Why 2016 isn't 2008 *for me*

[kiva]

In 2008 my first choice (lying, cheating bastard) John Edwards was out of the race pretty quickly; to give him credit, despite his flaws he did force economics into the race. So in short order, there were two candidates: Clinton and Obama.

To me, they were pretty much interchangeable - both centrists. Given how things have advanced - universal health care option dropped immediately, no prosecution of banksters, the TPP - I'm pretty sure either candidate would have made the same decisions...so, a wash.

I backed Hillary because I thought she was more transparent on the issue of whether or not it would be mandatory for everyone to buy into a health care system - originally Obama said no, and I believed that was a bit disingenuous - but I wasn't a particularly fervent supporter. When Obama became our candidate, I knocked on doors for him and voted for him as I'd been voting for Dems since the 1970s.

Eight years later, everything has changed. For the first time in my lifetime (and I'm over 60) there is a candidate who is actually promising real change, not just shuffling the lifeboats on the Titanic, and I will not gracefully settle for (a distant) second best. It's not just that Clinton is a flawed candidate (the Wall Street contributions, her war fervor, her support for trade agreements that will harm American workers), it's that the contrast between the establishment candidate and Bernie is so distinct.

For those who don't understand why Bernie supporters won't just sigh and change candidates, this is my reason. I've spent 40 years voting for the status quo because OMG, THINGS COULD BE WORSE. No more. I want things to get better, not to just deteriorate a little more slowly.

[Adrahil]

1. He's promising all kinds of stuff....

that he can't deliver on. So if he got elected, will we be in 2020 hearing about Bernie was so disappointing?

Once more. If you really want change, then the CONGRESS has to change, which means we need to take state legislatures and reverse the gerrymandering trend that given the Republican WAY more power than their numbers call for.



Also it's 2016.

[highprincipleswork]

4. He's not promising hardly anything at all. He's stating how it should be. All along he has said it

takes us all standing together to create the change we want.

Is this concept lost on Hillary supporters? I can imagine they think that Madame President will just wave her hands and get things done. Even the thought of her getting things done scares me - I'm afraid they will be the wrong things, perfectly in concert with the Republicans.

As to Congress changing, much better chance with Bernie and a sweep election than with Hillary "trudging us up the hill".

Oh yes, the gerrymandering, the Republicans. I know, it's all just so scary.

How about you fight for what you want instead of trying to get us to support the candidate who is clearly less Progressive, less in sync with traditional Democratic values, less in sync with the times, less likely to attract Independent voters, and probably less likely to be elected next November against a despicable but crafty fox like Trump, who may actually find it easy to run to the Left of Hillary on some issues!!!

[TransitJohn]

17. It's not lost on them.

They just don't care. They intentionally misrepresent reality.

[Adrahil]

19. No. I get aspirational politics, but I was responding to the post.

I fine with the idea of representing an ultimate vision...a direction. But So much of what Bernie is proposing is dead in the water, and he knows it.

At the end of the day, our political system is set up for evolution, not revolution, and one of my main criticisms of Bernie and his supporters is that they do not seem to be able to figure that out. But I'm wasting my breath. Too man here are driven my hopes and dreams and don't like harsh realities.

Having said that, I do hope Sanders' canidacy lights a fire under some asses, and we get actual progressive participation in off-year elections and state and local politics. I am active in my local party, and it is shocking to me to see all these folks show up in presidential years full of ideas and ultimatums, but where will they be in two years? If the pattern follows from 2008, not out working to take the state legislature and the House.

[highprincipleswork]

20. Too many people are always telling us what is possible, what is real, kinda cynical and hopeless,

without even trying for real change.

One thing we could really use, in addition to the hard work and grassroots politics you talk about, is a President who actually believes in the Progressive virtues that so many of us support.

And with the support of the rest of the Democratic Party, and with those who support Bernie, Democrat, Independent, and even Republican, I believe that for sure we could elect that person.

The thing that has kept us from doing so is a lot of fear, for the most part, it seems. One can live in fear, instead of faith, but hard to live in them both at the same time. I choose faith. In addition to the hard grassroots work, which Bernie has advocated as well.

Unfortunately, he has built his engine for change in one year, while the Clintons have been running for office for forever.

[Adrahil]

30. Well, for me, trying has to be more than presenting something you know won't fly.

I mean, I can TRY to fly by jumping off the roof, but I know that won't work. I can TRY to get to get my boss to give me $50,000 raise. But he'll laugh me out of his office.

