I'm voting for Hillary---but I won't bash Bernie.

[trumad]

I mean Jesus Christ---how the hell could you?

So I guess I'd like to say to my fellow Hillary fans---quit looking for an angle to bash Bernie---it makes you look kind of silly.

nuff said!

[hrmjustin]

1. Agreed. Sanders is a good and great man.

Voting for Hillary but love Sanders.

[KMOD]

2. I love Bernie.

I will not bash him.

[fredamae]

3. I am just So happy

that this conversation is necessary
Choice.

[cwydro]

4. I'm still considering.

I won't bash anyone.

[Cali_Democrat]

5. I think some Hillary supporters are responding to what they see as relentless attacks against Hillar

Let's face it, Hillary has been bashed here much more than Bernie.

Some folks are simply responding in kind.

I think Bernie supporters actually need tougher skin considering what the Hillary supporters have gone through.

[Buzz Clik]

8. +1

[stevenleser]

14. Yep. It's the thin-skinnedness after all the attacks on Hillary that is the most pathetic thing.

If you can't take it, don't dish it out.

Simple.

[1StrongBlackMan]

37. Or, perhaps just a truce ...

whether it's HRC-bashing or Bernie-bashing, neither does anyone any good ... the HRC supporters won't be dissuaded and the Bernie supporters won't be dissuaded; the only folks that are likely to be convinced or dissuaded will be those undecided or disinterested/disengaged, and then, for the wrong reason(s).

Our bashing really only hurts both sides, in this intra-partisan struggle.

[JoePhilly]

40. Exactly ...

I think those who have posted OPs about some of Bernie's positions on say gun control, did so many to demonstrate that every politician makes compromises, or takes a pragmatic path at times.

We've listened to some of them scream about principles, and attacking pragmatism as some form of evil.

So it is kind of fun to watch them squirm some regarding an example of Bernie taking a pragmatic position.

[JDPriestly]

51. I don't consider Bernie's positions on gun control to be

compromises. I am a city person and I don't want unregistered guns in the cities. But I have a lot of family who live in the country and like to hunt, and I support their right to own guns not only for hunting but for self-defense.

I agree with Bernie on guns.

[Cali_Democrat]

73. What's more important? Hunting or the deaths of tens of thousands of people every year because of

guns?

If a consequence of increased gun control is no hunting, then so be it.

People shouldn't be randomly killing wild animals anyways.

It takes a sick person to kill a defenseless animal.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

81. I will start shooting at animals when the animals can shoot back./NT

[Tarheel_Dem]

52. Exactly. And no surprise, it's the same ones who constantly bash Obama. They never miss an....

opportunity to pit Bernie or Warren against Clinton and Obama. I won't promise what the o.p. did, but I'll certainly respond (in kind) when I see the bashing.

[freshwest]

91. Oh, I respect your passion. But I respect my BP levels more! Have at 'em for me!

[OilemFirchen]

69. In my estimation...

Clinton has been bashed here much more than any Republican candidate.

Pitiful, eh?

[Buzz Clik]

6. Dude, you don't understand the rules.

This is for keeps. Blood lust.

If you don't hate Bernie, you're not a true DINO. A fake Third Way dipstick. A phony neo-liberal jackwagon.

If you are not with us, you're against us. So what's it gonna be?

[Bonobo]

86. Didn't see you criticizing BB's deceptive thread on Bernie's video.

But as Yogi Berra might have said had he been a political commentator: "It may be hypocritical, but at least it ain't duplicitous."

[Buzz Clik]

88. BB didn't lie about the video.

[Bonobo]

89. I kinda thought you'd say that. But there it is. nt

[Raine1967]

7. Thank you, Trumad.

This is appreciated.

[geek tragedy]

9. Also, frequent touting poll numbers showing her up 61-13% or something like that

It begins to look like frontrunning.

There is much to admire about Clinton. Stick to that.

[JaneyVee]

10. Yes, we all love Bernie.

Bit I haven't seen any posts "bashing" him, just pointing out facts.

[Snotcicles]

20. Throwing "facts" around may come back to bite you in the ass.

They are great while you know the opponent doesn't want to go negative.

