Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:12 AM Apr 2015

If you don't like HRC don't vote for her. seriously, nobody is going to beg you

She is still gonna win. The same people hating on Clinton here have done the same to Obama for eight years. And it didn't matter one bit. He won twice - big time.

So vote for whomever you want. Who gives a shit? Meanwhile Democrats will be electing the first woman president. If a bunch of bitter Naderites want to gripe, who could possibly care?

186 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
If you don't like HRC don't vote for her. seriously, nobody is going to beg you (Original Post) arely staircase Apr 2015 OP
People should vote as they choose. Always. MineralMan Apr 2015 #1
K&R for your response here. We can't have a GOP POTUS, period. Wish I had your confidence on that.nt freshwest Apr 2015 #49
Not confidence. Just hope driven by desperation. MineralMan Apr 2015 #55
Agreed, we're living a Koch poisoned media atmosphere. It takes its toll. n/t freshwest Apr 2015 #61
A vigorous primary often means a STRONGER candidate in the general. Not weaker. Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #158
Uh, I'm in favor of a strong primary. MineralMan Apr 2015 #160
Good. Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #161
See, here's the thing: MineralMan Apr 2015 #162
You have zero influence? Shit, i dont. Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #163
By the time the presidential primaries come to my state, Art_from_Ark Apr 2015 #175
Oh, my primary -vote- doesn't carry a ton of weight, either. Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #179
"The alternative is unthinkable." workinclasszero Apr 2015 #83
2007 called. It wants it's OP back. NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #2
If somebody else wins the primary, I'll be voting for him/her. MoonRiver Apr 2015 #4
Fantastic. What state is this Some One person from? Thor_MN Apr 2015 #5
In 2007, Obama announced only in February, but won the damned thing! NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #8
Yes, he was. greatauntoftriplets Apr 2015 #16
I will correct my OP. I'd checked and a CNN article dated May 2 came up. NYC_SKP Apr 2015 #20
You're welcome. greatauntoftriplets Apr 2015 #28
This time around, Sanders DIDN'T announce in February...neither did Warren brooklynite Apr 2015 #66
the 2007 announcement was only a formality, he already had an organization going and everyone knew JI7 Apr 2015 #140
So in essense, the argument to support Hillary in the primaries is "you have no other choice" Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #159
Those are your words, not mine. Thor_MN Apr 2015 #167
Apparently, you should talk to the people you're presumably railing against, then. Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #168
Well, you were the one that was railing to me, so... Thor_MN Apr 2015 #169
And every time you think you're being clever with that "someone else" shtick Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #170
What's the problem? Since you are not one of the people that you believe I'm railing against, Thor_MN Apr 2015 #171
I'd need to see the "right wing attacks" in question, before I would agree with that assessment Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #172
How, precisely, did you decide that my "POWERFUL MESSAGE" is no other choice? Thor_MN Apr 2015 #173
I'm gonna do what you did, in your post here. Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #178
I can speak for myself and it is damn impudent for you to think you can (incorrectly) summarize Thor_MN Apr 2015 #180
Oh, my, I've been "impudent". Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #181
No, you have conflated what I have said with what you would like to think I said. Thor_MN Apr 2015 #184
"I'm not sure why you want to defend Right Wing Trolls" - straw man. Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #185
We are having a Primary....she is just walking away with because WE Democrats WANT HER!!! VanillaRhapsody Apr 2015 #36
"she is just walking away with because WE Democrats WANT HER!!!" darkangel218 Apr 2015 #48
Yes, WE Democrats... brooklynite Apr 2015 #70
Not all WE Democrats or WE Durs support her. darkangel218 Apr 2015 #71
Not all those opposed to her here ARE Democrats... VanillaRhapsody Apr 2015 #78
Not all those who support her ARE Democrats... cui bono Apr 2015 #121
I think that when we get a few other Democrats campaigning Hillary's poll Autumn Apr 2015 #74
Why...she had those numbers before SHE announced... VanillaRhapsody Apr 2015 #80
So she's polling to win a primary in which she is the only candidate. cui bono Apr 2015 #119
The names of other prospective candidates have always been included in polling... brooklynite Apr 2015 #143
Still no officially declared and signed-up candidates, are there? Other than HRC? pnwmom Apr 2015 #84
Exactly! its too early to say shes walking away with the nomination! darkangel218 Apr 2015 #86
Excuse me? You are putting words in my mouth. Taylorz Apr 2015 #76
Exactly. Well said. cui bono Apr 2015 #122
You don't have to be an HRC supporter to be a Democrat. Ken Burch Apr 2015 #87
"walking away"? You have decided it already? nt Logical Apr 2015 #130
Yeah, a good example of magical thinking. BeanMusical Apr 2015 #134
It's tough. It is between Alfred E Newman, or Pat Paulsen still_one Apr 2015 #3
Really? Ms. Toad Apr 2015 #6
that was unfair on my part arely staircase Apr 2015 #7
hits bottom G_j Apr 2015 #9
fuck nader and his merry band of losers and cheney enablers nt arely staircase Apr 2015 #15
Nader has nothing to do with this and you know it. Ken Burch Apr 2015 #77
and his merry band of losers nt arely staircase Apr 2015 #104
You can't equate all anti-HRC sentiment with Naderism. Ken Burch Apr 2015 #107
That is BS! RoccoR5955 Apr 2015 #85
why not throw in Attiila the Hun for good measure? nt G_j Apr 2015 #112
It gets really old doesn't it? nt Mojorabbit Apr 2015 #67
Naderites like Rahm Emanuel? Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #13
+ 1,000,0000,000,000,0000 to that simple fact of life reddread Apr 2015 #149
+100000000000000. ^THIS^ misterhighwasted Apr 2015 #35
Bitter Naderites? Seriously? DefenseLawyer Apr 2015 #10
Naderites? Who are the "Naderites"? Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #11
losers and GOP fellow travellers. nt arely staircase Apr 2015 #17
So we are "losers" for not wanting to vote for Clinton? darkangel218 Apr 2015 #39
Kinda seems like a "with us or against us mentality" Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #64
more like a who gives a shit what people who claim to be dems but never support one think mentality arely staircase Apr 2015 #111
Examples of those "plenty of regular posters here who have never openly supported a democrat on this darkangel218 Apr 2015 #115
that is against the rules (naming people) nt arely staircase Apr 2015 #116
Feel free to PM me. darkangel218 Apr 2015 #118
Cop Out. bvar22 Apr 2015 #124
+1 darkangel218 Apr 2015 #126
naderites are losers arely staircase Apr 2015 #106
LMAO!!! darkangel218 Apr 2015 #114
So losers and GOP "fellow travellers" need not apply? Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #42
+1 Katashi_itto Apr 2015 #43
Who are you...the Spawn of Benchley? Ken Burch Apr 2015 #79
People should vote for whomever they want. DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #12
The reptilian brains ARE the opponents! Cosmic Kitten Apr 2015 #14
If you don't like HRC (you need a comma here) don't vote for her. That's absolute genius ! Hoppy Apr 2015 #18
what do you mean by 'do't'? arely staircase Apr 2015 #21