However, I understand the feeling, and I have to say you expressed it well. I hope he and his supporters can parlay his campaign into something that will make a difference all the way down the ticket, because ultimately, that is what will matter.

[stevenleser]

41. Yep. I'm all for trying to do difficult stuff, but you have to use your head and put yourself in the

best possible position to make things happen.

Throwing progressive bills at this congress is like trying to fly by jumping off the roof. It's stupid, a waste of time, and doomed to failure.

[Avalux]

42. But you could fly with a jet pack, and you could get another job paying 50k more.

Sometimes you have to think out of the box to succeed. Something completely lost on Hillary supporters who follow her blindly because they're afraid to actually try.

[KPN]

58. Yep.

I agree. It's fear. They call it being prudent and realistic ... which I can see why they would feel that way having gone through life staying between the lines.

[KPN]

56. So I guess that means you do "like harsh realities"???

[MrMickeysMom]

82. That's simply not true.

But So much of what Bernie is proposing is dead in the water, and he knows it.

I don't bare foolish things said easily, which is why after reading a statement like that, which is purely out of your own preference, should be met with - "show us how it's dead in the water". If part of active citizen participation (calling as a coalition that legislators hear the issues, town hall style (see recent posts during this last weekend about that) is not your cup of tea, then just admit that you prefer not TO BE part of any solution. You prefer being lied to and the status quo will fill that cup.

The rest of us have work to do, as you hope that someone lights a fire that you have no intention of tending.

[timmymoff]

25. Totally agree

They have an unwillingness to fight for anything of value or principle. They want to show how diplomatic and pragmatic they are by siding with the republicans and incremental steps. They do not think bold anymore, they do not have any fight in them, they have a last name of a president 16 years removed. An atrocious record as Secretary of State, amplifies the lean right accepted by all Hillary supporters. Hell it's even praised. I don't know where they went but I sure miss liberals being in the democratic party.

[kiva]

6. Thanks for the correction about the year.

Obviously we disagree about what Bernie can and cannot accomplish. I don't think he's a miracle worker, but it's a matter of trying vs. not trying...if a candidate doesn't advocate for change because she doesn't think it will happen, then of course it won't happen.

"Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?"

[Adrahil]

21. Thanks for the reply.

I DO think she is advocating for change. Is it incremental? Yeah, it is. And I agree that reach should exceed grasp. But I think it's important to be honest about what is realistic too. I was at a reception for my wife's class (she's a college professor) and all these kid's were very enthusiastic for Bernie. "Bernie is going to make college FREE!" is what I heard over and over again. Not one of them knew any detail of how that plan would work, and how it would require buy-in from states that would accept even the very generous Medicaid expansion. That's what I talking about. Free college would be great, and something I would support (though I would probably do it different from Bernie), but the reality is that the plan he has proposed has a 0% chance of getting passed. So the aspiration is wonderful, but I have the feeling that many mistake aspiration to the achievable.

Just my opinion, of course. I do hope we can move the ball forward. But it's going to take a genuinely executable plan.

Have a great day!

[Armstead]

16. People understand that thing about Congress

We're not stupid

[Adrahil]

22. I'm not sure a lot of people do.

Too many voters, especially on our side, seem to only care about who gets elected President.

[NurseJackie]

72. YOU are definitely not stupid ...

... I'm less confident about others. Especially the "contested convention" crowd.

Good morning!

[mike_c]

23. at least he acknowledges the need for fundamental change and is willing to try...

...to achieve it. Senator Clinton is the status quo democrat. That simply isn't good enough for me any longer. I've been saying for years that democrats need to run candidates who offer substantive alternative visions of American life and governance, not just slightly different flavors of the same crap sandwich. John Kerry made the same mistake, and it cost him the election, as well as my support.

I have been waiting all my adult life for a candidate like Senator Sanders, and my age starts with a six. A candidate who articulates real alternatives to the status quo. I don't know whether he'll succeed, but at least he speaks truth to power and recognizes the need for change. He isn't busy explaining why real alternatives are not possible, he's busy trying to make them happen.

[Adrahil]

28. Perhaps that is good enough for you.

I think it is important to actual move the ball. Our system is one that resists radical change, and we're certainly not yet in a position to do it. WE really need Democrats as a whole swept into government 1930's style to do what Bernie wants to do.