[leftofcool]

29. I have no response to your post just wanted to say.....

"Snotcicles" is one of the funniest names I have seen on DU. Reminds me of my son when he was a toddler with a cold, snot running down his nose and all.

[Snotcicles]

33. I don't know where I first heard it but I have enjoyed using it over the years.

It dose paint a picture.

[freshwest]

92. Ah, but the intent is a slap back at things that are specious, at best. Often not factual. I love

Bernie and Hillary. We have great people running in this primary we can all be proud of. I'll gladly vote for either one.

But the negative remarks and memes are a big turn off and I'll speak to the HRC folks as I post there, as they have been very respectful to all there, and most like Bernie, too.

Negative non-affirming rants don't help people make up their minds, but they do serve to boost the ego of the posters, though. And the fact is that neither of these two folks in the running ever stooped to the level online experts do.

In regards to bashing, I know that:



And make the appropriate effort.

[DFW]

11. I'm voting for the Democratic nominee in 2016 and will not bash any serious contender

Of course, since so far only Bernie Sanders and HRC have announced, that's a no-brainer at this point.

I reserve the right to reconsider that statement if we nominate Ralph Nader, but I don't count that as a possibility. He would never seek the Democratic nomination in the first place.

[DawgHouse]

12. I like him, always have.

I like Clinton and she's got my vote. But if she does not win the nomination and asks me to support Sanders, I most definitely will. Wholeheartedly! This is the same thing I did in the last election when she asked her supporters to support Barack Obama.

I'm a yellow dog.

[Beacool]

13. I don't see Hillary supporters bashing Sanders.

What I see is an endless parade of people rushing to trash any Hillary thread, no matter how innocuous. It feels like being on a RW site, some of the talking points are identical.

[Ichingcarpenter]

15. If I could quote you

YAWN..................................

[Orsino]

16. May each make the other an even better candidate.

When politicians have to compete, we win.

[lamp_shade]

17. You speak for me. I'll continue to rec any Bernie OP that doesn't compare him

to Hillary in a derogatory manner. I'll continue to "like" most of the posts I see on FB.

[Rex]

18. This will be hard, but how about not trashing any of the candidates and just talking

about their record? HRC, Bernie, Warren, O'Malley...a zillion times better than what the competition has to offer! WHY are we not trashing the GOP clown car posse?

It is sad we bash our OWN more than we do the GOP!

[Raine1967]

45. agreed.

[Snotcicles]

19. Good on you trumad. I'm for Bernie and I'm trying to behave as he would wish.

I think both sides should stay positive. They almost got me going on that gun control stuff.

[Gothmog]

21. Agreed

I am supporting HRC but I do not view this gun control issue to be disqualifying for Sanders. I personally believe that Sanders is a good man and I like most if not all of his positions. I do not believe that the vote on the Brady Act has any bearing on his qaulifications to be POTUS.

I can support HRC and still refuse to participate in unwarranted attacks on Bernie Sanders. Sanders is a good man

[Bobbie Jo]

50. Agreed.

I think the whole Brady vote todo was more about pointing out the hypocricy of those who righteously declare that they will not vote for HRC based upon her Iraq vote alone.

I admire Bernie Sanders, and I'm not into badmouthing fellow Dems and liberals. At this point, I'm leaning toward the Hillary camp, but that doesn't make me anti-Bernie by default.

[greiner3]

22. Sorry, but;

I'm voting for Bernie---but I won't bash Hillary.

[NYC Liberal]

23. Neither will I. But everyone is open for legitimate criticism.

Though even legitimate criticism can be non-constructive if it's delivered the wrong way.

Legitimate and thoughtful criticism should be welcomed by all -- and so should disagreements with that criticism.

[upaloopa]

24. I agree. I doubt many Hillary people will

bash Bernie because we agree with him and because he is not a threat to Hillary.
Now Bernie supporters are a whole other ball game. Mostly I trash a Bernie OP that is so obviously delusional it isn't worth paying attention to.

[Ed Suspicious]

43. Nice. Not a threat, huh.

[bluesbassman]

71. Caught that did you.

I like the backhanded bash to "Bernie supporters" too. Oh well, if nothing else it'll be an entertaining primary season!

