Will Bernie Fans Vote For Hillary? (TYT Poll RESULTS)

[pdsimdars]

TYT asked you if you’d vote for Hillary Clinton in the general election. The results are now in: no. Cenk Uygur, host of The Young Turks, breaks it down.

?list=PLTpcK80irdQjtZiataAkYvWqg3lCI-Ywy

[Faux pas]

1. If it comes down to it

I'm Writing In Bernie! We need a national Write In Campaign.

[chillfactor]

2. you can't write a name down in the general election....

your ballot will be thrown out. ..and trump gets the advantage of a no vote.

[Time for change]

3. I will not vote for Hillary because

I cannot condone election fraud. I can overlook everything else about her to prevent a Trump presidency, but election fraud is too much. The integrity of our elections is too important to do that.

[democrattotheend]

10. What fraud are you talking about?

I agree with you that a lot of things went wrong at the polls and a lot of people were prevented from voting, but I don't think there was outright fraud. Dirty tricks by some local caucus chairs, maybe, but most of the problems are more the fault of Republican state legislatures who put in restrictive rules and cut funding for election administration. That's not Hillary's fault.

[Time for change]

18. It's a lot more than that

I've posted many OPs on this subject. Here's one where I summarize the situation prior to the Kentucky and Oregon primaries -- and there's been a lot more since then:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511894124

In none of my posts have I put the blame for this on Hillary. I have my opinions on that, but I've never expressed them publicly because they are just my opinion, and I have no proof of who is behind this, so my opinion on this is not important. But there is no question whatsoever that the fraud has been perpetrated on her behalf -- or perhaps more accurately on behalf of stopping Bernie. So as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter whether she actually was involved in it -- a vote for her will be a vote for election fraud, and I will not do that.

[Adrahil]

26. You've talked yourself into this. Time to let it go. NT

[Time for change]

111. I don't need or want advice from you. Please don't waste my time by ever giving me advice again

Thank you

[MariaThinks]

117. anger issues?

[Time for change]

130. Yes, comments like the one that I responded to make me angry

[MariaThinks]

133. Republicans stacking the supreme court with their stooges to corrupt the judicial, tax, health care

is what makes me really angry.

[senz]

160. But you're okay with a Wall Street-friendly SCOTUS?

Sure you are.

[Time for change]

169. Yeah, that and election fraud make me very angry.

Does election fraud make you angry?

[MineralMan]

195. When you post an opinion on a public discussion forum, you

should expect to get replies. Some of those will be in the form of advice. That's how these forums work.

[Time for change]

202. And if you post unwanted advice you should expect a response letting you know that the advice is

unwanted

[MineralMan]

210. As you please...

[Chan790]

177. Ya think?

Justifiable anger is justified.

[Duval]

144. She is not alone, Adrahil.

There was fraud from the beginning, with DWS. Too many have seen it, and are not going to let it go because our very democracy depends upon it. And this isn't an "ideal" we're dealing with, it's the disrespect of the people and the law coming from our own party.

[metroins]

56. So she's not involved

In your conspiracy theory of voter fraud, yet you won't vote for her because....why?

Bernie lost because he had an incompetent campaign strategy of ignoring large delegate southern states and campaigning in lower delegate northern states.

That's the reality of it.

[Time for change]

114. I didn't say she wasn't involved

I said I will not state my opinion here on whether she was involved.

Bernie's campaign strategy was not incompetent. He was up against massive obstacles, most important election fraud.

Your calling that "conspiracy theory" is insulting, and the fact that you don't present any reasons for your insult exposes you as someone who doesn't have the intelligence to engage in civil arguments, but can only argue through insults and the use of pet phrases such as "conspiracy theories".

Whether or not Hillary was actually engaged in the election fraud, she was the beneficiary of it. So to vote for her would be to condone election fraud. I will never do that.

[metroins]

127. It's a conspiracy theory

Because Bernie won 20 some states and Hillary won the election back in March.