And as I said, however cool you think Sanders is, he can't do SQUAT without he Congress.

[Kip Humphrey]

36. She can't do SQUAT without the Congress. Seems we're in the same boat. However,

Bernie has a set of oars for that boat that he has both articulated and acted on whereas Hillary does not. Bernie provides a plan, beats all republicon contenders decisively, has been beaten on incessantly by the Hillary campaign and only receives M$M press when they are discussing his needing to end his campaign. In spite of it ALL, Bernie continues to gain on Hillary and remains the most likely candidate to beat republicons.

Per Bernie's plan, the revolution:
here:
http://berniecrats.net/
and here:
https://brandnewcongress.org/

[timmymoff]

24. And hillary is promising us to give up the fight before it starts!

[snowy owl]

48. His chances of changing Congress are better than Clintons

Longer coattails by far. He will bring more dems/ind/greens out and they will vote democratic down ticket. She will not.

[Uncle Joe]

2. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, kiva.

[kiva]

29. You're welcome.

[CorkySt.Clair]

3. Between Edwards, backing Hillary in 2008

And backing Bernie this year, it doesn't seem like you have much in the way of political instincts.

[earthshine]

5. I take it you are someone who likes to only vote for the winner.

Must be nice to do that instead of voting on issues or conscience.

[CorkySt.Clair]

7. Yeah I never bought into Edwards' snake oil act

[CorkySt.Clair]

11. Awww thanks!

And it was easy re: Edwards in real time, too. Hindsight not needed.

[Demsrule86]

33. I liked Edwards too

Two Americas...it was true then and is true now.

[snowy owl]

49. He was a good candidate for the country. He just had scummy private life.

Elizabeth was a driver.

[WhiteTara]

10. I saw him in person and he talked out of the

side of his mouth. I knew then he couldn't be trusted.

[CorkySt.Clair]

12. +1

Susan Sarandon couldn't see through it either. She was in deep with 'ol Johnny E. Her instincts are terrible as well.

[WhiteTara]

15. She lost me at Nadir.

What terrible judgement. Thinking that Trump will bring on "the revolution" is absurd. Unless of course it can be tweeted in 140 characters from the sofa.

[Demsrule86]

32. With five court picks

There will be no revolution if President Trump becomes a reality.

[Demsrule86]

34. No, I like to vote for a Democrat

And then I hope like hell he/she wins.

[Buzz Clik]

9. I supported Obama in 2008 and 2012 without hesitation. I was not disappointed.

After lots of reflection, reading (not DU), and listening to the candidates, I decided to back HRC. I have been simultaneously appalled and amused while watching the Sanders crew trying to paint HRC as a Republican.

[Dragonfli]

13. Well to be fair, she did supply the paint, we merely showed some videos of her rolling around in it

[Armstead]

18. Not a Republican -- A socially liberal Corporatist

[Cosmocat]

71. That is a pretty fair description

to be honest.

That said, end of the day, it's that or a dangerously bigoted, misogynistic meglomanic or massively socially regressive corporatist ...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. Well said. K&R

[oldandhappy]

26. Smile. Yes, vote FOR someone.

I made that promise to myself when I voted for Obama and I continue to promise that to myself with my up coming vote for Bernie Sanders. I also want things to get better.

[silvershadow]

27. I'm a Union Labor man, screwed over by Third Way. My marker has been laid. nt

[Demsrule86]

31. At your age a GOP presidency would be terrible

I would think twice before I but some political idol above my own self-interests. Hillary on her worst day is 1000 times better than any GOP.

[kiva]

35. Well bless your heart.

I just love having people assume that they know better than I what is best for me

[99Forever]

37. Your last paragraph says it nicely.

I too want things to get better and am thoroughly convince that Clinton will just continue the slide into the sewer for We the People.

[gainesvillenole]

39. Yes, Elections DO Have Consequences

The OP sounds just like the Nader supporters that handed the WH to George W in 2000..... And we saw how THAT worked out! If you think seeing Trump or Cruz in the WH would be NO different than HRC, then there's no reasoning with you and good luck in your political purity. 🙄

[99Forever]

45. Go away little sock.

Bye bye.

[snowy owl]

50. supreme court, jeb bush and Kathryn Harris did that.

blame the right people

[libdem4life]

53. Hello...polls show Bernie beats all Republicans.

So your logic doesn't work. They are in such disarray they are not much of a threat. Hillary beats most of them, but by smaller margins.