[stonecutter357]

25. K&R!

[rock]

26. And if I may, an obvious point of logic that everybody knows

Bashing Bernie does not lend one iota of a reason to vote for Hillary, no more than it does to vote for Jeb Bush. If you think so, you're a CONservative (they don't have right reason).

[NanceGreggs]

27. K&R n/t

[LanternWaste]

28. It just wouldn't be DU without the clown-cars, sideshows and melodramatic allegations...

Imagine if a candidate's supporters spent their time supporting their candidate rather than imitating the lower primate orders by throwing crap at the wall about the opposition candidate and pretending it's concern. "Look at what this unsupported book say!" "Why won't he officially register, complete with X's and arrows drawn all over his eight by ten glossy?"

It just wouldn't be DU without the clown-cars, sideshows and melodramatic allegations of irrlevance...

[murielm99]

39. If everyone were really doing that,

there would be a lot fewer posts here. Everyone would be out knocking on doors, making calls, raising money, setting up headquarters, putting signs in yards, etc.

The internet is a great way to find people and to support a campaign. But face-to-face contact is still the best thing.

I am tired of being defensive about supporting Hillary. And the bashing I see here is not Bernie bashing. It is Hillary bashing. Childish and unnecessary.

[MohRokTah]

30. If somebody could lay out the path to victory for Bernie in the GE,...

I'd get on board with his candidacy in a heartbeat.

I need to know where he comes up with the necessary $1 billion.

If he could meet those requirements I'd be all over his candidacy.

[Raine1967]

46. Bernie is looking to a 50 state strategy.

I now the DNC put that to bed a hill ago, but I heard him say that was going to be his path.

[MohRokTah]

48. That is not a path, it's a platitude.

Lay out the path.

How does he get the required money to run an effective national campaign? Where does it come from?

[BrotherIvan]

60. I have posted on this question and believe there is a path

Firstly, consider that anyone who will win the Republican primary needs to be hard right. I believe that person will be Jeb Bush, with many more negatives than Rmoney, not the least of which is his family history. The Republican nominee will need to be against gay marriage, which Jeb has already come out against with his support of the Pence bill. He has come out for immigration which his party hates so many conservatives might wish to stay home, but an argument can be made that Hillary will fire up their base.

More important is electoral college math. Money can't buy everything, no matter how much that meme is hammered. The electoral map shows that blue states make up the majority of the electoral college, so in summary, a Democrat walks into the general with 257 votes and a Republican has 149. That means that a Republican must win every swing state and a solidly blue state. A Democrat only needs to win one large swing state or two smaller ones (Obama won both). It's just plain arithmetic.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12801719

The electorate has changed. It's getting even more liberal, but you wouldn't know it based on our representatives or the MSM. A majority approve of "socialist" programs such as Social Security and Medicare. An overwhelming majority approve of gay marriage. All this fear that one must raise a billion dollars because of attack ads is nothing but hype. They will scream about Socialism!, his hair, his age, etc. But they can't attack his record of working for the 99%. And this nation would be crayzay to run and vote for another fucking Bush. Even Republicans hate him.

So yes, there is a path. If people (and Democrats) support him rather than just voting for the candidate with the most money, he can win. But the party is already showing they have a chosen candidate and will do their best for her to win. She means too much money flowing through the system. The MSM will want all that cash from both sides. If we believe that only corporate backed candidates can win, they we truly have lost our democracy.

[MohRokTah]

62. I have s en nothin my to suggest Bernie would get 157 EVs

Let alone walk into 257.

Bernie is not a Democrat. He immediately loses votes over that.

[BrotherIvan]

63. He would be the Democratic nominee

So you think Bernie, who represents traditional Democratic values, BIG TIME would lose voters over his party affiliation???

[MohRokTah]

66. Damned straight he would

Since he'll never be nominated the point is moot.

[BrotherIvan]

68. So you didn't want any information about a path

Your mind is already closed.

[MohRokTah]

70. You gave no information about a path to victory. eom

[BrotherIvan]

72. For some, the only path to victory is "money"

If that is so, we should all hang up our hats and let the corporations and billionaires decide.

[MohRokTah]

74. For people living in reality no money = HUGE loss

Wishing it wasn't so doesn't alter the fact.