Unfortunately, I have bad eyes (blind in one of them) so when I am posting on iPhone, stuff happens. Hoppy Apr 2015 #24
Petty. Grow up. misterhighwasted Apr 2015 #38
Hillary is that you? Enrique Apr 2015 #19
bull. I will get robot calls, mail, email, friends, unknowns, radio ads, JanMichael Apr 2015 #22
why? you think Al Gore is a capitalist lap dog and so will be Clinton? arely staircase Apr 2015 #25
a realist. go back to the du archives from 2001 on. JanMichael Apr 2015 #34
This message was self-deleted by its author LiberalElite Apr 2015 #23
lol. I voted for Obama twice, donated, and canvased for him. PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #26
+1 darkangel218 Apr 2015 #37
Quelle surprise. JTFrog Apr 2015 #50
Just as nasty as calling DUrs Naderites and losers , like the OP did. darkangel218 Apr 2015 #51
Yea, that's much nastier than what that poster said. JTFrog Apr 2015 #52
Im not going to alert on you. darkangel218 Apr 2015 #53
I wouldn't care if you did. JTFrog Apr 2015 #54
I wouldnt bother. darkangel218 Apr 2015 #56
You are so cute. n/t JTFrog Apr 2015 #63
Except you do bother all the time. JTFrog Apr 2015 #94
I was refering to alerting on you, since you thought i would darkangel218 Apr 2015 #95
IBTD. n/t JTFrog Apr 2015 #97
! darkangel218 Apr 2015 #108
hate away then. misterhighwasted Apr 2015 #44
Nice community standards DU. JTFrog Apr 2015 #45
we'll see. PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #68
You could take your chances I guess. JTFrog Apr 2015 #69
she'll have my support PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #72
I guess some of us will just have to work twice as hard then. JTFrog Apr 2015 #93
Must support Democratic nominees. bvar22 Apr 2015 #125
I was a Hillary supporter to the very end in 2008 Autumn Apr 2015 #102
Eagerly anticipated? JTFrog Apr 2015 #103
This message was self-deleted by its author Autumn Apr 2015 #110
It's a primary, we don't all agree on who should be the candidate. And that is okay. Autumn Apr 2015 #113
SLSPDD Puglover Apr 2015 #139
Hey! I missed you. Love the SLSPDD Autumn Apr 2015 #141
No, you shouldn't be called a Naderite. You should be called a Republican. tritsofme Apr 2015 #98
yes, actions do have consequences PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #128
Dress it up however you like. If you don't vote for Hillary in the general, you support Republicans. tritsofme Apr 2015 #131
Cart <horse. Ms. Toad Apr 2015 #135
That is a very safe assumption. There will be a primary in 2016, but it will differ little from tritsofme Apr 2015 #137
In 2012 we had a sitting president. Ms. Toad Apr 2015 #142
There are no other high quality candidates moving toward a run. tritsofme Apr 2015 #144
The multiple serious contenders were not yet in the race at this time in 2008. Ms. Toad Apr 2015 #145
Obama announced in February, Edwards announced earlier in December. tritsofme Apr 2015 #146
There's more than a year before the convention. Ms. Toad Apr 2015 #148
There is actually precious little time for a top tier candidate to get in the race. tritsofme Apr 2015 #151
Typical of Clinton supporters. Ms. Toad Apr 2015 #156
IOKIYAATW"D" reddread Apr 2015 #150
Cool! I glad it it works that way Katashi_itto Apr 2015 #27
My personal belief is: It's way to early for me to make up my mind about which Democrat I'm ... BlueJazz Apr 2015 #29
Most sensible post of the day. misterhighwasted Apr 2015 #46
Thank you much. That was very nice of you. BlueJazz Apr 2015 #155
In the primary I won't no matter what....In the general there really would be no other choice. yourout Apr 2015 #30
If no one gives a shit, then why the need for OPs like this? djean111 Apr 2015 #31
Shh.. reverse psychology! darkangel218 Apr 2015 #33
+1 merrily Apr 2015 #65
I wasn't planning on. nt darkangel218 Apr 2015 #32
What's the point of having this same simplistic sufrommich Apr 2015 #40
I think the point was to insult G_j Apr 2015 #57
Exactly. nt darkangel218 Apr 2015 #58
Why can't we be friends DemocratSinceBirth Apr 2015 #41
Sometimes I don't...speak...right. Iggo Apr 2015 #89
I'm rec'ing but wouldn't have put it that way. n/t freshwest Apr 2015 #47
. Autumn Apr 2015 #59
You don't know people who aren't voting for Hillary, voted for Nader betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #60
Hillary hasn't paid me yet so I won't beg. hrmjustin Apr 2015 #62
2nd OP I've see this week trying to run offf Hillary voters. bvar22 Apr 2015 #73
Yep.. Taylorz Apr 2015 #88
Okay, then! Iggo Apr 2015 #75
May not vote for her in the primary, depends on who runs MiniMe Apr 2015 #81
Political opposition is not hate. LWolf Apr 2015 #82
They are not Naderdites, unfortunately can't say what they are here. William769 Apr 2015 #90
+1 n/t JTFrog Apr 2015 #91
DU rec for pissing off all the right people...nt SidDithers Apr 2015 #92
so you think pissing off other dems wins elections betterdemsonly Apr 2015 #96
What is a dameocrat, anyway?...nt SidDithers Apr 2015 #99
Post removed Post removed Apr 2015 #101
Someone alerted... Agschmid Apr 2015 #117
Thanks for the heads up... SidDithers Apr 2015 #120
OK. But, my vote is not decided on the "likeability" factor. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2015 #100
I can't predict the future BainsBane Apr 2015 #105
We don't have to beg, they'll vote for her. ileus Apr 2015 #109
You forgot the link to the Onion, or maybe Highlights? cui bono Apr 2015 #123
Are we back in grade school? marym625 Apr 2015 #127
does seem more like batshit ratfucking than electioneering, doesnt it? reddread Apr 2015 #153
I believe it is marym625 Apr 2015 #154
LOL, drunk? This post cracked me up. nt Logical Apr 2015 #129
Fascinating. Yet *another* deliberately baiting post by the "defenders" of Hillary. woo me with science Apr 2015 #132
This has probably already been asked, but why post this dumbass invective if you "don't care"? whatchamacallit Apr 2015 #133
If you don't give a shit why the need to insult people? I will vote for Sanders no matter how liberal_at_heart Apr 2015 #136
it really is about wanting attention and people to beg them JI7 Apr 2015 #138
Hillary, please save us from your supporters. nt. neverforget Apr 2015 #147
Oh, yeah, there hasn't been any abuse of non-HRC fans here Doctor_J Apr 2015 #152
I dont want her to "beg for" my PRIMARY vote. Silly me, I'd like her to EARN it. Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #157
wow. lol! m-lekktor Apr 2015 #164
wha? Bobbie Jo Apr 2015 #165
I don't know which is more amusing: the assumption that Hillary will be elected, winter is coming Apr 2015 #166
Jeezus, Mary and Joseph. ...... A year and a half of this shit. marmar Apr 2015 #174
Bookmarking this Kelvin Mace Apr 2015 #176
WQe certainly do have haters in our party too. bobGandolf Apr 2015 #177
. Rex Apr 2015 #182
I have no special hatred for Hillary. Shoulders of Giants Apr 2015 #183
"...it's becoming quite apparent who the Dems are going to choose as their nominee." Warren DeMontague Apr 2015 #186

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
1. People should vote as they choose. Always.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:15 AM
Apr 2015

I expect Hillary Clinton to be the nominee, and I expect her to win in the general election, too. Some people will choose not to vote for her, I'm sure, as a protest of some kind. They should follow their beliefs, but they shouldn't expect that others will follow them down that foolish path. I think that enough voters will choose the Democratic option to offset the Republican vote. I certainly hope so. If not, we're in for some serious problems. That's why I'll be advocating voting for Democrats, just like always. The alternative is unthinkable.