It's just the Establishment Democrats that are enamored of her. In the GE she is our weakest candidate. Everyone else sees the writing on the wall of her past, present and likely future and don't give her a Clinton Pass .

[TM99]

54. Nah, it was those 200,000 registered Democrats in Florida

who crossed party lines and voted for the real Republican GW instead of pseudo Republican New Dem Gore that allowed FL and the SCOTUS to steal that election.

Political purity sounds like a talking point...oh silly me, I see you are new here and not likely a real person here to discuss politics!

[That Guy 888]

59. I think you will find that more votes for Gore were suppressed by Katherine Harris than Nader won

But keep spinning. Look on the bright side, if Clinton wins the nomination and wins the general election, you can say she won without liberals, if she loses, you can blame liberals. Win/win either way right?

Enjoy your neocon,Third Way/DLC/New Democrat war hawk.

[snowy owl]

38. Best OP yet! I feel exactly same. You were smarter re Obama-I was taken in. Went green 2012

All I cans say is so many people are going to be so hurt and upset when their babies go off to war again. Except it's going to be black, brown and poor babies. An endless supply of babies to gratify the hawks who care more about war than their own country.

Watching Chris Wallace today interviewing Donald Trump. he said Trump sounded more like a democrat than a republican. Trump emphasized bringing jobs back and working to get American infrastructure repaired. I don't think
trump is going to be the easy mark everyone else does. He doesn't make sense all the time but he talks to American issues right now. His message will resonate if it is anything like i heard today.

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. That's for all you posters who would NEVER watch Fox News. Okay with me if you keep yourselves in the MSNBC box.

[kiva]

40. Thanks.

The possibility of wars frightens me, and as long as we have an all-volunteer army, the "volunteers" will be the poor.

[Goldfish]

44. Trump is trying to sound like Bernie.

Think I read somewhere that he would be stealing Bernie's ideas to beat Hillary.nt

[snowy owl]

47. He was dem at one time...his kids are watching. I even wife.

Honestly, I've never seen them as extreme right-wing republicans. It just isn't in their bones. But I'll not be voting for Trump...in case you're wondering.

[snowy owl]

51. How can he run as republican on Bernie's ideas? Unless he's really a dem.

Which is what Chris Wallace called him this morning on Fox News Sunday.

[pampango]

70. Donald sounds like a racist, misogynist, nativist - not a bit like Bernie.

Trump is channeling his inner Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, 'America First' of the 1920's and 1930's. All of whom FDR fought with.

Bernie sounds more like FDR than like the people whom FDR fought with.

[KoKo]

43. Recommend...There are many of us out here!

[artislife]

46. Just say no to incrementalism.

[qdouble]

52. To deny incrementalism is to deny how congress and the court system works...

Bernie would inevitably fall short of the majority of his campaign goals as they aren't based on current political realities.

There's no way in hell you're going to get single player in 2016 regardless of whose president...and there's no way in hell you're going to get free college for all. These may be things that we can push and eventually arrive upon, but it's silly to hate Hillary or Obama for coming up with ideas that have a chance in hell of passing.

As far as Sanders leading some mystical political revolution that will force congress and governors to back his agenda, I'm simply not buying it. He can hardly turn out the vote for his own campaign, I'm supposed to believe he's going to strong arm the establishment?

Pixie dust and fairies.

[TM99]

55. Let's see, we got in pixie dust and fairies

so you are definitely using talking points.

Guess what? Sanders will fight for single payer a hell of lot harder than Obama who didn't even try and Clinton who has never supported it.

[qdouble]

57. The majority of laws come from congress, not from the executive branch

"Fighting" for laws that you don't have a big enough majority to pass is meaningless. If Sanders gets elected, he's not going to magically get every republican or democrat from a conservative state to magically sign up for it. He's not going to magically sign some executive order to remove all lobbyist input from legislation.

Sanders supporters seems to think he would be some sort of king that would write his own laws and strong arm congress into backing it all the while getting no push back from governors either. It's magical nonsense thinking.

[TM99]

64. And y'all magically think Clinton will get anything passed either.

The difference?

Clinton will triangulate like Bill did in the 1990's with the GOP and give us shitty compromises. She is so unpopular that she will have very short coat-tails and 2020 will be a disastrous mid-term for Congress.