[BrotherIvan]

80. That is the current system, one that can be changed

But if people buy into it, it won't be. It's that simple. It's not the only version of reality, it's just the one you have chosen to believe in. You may well be right that Bernie can't win without mountains of corporate cash. But that should all give us great pause.

[groundloop]

31. I'm voting for Bernie - but won't bash Hillary

And in November I'm enthusiastically supporting and voting for whomever the Democratic nominee happens to be. Anything less would be inviting another Bush (or worse) into the White House.

[justiceischeap]

32. It's never a good idea to bash members of the party you'll end up voting for

in the general elections. But who cares if we sully our candidate ahead of time if it makes you feel better at the end of the day.

I've not decided yet whom I'm supporting in the Primaries but I do know whom I'm supporting in the General Election and that is anyone with a (D) after their name.

[DonCoquixote]

34. Thanks

it shows rare class

[RandySF]

35. I agree

I have only the highest esteem for Bernie.

[NCTraveler]

36. Your point is excellent. I wish we would see something like it from other supporters.

Over 90% of this site is on board for Sanders. Hillary supporters going into the primary are truly in the minority to that extent. I think it would be great to ask the same of Sanders supporters. Not all are like you and I who are fond of both.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

38. What are you, a communist?

[MarianJack]

41. Well said. I'm Ready for Hillary, but...

...Bernie Sanders is a great man. If HE is our nominee, I will support him proudly and happily!

PEACE!

[chknltl]

42. Thank you trumad, this OP needed saying.

As you well know, there are a few Sanders supporters who have gone off the deep end at DU too. I have seen some posts by them that are embarrassing to say the least, embarrassing to the poster and surely an embarrassment to the candidate they support.

I am a Sanders supporter. Like you and others who have posted here, our candidate is taking the high road through this primary. When I look at the names of my fellow DUers who are displaying a Clinton avatar/banner/sig.line, I see many folks I have both respect and admiration for. Hell, even Skinner is sporting a Hillary avatar! (Well nobody around here listens to him so maybe I shouldn't use him as an example).

The bottom line is the mighty DU can be a force for good in this upcomming election, let's hang together this time and not drive any of our fellow DUers off in anger. Diversity is one of America's strengths, there is no reason it can't be our strength too.

If by the end of the day nobody from the Sanders Group has started an OP calling for better respect out of some of DU's more 'exuberant' fellow Sanders supporters, I will post one myself. This primary, let us all have each others back for a change. (How cool would THAT be!)


(Oh and that bit about Skinner....ok...so maybe he's earned a little respect around here too.)

[aikoaiko]

44. Wow. This may be your best OP ever.

[trumad]

47. No...that would be my fuck Ralph Nader threads back in 02.

[heaven05]

49. +100

[LoisB]

53. I am voting for Bernie but I won't bash Hillary.

[JDPriestly]

54. I'm solidly behind Bernie.

I look at the record of the Bill Clinton administration and I look at Bernie's views on the issues and I know there is no way I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Sorry guys, guilt-tripping DUers for speaking our minds is beneath the dignity of DU.

This is a discussion board. I can defend Bernie Sanders' stands and his personality any day because I have thought carefully about my reasons for supporting him.

Demanding silence from those with whom you disagree is the methodology of people who cannot explain and do not know why they hold a certain opinion.

If you like Hillary, defend her. Tell us why you think she is better for the country than Bernie Sanders.

But don't try to silence me for courteously and quietly telling you why I think Bernie is better. And if explaining to you why I think Bernie is better requires me to remind you of some negative aspect of Hillary or her candidacy, then I am sorry to hurt your feelings. But the truth is the truth.

I happen to agree with Bernie on both guns and Israel. Thanks for hearing me out. I will gladly read your posts and consider your arguments for Hillary.

This is not my bashing you or my bashing Hillary or my bashing anyone. But if a candidate has some ares in which they are weak, it is up to us to find them and not as you say allow our hero worship or our fixation on our favorite candidate to blind us to the qualities that make another candidate better.

As for the gun laws, we can pass all the gun laws we want, but it is the underlying violence that is the problem. The courts are full of domestic violence petitioners and defendants in cases involving serious injuries that did not involve guns. We have a more serious problem with violence. The abuse of guns is just one symptom of it.

