthCarolina]

75. So many Hillary Deserves to be Next threads!

I have to wonder if the ruling class is getting a bit worried that their candidate for the Democrats this go around doesn't seem to be generating much enthusiasm at all within the party, and keeps getting constantly eclipsed in web sites by that new comer Elizabeth Warren, and on the cable waves by that old guy from Vermont, Bernie Sanders who has become almost a regular on The Ed Show as of late.

I understand the desire to see everything go according to plan, because when things go off script it causes a major upset in the regular order of things. Hell, the Hillary is 45 bumper stickers were printed three years ago and should have been on bumpers across America by last Christmas! When will the people realize that in the interest of fairness they can't just back some 'different' candidate they feel is more acceptable to them, if is isn't acceptable to the third-way first. Geez.

Why shoot yourselves in the foot looking for other contenders? Sit back and see what is already planned for you...

CLINTON vs BUSH II in The Thrilla for the Hilla The money will flow to guarantee a good show.

They guarantee you the satisfaction of the first Female POTUS, just like they did with the first Black POTUS. You can't deny, that was a good run. Took that all the way down to the end in a nail bitter...Obama/Hillary, Hillary/Obama...I mean it was CRAZY...it could have gone either way...it was a squeeker. But anyway, you get the satisfaction of the first Female POTUS EVAH, and they get the candidate they feel best represents ALL THE PEOPLE. Geez.

[1StrongBlackMan]

77. And can you believe? ...

There's even a thread promoting an anti-HRC website that a DU is starting and recruiting DUers to staff!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12773857

[sadoldgirl]

78. Who says she is a "viable candidate"?

As long as nobody has declared, there is no candidate.

"She is the only one with the necessary funds."

Possibly so at this point. Is that the main issue to diminish
everybody else? Then let the Koch brothers decide totally.

" she is way ahead in the polls, even against the Repuglies"

Well, duh; who else is known by the public? Does the public
even know what the Third Way stands for? I doubt it very
much. When talking to some Dems in my neighborhood about
it, they "corrected" me politely with: You mean 3rd party, dear.
They had no idea.

Criticism of Billary's past decisions and campaigns is fair.
Still, if other possible candidates show a problematic history
as well as present comments, those items are fair game
for criticism.


While most of us know not to expect a shining white
hero in armor, all of us have to consider the importance
of congressional candidates as well. The last 6 years
have shown us what happens if we don't.

Just my little rant.

[winter is coming]

88. I was agreeing with some of your points until I got to the word "Billary".

Ugh. Just ugh.

[leftofcool]

101. Billary? Right out of the GOP playbook.

[Bonobo]

87. Maybe it is meaningful. Why discount it as mere "animosity"? nt

[joshcryer]

100. The good thing about the Hillary hate.

It'll make her fireproof when the real shit hits the fan. The left will be absolutely disgusted by the crap Jeb's team throws at her, and it'll make them want to support her more.

[workinclasszero]

102. Divide and conquer

It really worries me to see some of these anti Hillary posts. Some could have been copy/pasted direct from freakrepublic or redstate it seems like.

I definitely don't like everything Hillary has done but there is no other democrat in the race that has as good chance to win the presidency as she does.

If Hillary becomes the official nominee I sincerely hope all democrats will unite behind her to assure the defeat of these dangerous lunatic bagger fanatics that want to drag us back to the stone age.

Sen Warren has said time and again she is not running and she supports Hillary also.

If these posts continue after Hillary gets the nomination, if that happens,...well I would say DU has a problem then. I would strongly question the motives of "democrats" savaging the presidential nominee of the democratic party after the nomination that would only help Bush or Cruz or Rand or any of those theocratic nutcase republicans get elected.

A theocratic bagger house, senate and white house would be one of the worst damned things that could ever happen to the poor in this country, the working class, the non-white, or the non rich 99% of us and we must not let that happen under any circumstances!

[hobbit709]

103. If given a choice I'd vote "None Of The Above" before voting for Hillary.

[winter is coming]

108. There are days when I think the next major political party will be called

"None of the Above".

[RiverLover]

104. I have to wonder if that animosity isn't just fueling

the Democratic party to find us a Democrat to vote for in 2016. A real one. That is, if this online forum held that much influence.

[Marrah_G]

112. I think you overestimate the importance of DUers opinions on the Presidential election

I also thinking expecting people not to voice their opinions during a primary race is not just silly, it's detrimental.

If Hillary Clinton wants the votes, she will need to earn them again, just like any other candidate. She doesn't get to skip that part because the party leadership and the media have decided our candidate for us.

[Logical]

117. You really think politicians make decisions based on the DU posts? nt

[tavernier]

122. No.

I think republicans find great inspiration and energy whenever we tear apart our own. If I don't care for a particular candidate, I don't support them. But I don't spew ugliness about them because, yes, I believe there are plenty of ears listening and celebrating whenever we tear each other down.

[Logical]

123. Unlike the GOP, we tend to call out dems when they need it. I like that trait. nt

[tavernier]

125. We tend to beat each other to a pulp

over the definition of any word with more than one letter. Often my interest in a thread is lost because two Zax are fighting to the death in a 40 post argument. Calling out is one thing, but cutting off your nose to spite your face is counterproductive.

In the end, we'll never please everybody, but I would rather have a few pissed off fellow Dems than a Bush in the White House, regardless of who we finally nominate.

[Logical]

126. If Hillary is the nominee I will vote for her. I have promised to get really drunk.....

and have someone drive me to the polls and vote for her.

But my efforts and money will go to house and senate dems.

[benz380]

119. So little time! n/t

[NCTraveler]

124. And most of the anti-Hillary group act as though they are being silenced.

It is somewhat funny to watch.

[merrily]

127. I doubt DU threads are determining the 2016 Presidential.

I just cannot buy that what goes on on a message board has that much influence over world events.

The trillions represented by organizations like ALEC and Bilderburg and DU, all determining who will be the next POTUS?

Besides, there both posts supporting Hillary and posts criticizing her and/or hoping for a vigorous primary, as it should be.

When did Democrats start fearing speech?