Add up every state that you thought had election fraud. Then flip the win percentages to Bernie. Flip Nevada, New York, Iowa, Ohio, Florida and whatever else you want. He still loses.

This is why it is a conspiracy theory.

The truth is, it was incompetence to ignore states such as Louisiana, Alabama, Arkansas, Texas, Georgia, South Carolina. Those states weren't even close to being contested and that's why Hillary won.

Her lead remained steady of above 200 delegates because of huge wins in the South coupled with proportional delegate allocation. Flipping the "voter fraud" percentages that you think occurred still doesn't erase the large Southern lead she had.

Sit down and do the math, there was no path for Bernie after March.

[Time for change]

170. Actually, minus the election fraud he doesn't lose

That was the point of the election fraud. Hillary couldn't win without it.

It's a lot more than a theory. There is lots of evidence for it.

And even if he would lose without the election fraud, that doesn't make me feel any better about the election fraud. It is ruining our democracy.

And you calling it a "conspiracy theory" won't make it go away.

[metroins]

172. Please announce the cities

You're describing election fraud in. You're making the claim, back it up.

Flip Nevada, Iowa, NYC and California for Bernie. He still loses.

It was an incompetent strategy to ignore the south.

[Time for change]

193. See my link at post # 18 of this thread

[lancer78]

174. Bernie lost because he

only won Four Counties total among AR, LA, TN, MS, GA, and SC. In two southern states, he got less than 20% of the vote, barely maintaining viability for delegates.

[Time for change]

203. Moreso because of massive voter suppression/election fraud

[lancer78]

211. Lol

I am sorry, but what election fraud besides New York and Arizona. You know what, lets give Sanders the wins in Arizona and New York. That only nets him 40 more delegates and he STILL LOSES.

A dumb millennial who refuses to get up in the morning to make sure he registers as a Democrat so he can vote in the Democratic Primary does not count as voter suppression.

[swhisper1]

217. we dont see it that way, and its election fraud, not voter

[democrattotheend]

62. I get what you are saying, but why punish Hillary and more importantly this country

for fraud that she was not even responsible for? You withholding your vote from Hillary will have no impact on the Republican state legislatures that keep imposing more stringent voter ID requirements, cutting polling places, shortening voting hours, etc. If you want to help reform the voting process, do so by getting involved and continuing to be vocal about it, and electing more progressives to your state legislature.

Since your profile says you are from Florida, I don't think I have to remind you of the stakes. Would you really want to have been one of the 537 votes that could have made a difference?

[Time for change]

119. The purpose is not to punish Hillary

I will not condone election fraud. It is destroying our democracy and our country. Election fraud as a systematic process in this country is worse than a Trump presidency. I will put my thoughts and efforts into what can be done to combat it -- but I will not lift a finger to elect the beneficiary of it.

You can see from my sig that I have written a book on it (well before Bernie even announced his candidacy) -- so I know it when I see it.

Furthermore, I did not say that I don't think that she's a party to it. I said that I will not publicly state my opinion on that, because I have no proof either way. But it is crystal clear that she has been the beneficiary of it.

[swhisper1]

218. what makes you think she was not complicit?

who bought all those SGs?

[dbackjon]

72. You included Arizona in your list

Arizona had issues. 100% GOP's fault, and Hillary was hurt worse or the same as Bernie.


If you are blind to this, then the rest of your list is suspect.

[Time for change]

120. Hillary was not hurt worse than Bernie by voter suppression in AZ

Bernie was hurt much worse. Did you read what I had to say about that, or did you just read "Arizona", and since you've pre-judged that as being due to GOP efforts, just dismiss it from your mind?

[dbackjon]

134. Yes I read it

And yes I have read the countless claims that Hillary benefited, usually by people not in Arizona.

Bernie was not hurt worse than Hillary. Book it.



Repeating that falsehood only shows you are not dealing with an un-biased view.