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
49. K&R for your response here. We can't have a GOP POTUS, period. Wish I had your confidence on that.nt
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:51 AM
Apr 2015

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
55. Not confidence. Just hope driven by desperation.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:58 AM
Apr 2015

I'm far from confident these days. I'm watching the candidate most likely to be able to defeat the Republicans in 2016 being torn down daily on the Internet. I've never had a President with whom I've agreed 100% of the time. I've never expected to. Yet, I vote for Democrats, because I support more of those candidates' goals more of the time than any Republican candidate.

I believe it is possible for someone like Hillary Clinton to lose in 2016. Attacking a candidate nonstop for 18 months could easily produce that result. And what a terrible result will be obtained. I'm disheartened, disappointed, and disenchanted with such attacks. They will not lead to a good result. It is a shame.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
158. A vigorous primary often means a STRONGER candidate in the general. Not weaker.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:13 PM
Apr 2015

Look at 2008.

Yeah, 2008 is instructive for a lot of reasons.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
160. Uh, I'm in favor of a strong primary.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:19 PM
Apr 2015

I've said that many times. I don't have a candidate for President, and won't until after the convention. If you think someone should run, please encourage that person to run. Right now, HRC will surely win. I'll be voting for the Democratic nominee and campaigning hard.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
161. Good.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:25 PM
Apr 2015

i think a lot of people should run. However, "well you dont have any other choice" isnt a very good campaign message. Nor does the lack of an allegedly "viable" alternative mean the supposed inevitable front runner gets a free pass from criticism.

I also think that the announced candidates should run ON more than meaningless pablum like "i want to strengthen families and communities", "my most inspirational bible passage is" and "If the TPP isnt doubleplusgood for american workers, then we should be willing to consider thinking about ways that we could entertain the idea of starting to discuss whether or not we should think about maybe walking away from it"

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
162. See, here's the thing:
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:31 PM
Apr 2015

I get exactly one vote in the primary election. That's it. When a nominee is selected at the convention, my work starts. Until then, in presidential races, I have zero influence. I will support and campaign for that nominee. Simple.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
163. You have zero influence? Shit, i dont.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:34 PM
Apr 2015

The primaries are the time when we as a party decide what we stand for.

Maybe i am deeply deluded by i have earned my voice. I intend to use it.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
179. Oh, my primary -vote- doesn't carry a ton of weight, either.
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:24 PM
Apr 2015

But that doesnt mean I've written off having any influence, at least in my own small way.

 

workinclasszero

(28,270 posts)
83. "The alternative is unthinkable."
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:27 PM
Apr 2015

Ain't that the truth?

Wait till the republican ayatollahs have to get on nationwide, live TV and spell out their nightmare vision of "taking back America."

The teabaggers will not allow them to be one iota left of Adolf Hitler. Non insane American voters will come stampeding into Hillary's camp en masse!

I'm hoping for a landslide democratic party victory with long coattails!

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
2. 2007 called. It wants it's OP back.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:25 AM
Apr 2015

She was also inevitable then.

And I opposed her vigorously then.

I would prefer that we have a primary and that someone more supportive of the working person get the nomination and then move into the whitehouse to work for us.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1204376

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
4. If somebody else wins the primary, I'll be voting for him/her.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:30 AM
Apr 2015

Hillary was my favorite in 2008, but when Obama won the primary, I supported him 100%.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
5. Fantastic. What state is this Some One person from?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:33 AM
Apr 2015

Do you have any links to their (is Some pronounced sum or so-MEH) policy positions?

I really don't see much difference between supporting Republican candidates and attacking Democratic candidates.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
8. In 2007, Obama announced only in February, but won the damned thing!
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:43 AM
Apr 2015

How about THAT?

I'm not attacking any candidates, Hillary has a way of being her own worst enemy and doesn't need my help.

I would, however, like to keep all the doors open for the greatest number of choices possible and to have a genuine primary.

I'm a Democrat, that's how we roll.

brooklynite

(93,880 posts)
66. This time around, Sanders DIDN'T announce in February...neither did Warren
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:07 PM
Apr 2015

and in the year leading up to February, Obama was quietly organizing political and financial support. That has't happened this time either.

You've got O'Malley, Webb, Chafee, MAYBE Sanders, but imagining some other candidate getting in this late is a dream.

Of course, now someone will complain that my pointing this out is "discouraging".

JI7

(89,185 posts)
140. the 2007 announcement was only a formality, he already had an organization going and everyone knew
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:23 PM
Apr 2015

already for a long time that he was going to run.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
159. So in essense, the argument to support Hillary in the primaries is "you have no other choice"
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:17 PM
Apr 2015

WOW THAT IS A POWERFUL MESSAGE TO RUN ON, RIGHT THERE

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
167. Those are your words, not mine.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 09:14 PM
Apr 2015

I'm asking who this Someone Else is.

Apparently, there's a lot of people "ready for" him/her. A completely flaccid, limp message.

I'd like to know more about them, before supporting that particular bandwagon. Done you have any info, at all, on this Someone Else? Have they filed yet? Did they form a PAC? What's the URL to their web site?

I'll support the candidate, who ever it is, without furthering bullshit Right Wing talking points.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
168. Apparently, you should talk to the people you're presumably railing against, then.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 09:19 PM
Apr 2015

Because I've said repeatedly that I haven't decided who I'm supporting in the Primaries (shocking! i know, what with ONLY 568 days until the 2016 election) ... what I'd like to hear from all the ANNOUNCED candidates (and there may be some who still haven't announced, despite the fact that Hillary Clinton has been in the race nearly a whole week... so obviously the field should be finalized by now) is concrete policy proposals and statements on the issues pressing to the electorate.

I trust we will have time for that, and although Hillary has offered some real wonky policy meat already, like "I want to strengthen families and communities"--- who doesn't support THAT, amirite? I'm still keeping my options open.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
169. Well, you were the one that was railing to me, so...
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 09:39 PM
Apr 2015

I'd like to hear from all the candidates, including this Someone Else that people are so excited about. I'd like to see some contrasting and comparing amongst the candidates.

What I'm tired of seeing is Right Wing talking points, with absolutely jack shit in terms of positive content for any Democratic candidate.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
170. And every time you think you're being clever with that "someone else" shtick
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 09:48 PM
Apr 2015

you know exactly what you're doing, which is -like I said- perpetuating this "you don't have any other choice" meme.

Which is a crappy argument that someone deserves my vote.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
171. What's the problem? Since you are not one of the people that you believe I'm railing against,
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 09:57 PM
Apr 2015

why are you so passionate about defending them? Why do you apparently believe that mindlessly repeating Right Wing attacks without a shred of an idea about anything positive is a good thing?

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
172. I'd need to see the "right wing attacks" in question, before I would agree with that assessment
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:03 PM
Apr 2015

for one.

If someone is going "Hillary! Benghaziiiii!!!", yes, that's a mindless repetition of a right wing attack.

If someone criticizes her vote for the IWR, or a lack of substance from her campaign, or her perceived pro-corporate triangulation on stuff like the TPP, etc.... not so much.