[trumad]

55. "If you like Hillary, defend her"

ok--in three words:

SHE CAN WIN!

[JDPriestly]

59. What do you say to this well researched article?

It isn't a question of opinion. It is a question of the facts and the history.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/30668-the-clintons-and-their-banker-friends-the-wall-street-connection-1992-to-2016?key=0

We need a president who can face down Wall Street.

The billionaires make loads of money on Wall Street using every trick in the book.

Do you know how much interest a bank makes if people pay interest on a debt of $100,000 on credit cards?

A good rate is anywhere from 12.99% to 22.99%
http://www.bankrate.com/credit-cards/low-interest-cards.aspx


Do you know how much interest you earn on $100,000 if you put it in one of the major banks?

Check this out: http://www.bankrate.com/cd.aspx

The banks take the difference. Something very serious is wrong. The average American has less than $10,000 in savings including retirement savings. Something very serious is wrong.

Eight years of Bill Clinton created the illusion of prosperity while people were borrowing themselves into a hole.

The Republicans offer worse.

We need a better alternative than a president who, once again, does the banks' bidding.

[99Forever]

75. Well put, JDPriestly.

Speaking truth to power is not "bashing" to anyone honest enough to put up a reasonable and response to the facts of their actions. I will never surrender my right as a citizen of this nation to question any and every candidate seeking public office, least of all, the most powerful office on this planet. It seems to me that some folks have truly forgotten who works for who in this country.

[tk2kewl]

56. trumad, can you elaborate on why you favor Hillary?

Aside from the generic "electability" argument what do you think Hillary Clinton offers that makes her your choice over Bernie Sanders?

[trumad]

58. She will win.

That's not a "generic "electability" argument" from me. I'm a little deeper than that ---being on this board for 14 years will do that to you---NOPE--She is going to win and win big time.

I love Bernie--- but...sorry, he won't win.

[totodeinhere]

83. I disagree. Any major Democratic candidate should be able to beat whatever clown the

GOP nominates. There just are too many solidly blue states that the Republicans have no chance of winning. So given that why not go for a bona fide progressive?

[trumad]

85. Because it don't work that way.

[totodeinhere]

87. Is that just because YOU say so?

What emerges from the numbers is the continuation of a trend that has been in place for almost two decades. Once again, Republicans are disappearing from the competitive landscape at the national level across the most heavily populated sections of the country while intensifying their hold on a declining electoral bloc of aging, white, rural voters. The 2014 election not only continued that doomed pattern, it doubled down on it. As a result, it became apparent from the numbers last week that no Republican candidate has a credible shot at the White House in 2016, and the chance of the GOP holding the Senate for longer than two years is precisely zero.

The Blue Wall is block of states that no Republican Presidential candidate can realistically hope to win. Tuesday that block finally extended to New Hampshire, meaning that at the outset of any Presidential campaign, a minimally effective Democratic candidate can expect to win 257 electoral votes without even trying. That’s 257 out of the 270 needed to win.

This means that the next Presidential election, and all subsequent ones until a future party realignment, will be decided in the Democratic primary. Only by sweeping all nine of the states that remain in contention AND also flipping one impossibly Democratic state can a Republican candidate win the White House. What are the odds that a Republican candidate capable of passing muster with 2016 GOP primary voters can accomplish that feat? You do the math.

http://blog.chron.com/goplifer/2014/11/the-missing-story-of-the-2014-election/#28114101=0

If you think that this analysis is wrong, please explain why rather than just saying it doesn't work that way without backing that statement up.

[herding cats]

57. I don't know who I'm voting for, and I won't bash either Hillary or Bernie.

I very much dislike the 'focus on the negative of your opposition' stuff. Focus on the positive of your own pick so others can get a better idea why they should support them.

I support everyone's right to make a decision based on who they think is the better choice. I just hate that we can't arrive at these decision without flinging feces at the ones who aren't are choices.

Later in the too near future, when a person I don't want as our candidate makes their formal announcement, DU has my permission to remind me to not to fling feces at them should I stumble in my resolve.