[Time for change]

173. So what part of my discussion of the Arizona prmary do you not understand or disagree with

You're making statements with nothing whatsoever to back it up. If you can't contribute anything to this discussion other than simply repeat your completely unfounded claim that Hillary didn't benefit from the voter suppression in AZ, then please don't waste my time with your repeated unfounded assertions.

[dbackjon]

175. And you have nothing to back up

Your allegation that Bernie was affected more than Hillary


I have explained it dozens of times to you tinfoil Hillary is evil people

The areas where there was overwhelming Hillary support had zero polling places or one polling place

[Time for change]

205. See post 18 in this thread for my references

It doesn't matter how many times you explained it. Your assertions are wrong and without any evidence to back them up.

[dbackjon]

212. You have no evidence just your speculation

You have no evidence just your speculation


You tinfoil people ruin your credibility with your fake accusations Bernie lost fair and square deal with it

[Time for change]

224. Apparently you don't know what evidence is

[dbackjon]

225. I do know what evidence is obviously you don't

[GoneFishin]

204. The fraud is rampant. They won't and can't acknowledge it. In fact they are already trying to

rewrite history, but fortunately the internet never forgets.

If Hillary is the nominee she will be an illegitimate one, installed by rampant cheating by the Democratic Party. Fortunately they couldn't overcome Bernie's overwhelming popularity with small subtle dirty tricks, they had to go extreme and risk exposing themselves, which they did.

[pdsimdars]

22. Do some reading. Why should people have to explain it over and over. There are plenty of articles

[swhisper1]

219. no, it was national organized election fraud- too many to be coincidence

[TwilightZone]

14. Selective editing and made-up numbers are not election fraud.

Nor are frivolous lawsuits filed as a distraction.

Don't believe everything you read.

[Time for change]

19. I don't believe everything I read

For example, I would never believe anything you said under any circumstances.

The lawsuits filed on this are not frivolous. They are based on massive documentation of election fraud. If you're too ignorant to see what's going on, you should stop posting on the subject.

[leftofcool]

45. And you need to stop calling Duers ignorant or leave.

[Time for change]

121. I don't think you get to decide wether I leave or not

Are you a DU administrator?

When someone makes totally unsupported and untrue statements, repeatedly, and insults what I've written in the process, I think that calling them ignorant is an appropriate response.

[leftofcool]

131. No, it is not appropriate. Please read the TOS

[Time for change]

167. TwilightZone essentially called me a liar

With nothing to back it up, nothing to discuss. Just called me a liar.

In addition to ignorant, it's extremely childish and divisive. I think that calling him ignorant for that is pretty mild.

[bvf]

187. Check out the wannabe admin!

Really, that's a damn hoot!

[swhisper1]

220. they really need their own forum site.

[RKP5637]

102. If you have Trump and his cohorts for 4 or 8 years it won't matter. The US as

you knew it will be totally gone. No president is perfect. I will vote for HRC.

[Time for change]

122. Your insulting comments about one of our most decent leaders

is extremely arrogant.

[NNadir]

129. As is an assumption that everyone in the world wanted to vote for this so called "decent leader,"

...but was denied the chance.

At this moment, I don't see much "decency." After all, a virulent racist has become a candidate for President of the United States and all he wants to talk about is himself and his (rejected) "vision."

[notadmblnd]

154. Hillary only talks about herself too.

All I, I, I, me, me, me. What she thinks and what she is going to do when she is president. Never, ever says what we can all do together as a people or country. As far as bigotry goes- she just hides it better.

[GoneFishin]

163. Totally agree. If there had been ample debates not scheduled during football games, policy

discussions on the internet instead of paid propagandists lying about Bernie, if millions of voter's registrations weren't mysteriously fucked up, if there weren't video accounts of blatant cheating and lying by Hillary surrogates at the caucuses, if all of the exit polls didn't all point straight to Hillary shenanigans, and so much more, then I would probably have sucked it up and voted for Hillary.

But the cheating, lying, and other dirty tricks only reinforced what I already knew about Hillary. She is not trustworthy, and will do and say anything to grab power. And she will say anything to justify going back on her word later.