In the context of this subthread, it appears the only "mindless repetition of a right wing attack" that you could possibly be talking about, is upthread where someone pointed out that she was supposed to be "inevitable" in the 2008 primaries, too.

How, precisely, do you come to the conclusion that that is a "right wing attack"?

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
173. How, precisely, did you decide that my "POWERFUL MESSAGE" is no other choice?
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:22 AM
Apr 2015

Since you admit that you have no clue as to what I'm talking about, why don't you just leave it at that?

If you had actually read anything I posted, rather that been just trying to pick a fight, you would have seen that I would like to see the other candidates and have people support them. What I'm tired of is the right wing tactics of opposition, without absolutely no constructive content. If you don't like a candidate, fine. Offer up an alternative, sing their praises, tell us how they are better than the other candidates.

On the other hand, if all one has is negativity towards a Democratic candidate, with nothing else, no candidate to support, no idea towards policies, one is not materially different from a Republican troll.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
178. I'm gonna do what you did, in your post here.
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 03:22 PM
Apr 2015

SINCE you can't answer my question and you obviously dont have any coherent way to rationalize your calling nyc skp's bringing up of "inevitability- the 2008 edition" a "right wing attack", you're going to try to bluster me into leaving the thread.... instead of actually addressing anything i've said.

However, you must not know me very well, if you think that is going to work.

Beyond that, let me summarize what you ARE saying here- it is okay (sort of) not to like a particular candidate, but NO ONE MUST EVER SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT THEM, lest they be a right wing troll, because right wing trolls say bad things about our candidates TOO!

Uh, that's not really how primaries work. Is this your first time through a presidential election cycle, perchance?

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
180. I can speak for myself and it is damn impudent for you to think you can (incorrectly) summarize
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:20 PM
Apr 2015

what I have already made clear to anyone who has basic reading comprehension. It's also insulting to suggest that I do not know how primaries work or have not experienced a presidential election.

Bluster all you want about, but if all one had is negative Right Wing attack points (notice how I have not claimed that any one in this OP, including yourself, has made such attacks) then one is not materially different than a Right Wing Troll.

Why are you so defensive of these people? Since you have gone rude, exactly what bug is up your ass? Are you upset that there are no viable candidates at this point? I suggest that you apply your angst to finding some.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
181. Oh, my, I've been "impudent".
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:28 PM
Apr 2015

Quick, send me to the Principal's office.

Your entire act in this thread has been to counter people- in this thread- who put forth arguments like "she was supposed to be inevitable in 2008, too" with a neverending fusiallde of "who else ya got? hah? No one, that's who".

And yes, you are conflating ALL 'attacks' -and apparently pointing out the history of "inevitability" is a negative attack- with "right wing attacks", and by extension, you ARE doing it to the people in this thread, like nyc skp, who you initially responded to.

You can pretend all you want that isn't what you're doing, but basically your two main bullet points in this subthread have been

1) there is no one else you for you to support

and

2) all criticism and negative attacks are right wing attacks because criticism and negative attacks are what right wingers do.

Why am I defensive of "these people"? Which people? People who blather on about Benghazi or Alex Jones shit? I'm NOT defensive of those people.

People like Skip, upthread, who has been on DU for a long time and happens to not support Hillary? He and I disagree about a bunch of stuff, but I'll defend his right to point out that "inevitability" didn't get her the nomination last time around.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
184. No, you have conflated what I have said with what you would like to think I said.
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:04 PM
Apr 2015

I'm not sure why you want to defend Right Wing Trolls. Yes, "these people" that you can't seem to figure out who they are. I'm speaking about people who have jack shit to contribute other than to repost talking points attacking Democratic candidates. If you had been paying any attention whatsoever, instead of trying to pick a fight based on your revisionist claims of what I have said, you would note that I have NOT mentioned any candidates names.

"you're going to try to bluster me into leaving the thread" Take a good long look in a mirror, that's ALL you have brought to the table.

"your calling nyc skp's bringing up of "inevitability- the 2008 edition" See, there's a big part of your problem. You assume that I was making a statement about inevitability.

Please ask questions if you can't figure out what I said, rather than trying to use your ideas for what I said. If you can't understand the nuance between (your words) "there is no one else you for you to support" and the fact that "Someone Else" is not eligible to run for president, then there isn't much hope that you will be able to ever understand what I said.

We agree more than you think, but you have some sort of bug up your ass that I am somehow attacking you. You have been attacking me for several exchanges here while I have explained what apparently is beyond your ability to comprehend. I welcome any constructive discussion of candidates and criticism of a candidate that supports another candidate (a real candidate). Sorry if you don't like my opinion, but tough shit if you don't. Since you don't appear to listen to anything I'm typing, have a nice day, and feel free to make another inane, incorrect stab at inserting your flawed comprehension into my words.

At the end of the day, "Someone Else" can never run for president and supporting him/her is a waste of time.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
185. "I'm not sure why you want to defend Right Wing Trolls" - straw man.
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 08:17 PM
Apr 2015

Yeah, we're talking past each other.

criticism of a candidate that supports another candidate (a real candidate): Okay, O'Malley - who may be running, it's certainly within the realm of possibility - recently criticized Hillary Clinton both on her vote for the IWR and the fact that she only relatively recently "evolved" on marriage equality.

So now that I have put it in the context of an approved alternative (unless he's not) NOW can I criticize Hillary for voting for war in Iraq? Or changing her tune on LGBT marriage?

Just curious.

If you're calling the person you responded to originally a RW troll, you're not only out of line, you're breaking the rules. If you're NOT doing that, then your arguments in this thread -- which all followed his post-- don't make any coherent sense.

As for the rest of it, sure. You feel the way you do, and I do the same. That tough shit logic works both ways.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
36. We are having a Primary....she is just walking away with because WE Democrats WANT HER!!!
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:34 AM
Apr 2015

its very simple...

 

darkangel218

(13,985 posts)
48. "she is just walking away with because WE Democrats WANT HER!!!"
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:51 AM
Apr 2015

WE Democrats? Not all democrats are going to vote for her, and you are not speaking for the majority. It still remains to he seen if she will win the primaries. I personally don't think she will.

brooklynite

(93,880 posts)
70. Yes, WE Democrats...
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:09 PM
Apr 2015

Every poll consistently shows broad popularity for Hillary Clinton, from both liberals and centrists; black, white and hispanic; rich and poor; young and old. I think your problem is relating "WE DUers" with "WE Democrats".

 

darkangel218

(13,985 posts)
71. Not all WE Democrats or WE Durs support her.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:13 PM
Apr 2015

And polls are irrelevant so early in the race. We don't even know who else will be running yet!

This thread has been a hoot. Thanks OP!

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
74. I think that when we get a few other Democrats campaigning Hillary's poll
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:18 PM
Apr 2015

numbers will go down. Right now she is sucking up all the oxygen.

 

VanillaRhapsody

(21,115 posts)
80. Why...she had those numbers before SHE announced...
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:25 PM
Apr 2015

she has had that level of support now for a very long time...

brooklynite

(93,880 posts)
143. The names of other prospective candidates have always been included in polling...
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:24 PM
Apr 2015

...if you want to believe that nobody's picking them because "they haven't announced", knock yourselves out.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
84. Still no officially declared and signed-up candidates, are there? Other than HRC?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:27 PM
Apr 2015

I know there are people floating whispers and beginning "exploratory" campaigns. . . .