[calimary]

61. Hey, this Hillary supporter greatly appreciates Bernie Sanders.

Seems to me there's a LOT more of an effort to bash us Hillary supporters from other quarters here, than there is much evidence that we Hillary supporters are out bashing Bernie Sanders supporters.

I've never bashed him because I see no need to. I think he's pretty terrific. I agree with a LOT of what he says. Maybe even resoundingly most of what he says. I still think Hillary has a better shot. But I'm also one of those annoying people who thinks the more he pushes forward with his campaign, and his views on the issues, the more interest and prominence those issues will have. Which seems to me would make it far more likely that Hillary will find those issues compelling enough to push, in her own right.

What I see in her case is a broadening and strengthening of her expressed policy positions - that lean decidedly left. Farther left than we've heard from her, and in the direction we all want.

What I'm guessing - just GUESSING! - is that either she has evolved on her own on some of these issues (after all, President Obama did, on marriage equality, from his original stated position), OR she's smart enough to notice the changes in the wind now. Because of the noise Elizabeth Warren has been making, and how much that's caught on with the public, and how America in general has changed, almost startlingly fast, on issues like marriage equality. It feels very much like the country is moving farther left. Like the pendulum is finally swinging back left - and really noticeably so. I see more noise being made just generally on the correct side of climate change, overturning Citizens United, against the TPP, the Keystone pipeline, net neutrality, the lopsidedness of income inequality, the expanding push to raise the minimum wage, immigration, the growing realization about police brutality and injustice and over-incarceration of black men, as well as on marriage equality. And more. Look at pot! Look what's happening with THAT. The big Comcast merger was defeated, too. Things WE CARE ABOUT! There are numerous issues that sure seem to be trending distinctly LEFT, all over America. And assuming that's true (and I seriously think it is), I would expect Hillary Clinton to be smart enough, adaptable enough, and open-minded enough to recognize that and respond to it. If she's gonna be President she's going to have to be. ANYBODY who wants to be President will have to be, to respond to the changing times and needs and demands of the people. (Another reason why NOBODY on the so-called "right" is qualified in that regard, with their rigid, utterly calcified, shit - even fossilized worldview.)

The people are leading on these issues. Seems to me, at least, that the trends are clear. The opposition (i.e.: US) is growing louder and gaining ground and is becoming far less avoidable or ignorable. We're starting to draw blood. President Obama once said - "you need to MAKE ME do it." Well, perhaps this could be HRC recognizing the same thing?

Hey, things CHANGE! I can remember when ALL newsrooms were wall-to-wall typewriters. I started working back when there was no internet. Digital editing only started coming in when I was already starting to hover around retirement. Now it's all computer terminals and there isn't a typewriter to be had for love nor money. Nor are there splicing blocks and single-edged razors for tape editing! Things CHANGE. And the smart and nimble political leaders will adapt and evolve - NOT dig in their heels and resist the inevitability of change.

[Adrahil]

64. With you! n/t

[MaggieD]

65. LOL - in the eyes of Sander's supporters....

You are bashing him just by the mere fact of daring to say you support HRC.

[leftofcool]

76. +1

[Number23]

82. I agree. Off topic, but some folks here accuse you of being a sock puppet for Vanilla Rhapsody

Now granted, the folks doing this I think are not only DU's "finest" but are about as clued in as a coma patient, but I'm just curious whether you think it's funny that as a 2001 poster, you are now being accused off being a sock for someone who joined in like 2012?

[Cha]

90. And, you must be "piling on" if you're talking about Bernie's Record of History. I haven't chosen

a candidate yet. I appreciate those who do the research on a candidate's voting record.

[bigwillq]

67. I'm voting for Bernie---and I will bash Bernie.

And I will bash Hillary, and O'Malley, and Webb, and any other potential candidate, if they are deserving of it.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

77. I will bash him....Guy is old, has crazy hair and he repeats the same thing over & over again.

I hate it when people do that



"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"
"The Republican party exists for the sole purpose of causing human misery and ultimately death"

[samsingh]

78. im with you

[HockeyMom]

79. Unsure at this point

but I agree with the OP. Whoever I decide to vote for, I won't bash the other candidate because ANY Democrat is better than the Clown Car.

[LiberalElite]

84. Thank you for this nt