[brooklynite]

4. No- you're free to cast a write-in vote; if you want to help Dinald Trump

[HooptieWagon]

5. Votes for Sanders aren't added to Trumps total.

If Hillary isn't a strong enough candidate to beat Trump, then she has no business being nominated. Her weakness isn't Sanders fault.

[pdsimdars]

23. EXACTLY! She is a weak, flawed candidate under FBI criminal investigation with the

highest negatives in democratic history. And they want to blame Bernie. COO - KOO !

[HooptieWagon]

25. And after attacking Sanders supporters...

...they're demanding our help to prop up their weak candidate, who we told them was a weak candidate. Must be a special kind of stupid to burn bridges and then demand help.

[pinebox]

33. Precisely. No thank you.

[sandyshoes17]

52. +1

[pdsimdars]

78. Perfect phrase "special kind of stupid"

[840high]

112. +1 exactly

[mac56]

123. Word to the herd.

[Adrahil]

30. That's shows a misunderstanding of how our system works.

Either the Democrat or the Republican is going to win. If you vote for someone else, then from the perspective of THIS group, you are helping the GOP nominee. That's just the way our system works, rightly or wrongly. Voting for someone other than Hillary does not help defeat Trump.

I think she will beat Trump. But IMO, it's important for everyone to do what they can to defeat him. You've already heard Bernie say the same, and expect to hear more of it.

[pinebox]

35. Perspective of what "group"?

Reality is not voting for neither helps neither.

0+0=0.

I don't think she will beat Trump, sorry but I don't. She is the weaker candidate and she is forever damaged. We're screwed in the end.

[Adrahil]

37. DEMOCRATS

You are either helping to elect a Democrat, or helping to elect a Republican.

You don't have to believe it. We'll talk after the election. And I happen to think Bernie was a weak candidate, so there ya go.

[pinebox]

41. Uh no sorry

If you don't vote for either then you're not helping to elect either.

You think Bernie was a weak candidate despite ALL polls showing him beat Trump, no FBI investigation and a husband who did you know what?

Many Bernie supporters will NEVER vote for Hillary. You trashed us constantly, hell her campaign trashed his supporters & now you want us to help you prop up your candidate who is loathed by the majority of America?

Have fun with that.

She is going to lose the GE.

[Adrahil]

44. You can believe that, but the reality of the system is that one will win.

And I haven't trashed Sanders supporters (my wife and several of my friends supported him). I have trashed "Sadernistas," those supporters who have whipped themselves into an anti-Clinton frenzy based on exaggerations and falsehoods. Heck, even among Sandernistas, the only ones I really have a problem with are the Bernie or Busters.

[pinebox]

47. I do believe it

I'll throw you a bone.

"Young Democrats Of America", a high school entity. They are too young to vote & therefor can't vote. Do they help Trump? Nope. Same scenario. A no vote or a vote for a third candidate doesn't help Trump. It helps either that third person candidate or it helps nobody. Because someone voted for neither candidate, their vote doesn't suddenly appear on Trumps tally's. That's the reality.

I can right now link you to the massive bullshit on here about how we've been red baited, called delusional, how we need mental help, need meds, how Sanders is old, how we live in our parents basements, how Bernie supporters are all kids, how we want free stuff.

You know this. We all know this. The damage has been done.

[Adrahil]

50. Not even CLOSE to the same scenario.

They CANNOT vote for her. It's not that choose not to.

Look... do what you think is right. But I know what I think is right too, and I think you are NOT doing right. We are unlikely to agree on this it seems, but I believe you are cutting of your nose to spite your face.

And if you choose not to vote for her because your feelings were hurt? Boo fucking hoo. I've been called a war-monger, a 1% stooge, someone who doesn't care about poor people, red-baiter because I don't think Sanders' plans add up. Primaries get ugly. I would have still voted for Bernie. Because it fucking MATTERS to defeat the GOP.