 

darkangel218

(13,985 posts)
86. Exactly! its too early to say shes walking away with the nomination!
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:29 PM
Apr 2015

When the debates haven't even started!

 

Taylorz

(53 posts)
76. Excuse me? You are putting words in my mouth.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:22 PM
Apr 2015

I do not support Hillary at all. I've seen her. Hell, I had family working for the White House during the Clinton years. Worked closely for Gore. I know the stories.

I supported Clinton with my first vote in '96, and have supported Gore, Kerry, Obama through their races. I was a Dean supporter, and Obama supporter.

I knew what I was getting, and Clinton offers nothing substantial of value for me or the 99%'ers. So, I am opposing her in principle because she is too far to the right so much that even mainstream right-wingers are supporting Clinton.

We need a Democratic Party flagbearer that stays true to the party, and Clinton isn't it. She's already triangulating. Bernie stands an excellent chance of getting that nomination, despite the "fringe left" that makes up a large portion of the Democratic Party. Lunatic fringe left was what, 1980s? In today's society, he is the Democratic Party. Hillary would be labelled "Republican". Hillary is only interested in recruiting the 1%'ers and giving lip service to everyone else.

Remember, the Republican platform today is identical to the Koch/Libertarian platform in 1980. That's how extreme right they are.

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
122. Exactly. Well said.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 02:00 PM
Apr 2015

Obama is a self-described moderate Republican. Hillary is close to him in most things. I don't want another Republican president.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
87. You don't have to be an HRC supporter to be a Democrat.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:30 PM
Apr 2015

A bit of history.

At this point in 1971, Ed Muskie was "walking away with it".

At this point in 1979, Ted Kennedy was "walking away with it".

At this point in 1987, Mario Cuomo was "walking away with it".

And at this point in 2007, HRC was "walking away with it".

Things change.

And no candidate benefits from combative smugness on her supporters' part.

Ms. Toad

(33,915 posts)
6. Really?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:35 AM
Apr 2015

I assume that's why is there post after post calling people who don't support her names like "haters" and "Naderites." No one cares. Least of all you.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
77. Nader has nothing to do with this and you know it.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:22 PM
Apr 2015

And it's not like HRC has anything to offer as a candidate that the others don't.

How does McCarthyite flamebait like this HELP your candidate?

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
107. You can't equate all anti-HRC sentiment with Naderism.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:29 PM
Apr 2015

That simply isn't fair, or true.

And HRC has no special entitlement. She's just another candidate and nobody's voted yet. Polls are meaningless at this stage.

 

RoccoR5955

(12,471 posts)
85. That is BS!
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:28 PM
Apr 2015

Because had ALL the votes in Floriduh been counted, we wouldn't have had Dubya.
It had nothing to do with Nader. Nader finished third with 97,000 votes.
What about Buchanan with 17,000 votes, Brown with 16,000 votes, Hagelin with 2,200 votes, Morehead, with 1800 votes, or Phillips, with 1300 votes? If any of these candidates were not on the ballot, and even half of the people who voted for any of them voted for Gore, Gore would have won.

I am sick of people blaming Nader for Gore's loss, when it was the RepubliCONs in Floriduh, and the Supremes Court who stopped the counting of all the votes in Floriduh. That, along with the fact, that there was a considerable number of minor party candidates, several of whom could have been put there as spoilers, were more than a factor than Nader was.

Cosmic Kitten

(3,498 posts)
13. Naderites like Rahm Emanuel?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:49 AM
Apr 2015
I should have included the Republicans who fund the Naderites. My bad.


????

Republicans Heap Money On Rahm Emanuel's Re-election Campaign
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/19/rahm-emanuel-republicans_n_6904566.html
 

DefenseLawyer

(11,101 posts)
10. Bitter Naderites? Seriously?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:47 AM
Apr 2015

Colonel: Whose side are you on, son?
Joker: Our side, sir!
Colonel: Don't you love your country?
Joker: Yes, sir!
Colonel: Then how 'bout getting with the program? Why don't you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?
Joker: Yes, sir!

Cosmic Kitten

(3,498 posts)
11. Naderites? Who are the "Naderites"?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:47 AM
Apr 2015
So vote for whomever you want. Who gives a shit? Meanwhile Democrats will be electing the first woman president. If a bunch of bitter Naderites want to gripe, who could possibly care?


Cosmic Kitten

(3,498 posts)
64. Kinda seems like a "with us or against us mentality"
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:04 PM
Apr 2015

Guess we're going back
to the Rahm Emanuel
school of "Loseing Friends
and Making Enemies"



Rahm Emanuel apologises for 'retards' comment
Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, has apologised for calling Left-wingers Democrats '----ing retards'.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/7158169/Rahm-Emanuel-apologises-for-retards-comment.html

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
111. more like a who gives a shit what people who claim to be dems but never support one think mentality
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:34 PM
Apr 2015

There are plenty of regular posters here who have never openly supported a democrat on this board, but claim to be democrats who just don't think HRC is a good enough Democrat.

 

darkangel218

(13,985 posts)
115. Examples of those "plenty of regular posters here who have never openly supported a democrat on this
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:48 PM
Apr 2015

board"??

You peaked my curiosity!

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
124. Cop Out.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 02:02 PM
Apr 2015

You can post links, but, of course you have none since you just made that shit up,
so I expect another BS, Cop Out, whiny Excuse.

Cosmic Kitten

(3,498 posts)
42. So losers and GOP "fellow travellers" need not apply?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:43 AM
Apr 2015

Well you've come to
the right place to espouse
that nugget of insightful
political strategy

Clearly some folks are confused.

I've heard talk that if
we don't vote for Hillary...
then REPUBLICANS!!!!1!11!!

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
79. Who are you...the Spawn of Benchley?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:24 PM
Apr 2015


Will you start telling people to "pound sand and peddle it walking", too?

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,706 posts)
12. People should vote for whomever they want.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:48 AM
Apr 2015

The constant drumbeat of derision in some quarters here for Ms. Clinton triggers the reptilian brain and leads us to want to lash out. That's exactly what our opponents want. We must try to rise above it.

As hard as it is I am going to try to create a virtuous cycle as opposed to a vicious one. I might not succeed because it is contrary to my nature but I will try.


 

Hoppy

(3,595 posts)
18. If you don't like HRC (you need a comma here) don't vote for her. That's absolute genius !
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 10:55 AM
Apr 2015

Maybe we can gofundme for an electric billboard with that insight.

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
21. what do you mean by 'do't'?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:02 AM
Apr 2015

Is that a new contraction?



It is important to proofread your posts when correcting the grammar of others.

 

Hoppy

(3,595 posts)
24. Unfortunately, I have bad eyes (blind in one of them) so when I am posting on iPhone, stuff happens.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:07 AM
Apr 2015

Things should get better after cataract surgery. That will probably next year.

Anyways, thanks for the tip.

misterhighwasted

(9,148 posts)
38. Petty. Grow up.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:38 AM
Apr 2015

I see plenty of posts with typos. Pretty rare to call another out on it.
Civility would be more appropriate.
Pointing it out, as in this instance is petty.

JanMichael

(24,847 posts)
22. bull. I will get robot calls, mail, email, friends, unknowns, radio ads,
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:05 AM
Apr 2015

TV ads, Web banner ads, flers, buttons, tattoos, ring tones on other phones, etfreakincetera.

There will be billions of dollars worth of "begging" me for a year or more.