Sanders on the other hand will fight for what is necessary without triangulation. He will work with congress in the same ways he has to become the Amendment King without compromises that will harm us. He has the highest popularity of any congress person and has the highest trust level of any candidate this primary on either side. He will have long coat tails. He has also said from the beginning that it will take all of us pushing for this and he won't blow the support he has like Obama did between 2008 and 2010. There is a long list of new candidates inspired by Sanders and his return to 21st century New Deal Democratic policies and values.

[qdouble]

66. A lot of Bernie's favorability simply comes

from him being an unknown figure by the majority of Americans for the majority of his political career. Hillary can't go after him aggressively for being on the far left because it would alienate her from her own party, but the republicans won't have that issue. I'd expect his popularity among right-leaning voters to drop dramatically once they paint him and his platform as communist...and expect the left to fall out of love with him when they start to see him being unable to achieve half of his promises due to the sobering reality that presidents don't just get their platform rubber stamped by congress.

I honestly don't think Sanders has even half of the political capital that his supporters think he does...hence while he's losing the primary, but is still not a heavily unliked figure (once again, this mostly comes from not being in the spotlight very long).

Where his approval ratings would go is purely speculative, but I'd assume they'd go down for the reasons I've listed (heavy opposition from the right and inability to deliver for the left).

[TM99]

67. Wrong.

He was just rated highest of any congress person for support from his constituents.

Again with that sensible woodchuck bullshit. If a president wants to get things passed, he will. From FDR to LBJ to Obama and the TPP.

And your speculation are not sound. The true right will not like any Democrat or liberal. The true left will like him as much if not more so than Obama, who is very well liked even those he is a moderate 1980's Republican New Dem.

[qdouble]

68. Congress has an approval rating of 17%

being the favorite amongst a heavily hated group of people is no high achievement.

"If a president wants to get things passed, he will." With or without big compromises? If you're suggesting a president gets whatever he wants passed without compromise...then I see why you buy into Bernie, but not me or the majority of people over 30.

As far as the speculation of how he'd be received after becoming president....I suppose it's just speculation that neither of us will have a chance to prove either right or wrong as he won't even be on the ballot in November.

[StevieM]

61. You seem to be implying that at one point President Obama indicated that he would pursue

a single payer health care system. He never did that while running for president, and I don't think he did that while running for the United States Senate. I suppose it is possible that he indicated some support while in the Illinois state senate, but I am not sure.

It's also possible, of course, that I misconstrued what you were saying.

I just don't see how Sanders can ever get single payer through. It would take incredible luck to be able to take back both houses of congress. And the Democrats who win House seats, if we get to 218, will be in Republican-leaning districts due to gerrymandering. They are not the type to vote for single payer health care, even with public support. We have a hard enough time getting them to raise the top marginal tax rate on the wealthy, even when polls show the public supporting it.

When Obamacare passed it was with almost 40 Democrats bolting, and they were in more liberal districts, since the vote happened before the post 2010 gerrymandering.

The best way to get single payer health care some day is to win back gubernatorial and state legislative seats in 2018 and 2020. That way we can un-gerrymander the House.

We also need to win this election so that we can secure the Supreme Court for 20 years and overturn Citizens United. There is no reason to believe that Hillary's nominees (or Merrick Garland) will be any different from Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayer or Elena Kagan, all of whom voted against Citizens United.

[TM99]

63. He did and Politifacts

seems to agree.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/dec/23/barack-obama/public-option-obama-platform/

It was not a prominent component but it was there and during the run up to negotiations public option supporters were at the table. That quickly changed.

[StevieM]

74. I don't that you can compare a public option to a single payer system.

They are not the same thing.

[TM99]

75. No but they are still vastly

different from an insurance mandate.

[That Guy 888]

60. Kick and Recommend n/t

[Kalidurga]

62. In 2008 I was a tepid Obama supporter.

He wasn't Hillary that is all I needed to be okay with him getting the nomination. I was in a red state at the time so, I knew my vote for him wouldn't count anyway so I really didn't feel any need to find out what he was about. That changed a whole heck of a lot in 2012 when Rmoney got the RepubliCON nomination. Yikes, I found out a lot more about him then because it was him or go Green. I decided he was alright and at that time I was back to sanity in my deep blue state where my vote still doesn't really count, but I wanted to send a message to Rmoney, your kind ain't welcome around these here parts.