[pinebox]

54. Actually it is

The ends are identical. No vote = no vote. Same exact outcome. Same exact worthiness.

You don't know me and what I stand for at all, not a clue. I promise you this, you're to the right of me just by who you support. You can say whatever you wish to but I will fight and stand for people who want to turn vacant buildings into apartments for the homeless which are self reliant and contained, where education is taught and gardens are grown for their food supplies. I stand & fight for those who work their asses off and deserve a living wage. I stand for true universal health care similar to what Canada and Germany has.

I vote for who best represents me. My vote is my own and activists never stay home on election day. Ever.


And now you know

[Silver_Witch]

67. +1000 and a standing Ovation!!!

[pinebox]

70. Thank you.

[Duval]

146. Thank YOU, pinebox.

[senz]

164. Bravo! Thank you.

[HooptieWagon]

58. So after DNClinton and supporters marginalize and insult Sanders supporters,...

...now you think they're being unreasonable to not support Clinton? Wow... Talk about tone-deaf.

[Jackilope]

59. Democrats alone cannot help her win.

Elbowing and buying her way into the nomination seat doesn't make her the stronger candidate. She can't buy off Independents and even a good percentage of Democrats don't trust her. This loyalty oath pledge, guilt tripping and bullying approach just doesn't get trust or real loyalty. The orange boogeyman man doesn't make her more trustworthy.

DNC and the establishment got their pick. No one owes Hillary their vote. I am not sure how she will go about to earn it, that is DNC and Hillary's burden.

[Adrahil]

80. You have a choice to make. Help Hillary defeat Trump, or not.

I know that righteous indignation is satisfying. But it's not very practical.

[Glamrock]

77. Awesome!

I overheard two Republicans talking while I was outside enjoying a butt. The one just couldn't get behind Capt. Coo coo the orange avenger. Was talking about only voting down ticket or third party. "But don't you get it?" the other asked. "Not voting for Trump is a vote for Clinton." Deja vu. Seems I'd heard that somewheres else. Then it hit me.

If I don't vote for Trump, I'm voting for Clinton.
If I don't vote for Clinton, I'm voting for Trump.
Apparently, if I vote third party or write in, I get 3 friggin votes! Legally! How awesome is that, huh?

[Adrahil]

82. The reality is that one or the other will win.

If you don't want Trump to win (and I assume you don't), then there is only one way to realistically do that.

[Separation]

142. This should be an OP

I live in an EXTREMELY republican town. However, most talks have been boiling down to this. Many people can not stand Trump! Then you have co-workers, friends et al saying "If you dont vote for Trump you are just a stupid Hillary loving libturd!"

This conversation happens almost daily on my Newsfeed on Facebook. It is just as ugly on their side as it is on ours with the threats of not voting Trump = a Hillary vote. Friends that have known each other for years arguing over this. I try my best to stay out of political talk on Facebook. For one, there is less than %1 of me changing their mind, and I was always taught that you dont talk politics or religion with your friends.

If Hillary could do just one thing it would win me over. It would be to disconnect from the for profit prison system and condemn and shut them down. This in itself in my opinion a crime against humanity, it has created hundreds of thousands of parentless children who are more likely at risk to keep the cycle continuing. I hate to think that America is #1 in locking its own people up.

[AntiBank]

206. "disconnect from the for profit prison system" <<< she will never do it bruv

She is never going to disconnect from any of the right wing shit she pushes.

I hate Trump, EVERYTHING he stands for, and goddamn if Clinton isn't making me literally have to self-gun-to-head to get me to vote for her, just to stop the fucking Dumpster.

I will do it, but goddamn I will also mercilessly do whatever I can to fuck up the corporatist wing of this Democratic party. They are so, so utterly damaging for the country as they give LEFT COVER FOR RIGHT WING SHIT.

[840high]

180. 0 still equals 0

[Jennylynn]

179. I've said since after NY that she's not going to beat Trump

It's not that I want Trump to win, believe me. She's not going to beat him.