Oh and I forgot something. I will be asked for or begged for money. Sadly I am a socialist with good income and they will magically know that.

Stupid op. It doesn't even make sense.

And I voted for Gore in Florida in 2000 and will vote for whatever capitalist lap dog runs as a Democrat in 2016. I should also add the I am not a Warrennutter or Bernie lover at this time.

Phhhft.

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
25. why? you think Al Gore is a capitalist lap dog and so will be Clinton?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:10 AM
Apr 2015

But you voted for one and plan on voting for the other? Why? A cynical person might think you are just saying that to stay on the right side of the rules here.

JanMichael

(24,847 posts)
34. a realist. go back to the du archives from 2001 on.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:30 AM
Apr 2015

You also didn't acknowledge my point about begging. That is exactly what will happen.

Your op still sucks.

I still voted for the god awful lesser of evils starting in 1992.

In 1988 I stupidly voted Bush 1. Then again at that time I wasn't far Left either.

Response to arely staircase (Original post)

 

PowerToThePeople

(9,610 posts)
26. lol. I voted for Obama twice, donated, and canvased for him.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:12 AM
Apr 2015

HRC will not get my vote.

FU for calling us Naderites.

 

JTFrog

(14,274 posts)
52. Yea, that's much nastier than what that poster said.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:56 AM
Apr 2015

So you would be okay with me telling you FU? Not that I would of course....

(Note to juror: Legitimate question since poster claims it's just as nasty as the OP using "Naderite&quot

misterhighwasted

(9,148 posts)
44. hate away then.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:46 AM
Apr 2015

FU ?
Wow, considering what loathsome name calling goes on here from those who oppose Clinton, well this should not bother you.
Like being called a Republican for supporting Clinton.

Same thing, different day. How it goes on & on around here.

 

JTFrog

(14,274 posts)
45. Nice community standards DU.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:49 AM
Apr 2015


Can't wait for the big going away party DU will hold when Hillary wins the nomination.




 

PowerToThePeople

(9,610 posts)
68. we'll see.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:08 PM
Apr 2015

If hrc does happen to get the nomination, I will just have to trashcan by keyword and not join into any hrc threads until after the election.

 

JTFrog

(14,274 posts)
69. You could take your chances I guess.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:09 PM
Apr 2015
But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear.
 

PowerToThePeople

(9,610 posts)
72. she'll have my support
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:13 PM
Apr 2015

Via my silence. Been here longer than you. I know how to navigate du pretty well.

 

JTFrog

(14,274 posts)
93. I guess some of us will just have to work twice as hard then.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:42 PM
Apr 2015

Enjoy your silence.

I'm sure someone will.





bvar22

(39,909 posts)
125. Must support Democratic nominees.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 02:14 PM
Apr 2015

Well, I guess that Debbie Wassermann Schultz or her supporters should get banned:


The fact that she wasn't raises alot of nasty questions about the Party Leadership.



In 2008 Debbie Wasserman Schultz refused to endorse these 3 Democrats
who had won their Primaries and had a chance to win Republican seats:

Miami-Dade Democratic Party Chair Joe Garcia

Former Hialeah Democratic Mayor Raul Martinez

Democratic businesswoman Annette Taddeo

All three had won their local Democratic Primaries, and were challenging Hard Core Republican incumbents with whom Wasserman-Schultz had become cozy.
Not only did the head of the DCCC Red to Blue Program REFUSE to endorse these Democratic challengers,
but she appeared in person at at least one (possibly more) Campaign/Fundraiser for their Republican opponents.




FL-18, FL-21, FL-25: Wasserman Schultz Wants Dem Challengers to Lose
by: James L.
Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 7:15 PM EDT
<snip>

Sensing a shift in the political climate of the traditionally solid-GOP turf of the Miami area, Democrats have lined up three strong challengers -- Miami-Dade Democratic Party chair Joe Garcia, former Hialeah Mayor Raul Martinez, and businesswoman Annette Taddeo to take on Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, respectively.

While there is an enormous sense of excitement and optimism surrounding these candidacies, some Democratic lawmakers, including Florida Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Kendrick Meek, are all too eager to kneecap these Democratic challengers right out of the starting gate in the spirit of "comity" and "bipartisan cooperation" with their Republican colleagues:

But as three Miami Democrats look to unseat three of her South Florida Republican colleagues, Wasserman Schultz is staying on the sidelines. So is Rep. Kendrick Meek, a Miami Democrat and loyal ally to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

This time around, Wasserman Schultz and Meek say their relationships with the Republican incumbents, Reps. Lincoln Diaz-Balart and his brother Mario, and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, leave them little choice but to sit out the three races.

"At the end of the day, we need a member who isn't going to pull any punches, who isn't going to be hesitant," Wasserman Schultz said.

Now, you'd expect this kind of bullshit from a backbencher like Alcee Hastings, but you wouldn't expect this kind of behavior from the co-chair of the DCCC's Red to Blue program, which is the position that Wasserman Schultz currently holds. Apparently, Debbie did not get Rahm's memo about doing whatever it takes to win:

The national party, enthusiastic about the three Democratic challengers, has not yet selected Red to Blue participants. But Wasserman Schultz has already told the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that if any of the three make the cut, another Democrat should be assigned to the race.

http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1537










The bloggers also are furious with Rep. Kendrick B. Meek (D-Fla.), who similarly refuses to endorse the Democratic challengers to the three Cuban American Republicans.

They are calling for Wasserman Schultz to step down from her leadership role at the DCCC. And they're not letting up, even after one Florida liberal blogger reported that the congresswoman seemed "frustrated" by the blogs and had asked to "please help get them off my back."

This prompted even harsher reaction from perhaps the most influential of the progressive political bloggers, Markos Moulitsas, a.k.a. Kos, founder of Daily Kos, who wrote on his blog Wednesday: "On so many fronts, the Republicans are standing in the way of progress, on Iraq, SCHIP, health care, fiscal responsibility, corruption, civil liberties, and so on. Those three south Florida Republicans are part of that problem. And she's (Wasserman-Schultz) going to be 'frustrated' that people demand she do her job?"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/19/AR2008031903410_3.html


Here are Kos comments on the Wasserman-Schultz betrayal of the Democratic Party:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/03/20/480511/-DCCC-Says-Uproar-Over-DWS-Recusal-Much-Ado-About-Nothing




A lot of time has passed since 2008, but I don't take these kinds of betrayals lightly.

bvar22
Cursed with a memory

"I want to thank Debbie Wasserman-Schultz for being an outstanding chair of our party. (Applause.) She is a great partner."--President Obama


With "partners" like this, we don't need Republicans!

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
102. I was a Hillary supporter to the very end in 2008
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:18 PM
Apr 2015

I find it interesting that at that time so many Hillary supporters were driven off from this site or hounded until they were banned by some of the very same people who are such staunch supporters of Hillary this time around. Yeah the purges are eagerly anticipated aren't they?

 

JTFrog

(14,274 posts)
103. Eagerly anticipated?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:24 PM
Apr 2015

No. I think it's sad that some folks are so far gone as to already declare they won't vote for the Democratic nominee. I do, however, think their constant negativity is a blight on this website during election season.