[MFM008]

65. how did the Obama years

turn into such a horrible experience?
Or is it just the personal distaste for HRC?

I to am close to 60, how does a white man that is 75 years old represent change?
representing the nursing home population is closer to it.
This man is 6 years older than my father when he died. He is 4 years younger than my mom .
Ancient history.
Its different for women. My mom out lived Dad by 16 years so far.

Lets go with this fantasy. Even if he gets the nomination he wont get purple states like Virginia.
The gop will scare the crap out of middle class, white, dummies with commercials about communism,
socialism, bomb throwing hippies, flower power, 4 dead in Ohio.

Sorry I cant support a guy on life support .

[islandmkl]

73. you are living proof, that even at 'close to 60' you have a lot to learn...

from some old white man that is 75 years old...

or are you the one human who has learned all he/she can learn already?

in your case, you probably don't, or couldn't, know the difference...

nice ageism slant....real cheeky...

[RichVRichV]

77. Actually he has the best shot at winning Virginia.

In 2012 Obama won Virginia by 4 points while losing the Independent vote (29% of the vote) by 10 points.

In this year's Virginia primaries Bernie got more Independent votes than either Hillary or Trump. He has a strong chance of turning Virginia from purple to purple/blue. With Hillary it's a tossup.

[kiva]

79. In case you really want answers:

how did the Obama years turn into such a horrible experience?
Horrible? No. Progressive? Not terribly. I'm not saying Obama has been a terrible president, he has been a good centrist.

Or is it just the personal distaste for HRC?
As I said in my OP, she's got the bad luck to be running against someone who is seeking actual change...and yeah, some distaste happening there too.

I to am close to 60, how does a white man that is 75 years old represent change?
So white men can't be effective leaders of change? Wow, bigoted much?

representing the nursing home population is closer to it.
That's really a deep and meaningful comment

This man is 6 years older than my father when he died. He is 4 years younger than my mom .
Ancient history.
Its different for women. My mom out lived Dad by 16 years so far.
And he's still alive, so not the same as your personal experience.

Lets go with this fantasy. Even if he gets the nomination he wont get purple states like Virginia.
See post above for answer
.
The gop will scare the crap out of middle class, white, dummies with commercials about communism,
socialism, bomb throwing hippies, flower power, 4 dead in Ohio.
And if Hillary wins they will scare them with Clinton! Clinton! Clinton!...which is scarier to many than Communist hippies.

Sorry I cant support a guy on life support .
And yet another mature and thoughtful statement...and people wonder why some Clinton supporters here aren't more popular.

[Betty Karlson]

69. Right there with you. I'm only 33 - spent a lifetime of seeing things deteriorate.

I'm done with the status quo - and with the direction of the status quo.

[SujiwanKenobee]

76. The problem with hold-the-nose-voting or "just keep Republicans out"

Is that later that 'must support the unlikable candidate' action becomes misrepresented as providing an OK. A mandate by faked support numbers.

Just like anyone who gives money expects something--support for a position or moving forward in a particular direction--the presumption that Bernie's people should just jump on the Hill wagon and vote for her is preposterous without return on investment.

[GardeningGal]

78. I started out fulling intending to vote for the nominee, regardless of who it was

After the crap that was pulled in the election by Bill in MA and IL, I will not vote for a Clinton ever. Add the that, the fact that she will change her stand to pull in votes without any intention of following through, I don't believe she can be trusted at all. She is a DINO in my opinion. So, I may end up sitting out this election because I certainly could not vote for Trump.

It's amusing to me that this board touts how many more votes Clinton has without considering the state electoral implications. Sure, she won the south but I wouldn't count on that in the general election as that will most likely go republican. That leaves some solid democratic states, and then you have to consider the purple states which is where it really gets interesting. Particularly since the Clinton followers here have been so dismissive about the Independent or Unaffiliated voters.

That's why it doesn't look promising to me considering that her unfavorable rating continues to go up. I don't believe that she can win in the majority of the purple states due to the independents, but I guess we'll see if she gets the nomination.

If Bernie would get the nomination I believe he could pull in both the independents and some of the more sane republicans as well as a majority of democrats.

[Marrah_G]

80. I can completely relate to your post

[kiva]

81. I think many of us feel like this.

I just don't think I can suck it up this year if Clinton is the nominee.