[redstateblues]

201. Bernie was the weaker candidate. He couldn't win the Democratic primary.

All the Republicans would have had to do is loop the video of Bernie promising to raise taxes on the middle class. Mondale was the last D to try that. He won one state. Game over. BTW Hillary will win dashing your fondest wishes.

[HooptieWagon]

55. Maybe 30 years ago when there was a left party and a right party.

But that is no longer the case. We have two Rightwing parties that back corporate interests over people. A lot of people are saying "none of the above" , which is a perfectly valid vote. The party that recognizes that new reality first will grow stronger and survive. The other won't.

[Arazi]

60. People who don't live in swing states can vote anyway they like

Vote for Jill Stein to help get Greens above the 5% mark for example.

Everyone seems to agree that Bernie’s strong candidacy made Hillary a better candidate and helped push her to the left so in actuality having a strong left candidate in the race helps Democrats.

You're not allowing for any nuance

[Silver_Witch]

68. Bernie pushed her to the Left until Inauguration Day and then....

RIGHT BACK TO THE RIGHT.

[HooptieWagon]

101. Yes, her untrustworthiness plays a major role.

She could swear on a stack of bibles to back Ssnders entire platform, and few people would believe her. That's what 30 years of compulsive lying and secrecy gets you.

[Howler]

110. Excuse me.

I live in ohio and there are many of us that I know that will vote for who they choose and it's not hillary or trump. I am sick and tired of folks thinking we owe our votes to any party regardless of who they put up. Further more swing state voters have every right to vote their conscience instead of what ever perceived strategy the freaking d.n.c. establishment or other democrats think or come up with. As the bumper sticker says "I voted for bernie because fuck that shit"

[TheKentuckian]

148. Silly buggers talk about "the math" for months and yet can't even grasp addition.

The whole line of argument is about something beyond entitlement to actually feeling some sense of ownership of people's votes.

[senz]

162. Thank you. n/t

[Sivart]

8. This is not true...

This is not true and should not be allowed to be repeated.

This is not true.

[democrattotheend]

9. Chillax. That poster lives in Oregon

If Hillary is struggling to win Oregon against Trump she is not winning the election.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. Incorrect.

Write-In Candidate Procedures
Oregon voters have the option of not voting for any of the candidates for office who are printed on the ballot, but instead writing in a name of a candidate for each office.
http://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Documents/elec_law_summary.pdf

[TalkingDog]

24. 43 states currently allow write in candidates.

States not allowing write in ballots include; Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Dakota

Most States require a candidate to register, however; Vermont, Wyoming, Oregon, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Iowa, Delaware, and Alabama do not require registration.

Thirty-five states require that a write-in candidate must submit some form of affidavit and, sometimes, a filing fee at least one month before the election. In North Carolina, these candidates must circulate a petition. Then their names are posted on a list at the polling place, though not on the official ballot. All other write-in votes are tossed. ~Bloomberg

[pinebox]

31. You're incorrect. It depends upon which state you're in.

[-none]

49. If there is a line for "Other", you most certainly can.

[Silver_Witch]

65. Another mis-statement by a Hillary Supporter.

A write in candidate will not be counted (in California - may vary for other states); however the BALLOT will NOT be thrown out. Your other votes will be counted. In fact, I don't believe there is a place for a "write-in" unless no one is running for that office (happens in California believe it or not); so writing in a choice is not applicable, at least here in California.

Anyway - try to tell the truth - it helps everyone. Thanks!

[catnhatnh]

92. Not true

Currently, 43 States allow Write In Ballots for President of the United States.

States not allowing write in ballots include; Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Dakota

Most States require a candidate to register, however; Vermont, Wyoming, Oregon, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Iowa, Delaware, and Alabama do not require registration.




http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/7/21/1404380/-The-Write-In-Vote

[Paka]

166. It varies from state to state.

There are eight states that allow write-ins without any pre-filings, and only seven states that completely dis-allow it. Most of the others require some sort of pre-election filings, but do allow write-ins.