Response to JTFrog (Reply #103)

Autumn

(44,765 posts)
113. It's a primary, we don't all agree on who should be the candidate. And that is okay.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:36 PM
Apr 2015

Skinner will decide when the crackdown on election season begins.

tritsofme

(17,325 posts)
98. No, you shouldn't be called a Naderite. You should be called a Republican.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:06 PM
Apr 2015

A vote for anyone but Hillary in the general is a vote to empower Republicans and give them the White House, and the ability to choose Supreme Court justices.

Not sure why you are sensitive about being called out for this, actions do have consequences.

 

PowerToThePeople

(9,610 posts)
128. yes, actions do have consequences
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 02:36 PM
Apr 2015

And the Democratic party continually putting up Republican-lite as the best option available has run it's course. I, and many others, are tired of it.

I will be for Sanders (furthest thing from Republican) as long as possible.

Third way and DLC are the Republicans in this thread, not I.

tritsofme

(17,325 posts)
137. That is a very safe assumption. There will be a primary in 2016, but it will differ little from
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:13 PM
Apr 2015

the one we held in 2012.

Ms. Toad

(33,915 posts)
142. In 2012 we had a sitting president.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:21 PM
Apr 2015

That makes it inherently different. In 2008, a candidate who had not yet announced won the primaries.

So, as I said, you're putting the cart before the horse.

tritsofme

(17,325 posts)
144. There are no other high quality candidates moving toward a run.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:47 PM
Apr 2015

This is very different than 2008 when there were multiple serious contenders.

Hillary's primary opposition is shaping up to be far weaker than even Al Gore faced as an incumbent vice president in 2000.

Hillary truly does enter the nominating process in a stronger position than any candidate other than an incumbent president in the modern process, her position as essentially the presumptive nominee this far out is unprecedented.

My point is that she face a somewhat more difficult task than Obama in 2012, but likely an easier glide than Gore in 2000, bookmark it.

Ms. Toad

(33,915 posts)
145. The multiple serious contenders were not yet in the race at this time in 2008.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 05:54 PM
Apr 2015

And, as I recall, many many people believed her to be the presumptive nominee in 2008, and it didn't turn out to be the case. She is neither a sitting president, or vice president.

You're putting the cart before the horse. Let the primary play out before you start lobbing names at people who don't support her.

tritsofme

(17,325 posts)
146. Obama announced in February, Edwards announced earlier in December.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 06:02 PM
Apr 2015

They had been seriously mulling campaigns for months or years before.

With Warren repeatedly insisting she is out, there are no serious contenders on the horizon in this contest.

Ms. Toad

(33,915 posts)
148. There's more than a year before the convention.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 07:15 PM
Apr 2015

10 months before the Iowa caucus. Plenty of time for others to enter the field.

tritsofme

(17,325 posts)
151. There is actually precious little time for a top tier candidate to get in the race.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 07:32 PM
Apr 2015

You can't build a national campaign on the back of a napkin.

Feel free to cling to the illusion that someone meaningful could actually challenge Hillary, let alone beat her, but the reality is that this race was over before it ever started.

Ms. Toad

(33,915 posts)
156. Typical of Clinton supporters.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:10 PM
Apr 2015

She's inevitable. Everyone else should just roll over and play dead.

As I started this conversation, you're putting the cart before the horse.

 

BlueJazz

(25,348 posts)
29. My personal belief is: It's way to early for me to make up my mind about which Democrat I'm ...
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:20 AM
Apr 2015

...going to vote for. I have no axe to grind regarding Hillary whatsoever. To me, it's like buying a new car. True, it's much more important but at the same time I want to study the "Purchase" before laying down the Vote/Money. I might have the Purchase driving me around for 8 years.

yourout

(7,521 posts)
30. In the primary I won't no matter what....In the general there really would be no other choice.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:20 AM
Apr 2015

I would not be able to sleep at night if Walker, Bush, Cruz got elected and I did not at least vote against them.

Would love to have someone to vote FOR but that is not likely to happen.

 

djean111

(14,255 posts)
31. If no one gives a shit, then why the need for OPs like this?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:21 AM
Apr 2015

And I would hope no one would beg me to vote for her.
What you seem to really be instructing us non-Hillary-supporters to do is to sit down and shut up.
I skip the Yay! Hillary threads. I you skip the threads that express displeasure with Hillary's policies, then it would be equally easy to skip them, I would think. Or stay in the HRC group, or something like that.
But you don't really get to tell people who do not agree with you what to do.
The Naderite thing is pretty funny, gotta give you that.

sufrommich

(22,871 posts)
40. What's the point of having this same simplistic
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 11:42 AM
Apr 2015

fake argument over and over again on DU? People can vote however they want,that's not exactly a new revelation.

 

betterdemsonly

(1,967 posts)
60. You don't know people who aren't voting for Hillary, voted for Nader
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:00 PM
Apr 2015

but even if they did it seems stupid not care since according to Nader haters they caused Gore to lose. I guess you don't care whether you lose. Oh I forget, your psychic feelers tell you, Hillary will win. No need for election anymore than there is any need for a primary.

The first women President isn't exactly a compelling perk for most people who expect the President to do things rather than be a particular identity.

I don't really have any respect for symbolism voters. I am guessing they are mostly frivolous rich women that get misty eyed over stories about European Queens, and Maggie Thatcher, reactionaries who mostly oppressed the average women.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
73. 2nd OP I've see this week trying to run offf Hillary voters.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:14 PM
Apr 2015

If you volunteer to "help" Hillary,
stay away from phone banking or canvassing because you do more harm than good.
Stick to Stuffing Letters.
You will do less damage to Hillary.....and the Democratic Party.

No charge.




 

Taylorz

(53 posts)
88. Yep..
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:30 PM
Apr 2015

I've already soured on Hillary and it took even less than a day.... already looking forward to a Bernie Sanders switch/announcement to challenge for the Democratic nomination, and based on his records, I think we've found the right candidate to directly challenge Clinton from the left and understand how massive of a support Bernie has on the liberal side vs the Third Way Democrats.

Iggo

(47,489 posts)
75. Okay, then!
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:19 PM
Apr 2015

And since you don't give a shit whether I vote for her or not, does this mean this is the last I'll hear from you about it?

MiniMe

(21,677 posts)
81. May not vote for her in the primary, depends on who runs
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:25 PM
Apr 2015

But I will vote for whoever the dem candidate is in the general election!

LWolf

(46,179 posts)
82. Political opposition is not hate.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:26 PM
Apr 2015

And no, I won't be voting for her, but then, I didn't need your permission to abstain.

William769

(55,124 posts)
90. They are not Naderdites, unfortunately can't say what they are here.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 12:33 PM
Apr 2015

So I will just tell them all to have a nice day.

 

betterdemsonly

(1,967 posts)
96. so you think pissing off other dems wins elections
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:02 PM
Apr 2015

Lord Jesus seeing you trashtalkers lose your Astroturf wages is the best reason I can think of to vote for O'Malley, Sanders or even James Webb.

You are the stupidest campaigners I have ever seen. You actually want to incite supporters of other candidates to hate you and your own candidate. Why has noone observed you are possibly a closet repuke is something I'll never understand. Why does Hillary want to pay you good wallstreet money to sink her career?

Response to SidDithers (Reply #99)

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
100. OK. But, my vote is not decided on the "likeability" factor.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:09 PM
Apr 2015

It's decided on policies, issues, history, and principles.

It's also not decided on polls, party loyalty, or "not as bad".



BainsBane

(53,003 posts)
105. I can't predict the future
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 01:26 PM
Apr 2015

to say if Clinton will win the nomination or the presidency, but I share your sentiment about the professional gripers. Who cares is right. Nobody but themselves. While they piss me off sometimes, their influence is minimal.

cui bono

(19,926 posts)
123. You forgot the link to the Onion, or maybe Highlights?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 02:01 PM
Apr 2015

I'm not sure which, but this can't possibly be the post of a serious adult who cares about our country.

marym625

(17,997 posts)
127. Are we back in grade school?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 02:34 PM
Apr 2015

Next will be a post saying nah-nah-nah-nah-nah


If this is how someone responds to actual issues, rather than justifying actions or policy, then I hope for HC's sake, that everyone that is using it are not on her campaign. Convincing anyone to vote for her, that may be leaning left or right, with this argument will turn anyone off.

I do hope that all those using it are out in the primaries though, working for HC.

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
153. does seem more like batshit ratfucking than electioneering, doesnt it?
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 07:35 PM
Apr 2015

smells so familiar...
is that cologne the same one Karl uses?

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
132. Fascinating. Yet *another* deliberately baiting post by the "defenders" of Hillary.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 02:42 PM
Apr 2015

Such a fascinating pattern:

How corporatists on both sides are working hard to alienate the Democratic base and elect a Republican
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6508212

From the DCCC "Accept Doom" email campaign of the midterms, to the relentless stream of deliberately baiting, blaming messaging like this, I don't think we have *ever* seen such a transparent and relentless campaign by corporate politicians and their mouthpieces to depress Democratic enthusiasm for the party and suppress Democratic turnout.

Corporate politicians want a Republican in next time. It is becoming increasingly clear that the plan of corporatists in both parties is for Hillary to lose. This is why:

IMO we're being set up for a Republican win by both sides.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6229978

...
Corporatists on both sides are working hard to set the stage to elect a Republican next time, because eight years of corporate Democratic rule have opened too many eyes to the fact that the predatory corporate agenda continues no matter which party is elected. That awareness is dangerous for the PTB.

They NEED to alienate the base and get a Republican in office for awhile so that corporate Democrats can pretend to be against corporate/warmongering/police state policies again. They hope that the country will forget all this silly talk about oligarchy and go back to believing that the only thing wrong in Washington is that a Republican is in office and we need to rally to get the Third Way Democrats back in again.

They are TRYING to demoralize and alienate the base. We saw it in the DCCC "Accept Doom" email campaign. We see it in the gratuitous attacks on traditional Democrats every single day by supposed Hillary supporters. Corporatists in both parties are doing everything possible to enable a Republican win....The truth is that we live in a post-partisan, united oligarchy now, not a democracy...


[font color=red]***************************************************************************************[/font color]
[font size=3]We misunderstand our corporate politicians in 2015 when we assume that their goal is always to win. That was the old system, democracy. In the new system, oligarchy, the goal is to use the two parties you own in whatever way will best protect and advance the corporate agenda. [/font size]
[font color=red]***************************************************************************************[/font color]


Red vs. Blue = Oligarchy Theater for the masses.

Mass spying on Americans? Both parties support it.
Handing the internet to corporations? Both parties support it.
Austerity for the masses? Both parties support it.
Cutting social safety nets? Both parties support it.
Corporatists in the cabinet? Both parties support it.
Tolling our interstate highways? Both parties support it.
Corporate education policy? Both parties support it.
Bank bailouts? Both parties support it.
Ignoring the trillions stashed overseas? Both parties support it.
Trans-Pacific Job/Wage Killing Secret Agreement? Both parties support it.
TISA corporate overlord agreement? Both parties support it.
Drilling and fracking? Both parties support it.
Wars on medical marijuana instead of corrupt banks? Both parties support it.
Deregulation of the food industry? Both parties support it.
GMO's? Both parties support it.
Privatization of the TVA? Both parties support it.
Immunity for telecoms? Both parties support it.
"Looking forward" and letting war criminals off the hook? Both parties support it.
Deciding torturers are patriots? Both parties support it.
Militarized police and assaults on protesters? Both parties support it.
Indefinite detention? Both parties support it.
Drone wars and kill lists? Both parties support it.
Targeting of journalists and whistleblowers? Both parties support it.
Private prisons replacing public prisons? Both parties support it.
Unions? Both parties view them with contempt.
Trillion dollar increase in nuclear weapons. Both parties support it.
New war in Iraq. Both parties support it.
New war in Syria. Both parties support it.
Carpet bombing of captive population in Gaza. Both parties support it.
Selling off swaths of the Gulf of Mexico for drilling? Both parties support it.
Drilling along the Atlantic Coast? Both parties support it.




liberal_at_heart

(12,081 posts)
136. If you don't give a shit why the need to insult people? I will vote for Sanders no matter how
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:08 PM
Apr 2015

many insults are thrown my way.

JI7

(89,185 posts)
138. it really is about wanting attention and people to beg them
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 04:21 PM
Apr 2015

the same shit happens every election year , especially during presidential elections. i realized this when i told a few them to not vote for the candidate if they don't like them . and they got even more angry and full of rage at how i dare to dismiss them and went into the whole victim crap.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
152. Oh, yeah, there hasn't been any abuse of non-HRC fans here
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 07:32 PM
Apr 2015


Spare the sanctimony. Of course she'll win. Some of us think Americans deserve better.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
157. I dont want her to "beg for" my PRIMARY vote. Silly me, I'd like her to EARN it.
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:11 PM
Apr 2015

And as much as it may drive some people here into fits of apoplexy, THE PRIMARIES ARENT OVER YET.

Once she's the nominee, expect and demand universal support on DU all you want. Or at least no open opposition. That is the rules.

Until then, though, it's out of line.


But If she's as inevitable as you say, you have nothing to worry about, right???

so what 's the rush?

m-lekktor

(3,675 posts)
164. wow. lol!
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 08:42 PM
Apr 2015

if electing the first woman president is such a priority for you does that mean you would vote for Sarah Palin for president if she were a candidate running against a male DEM?

winter is coming

(11,785 posts)
166. I don't know which is more amusing: the assumption that Hillary will be elected,
Sun Apr 19, 2015, 09:06 PM
Apr 2015

or the mistaken belief that people who don't want Hillary must be bitter Naderites.

As to "Who gives a shit?" You do, clearly, or you wouldn't waste your time dissing people who don't support your candidate.

Multiway fail! Most entertaining!!

 

Kelvin Mace

(17,469 posts)
176. Bookmarking this
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:16 AM
Apr 2015

since people keep asking me for an example of someone telling me (and others who feel as I do) that our votes are not needed, so our concerns can safely be ignored.

bobGandolf

(871 posts)
177. WQe certainly do have haters in our party too.
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 09:51 AM
Apr 2015

Have to agree with your post, though I'm keeping an open mind as to whom I'm voting for.

183. I have no special hatred for Hillary.
Mon Apr 20, 2015, 07:39 PM
Apr 2015

I think people do irrationally hate her for being female. However, I am not one of them. However, she still voted for the Iraq War, was against gay marriage until it was convenient, doesn't support true single payer healthcare, supports the drug war and prison state, and does little to speak out against massive wealthgap. Maybe she is the best we can do. I personally wish we could do better though. I wish people would stick more to criticizing her on the issues like I did here, than attacking her personally. To be fair, most mainstream politicians are nearly identical on the issues I just mentioned, but don't get the hate Hillary gets.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»If you don't like HRC don...