[roguevalley]

207. link for this assertion? Sounds like slag to me.

[Samantha]

183. Here are the instructions for writing in the name of a Presidential Candidate in Maryland

http://www.elections.state.md.us/voting/write-in.html

Just google your own state to find the instructions. We now have paper but I read down to the provisional part and voters just write the name down on the ballot. So it probably will work that way in November.

Sam

[Faux pas]

190. Thank you

Samantha!

[Samantha]

213. My pleasure, Faux pas

Sam

[Surya Gayatri]

6. Who gives a flying shag what Uygur has to say...irrelevant and inconsequential bombast.

[Demsrule86]

11. What a hypocrite this guy is...

He told Larry King yesterday...I will vote for Hillary to stop Trump. She is way better than Trump.

[choie]

15. He's a hypocrite because he's reporting

what his viewers have decided in a poll? Come on now...Don't be so damn petty and thin skinned.

[HooptieWagon]

27. Petty and thin-skinned defines their very nature.

I don't think we can change the natural order.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

32. He used to be a hero here when this was still an "underground". But DU is now the establishment. nt

[Surya Gayatri]

36. NEVER, since I first heard him years ago, has this overbearing blowhard been my hero.

Cannot bear his voice or manner.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

40. I didn't say YOUR hero. He WAS a DU hero when this was an "underground", that is a FACT. nt

[Duval]

149. Yes. nt

[840high]

113. I do.

[Spazito]

125. Yep, he loved Ron Paul, used to talk him up all the time...

when he was on Al Gore's network, "Current TV" before Gore sold it.

[JoePhilly]

7. Former Bush voter said what now?

[TwilightZone]

13. Irrelevant.

Some Sanders supporters - his target audience - said they wouldn't vote for Hillary. There's a surprise.

What I always find interesting is that some people just summarily dismiss the fact Uygur took $4m from a Republican to fund his show while decrying money's influence on politics, because he tells them what they want to hear.

You might want to consider that his motivations are not what they appear to be.

[choie]

17. You might want to

Look at your candidate and consider the same thing.

[Time for change]

20. +1000

[Silver_Witch]

69. SNAP and double SNAP

[pinebox]

38. Oh so let's attack the guy in the video? Deflection

when your candidate is taking $250k per speech to the likes of Goldman-Sachs. Never mind DNC chair Wasserman-Schultz helped get her Republican friends elected.

Yeah, let's talk about that whole motivation thing. A program host vs actual politicians. Hmmm, who has a bigger impact?

[bigwillq]

16. Some will, some won't. That's life.

I support democracy, so I wouldn't want it any other way.

For those that will, cool.
For those that won't, cool.

[RoccoR5955]

21. I live in NY, if Clinton gets the nod

I shall vote for Jill Stein on the Green Party. They can use the votes to get a line on the ballot.
I shall vote for Democrats who are running on down ticket races, so long as they are not running unopposed.

[Nedsdag]

136. New Jersey here!

I'll be doing the same thing as well.

My congressman is a Hillary toady so it's practically voting for her anyway.

[seabeckind]

28. You have to vote Hillary cause Trump is scary!!!!

Which is what some believe is the big scam.

That in an even up race on the issues, Hillary doesn't stand a chance. She has to rely on the anyone but Trump vote.

In my case there are a number of reasons why I'll just plan on a ballot with nothing but write ins.

Glass-Steagal. IWR. Private server. Wall Street.

Trump doesn't scare me. He'd be an ineffective buffoon if he made it. Hillary would help the corporations pack up the factory.

[leftofcool]

46. Of course he doesn't scare you

[dbackjon]

75. I assume you are straight then.

[pdsimdars]

79. god, another confused one who doesn't know the difference between reality and talking points.

[dbackjon]

84. No, I am not a deluded Bernie supporter

I KNOW what it is like to be a second class citizen.


I know that Trump has pledged to erode LGBT rights.


Anyone that does not take that serious is delusional.


Sorry if equality is not a priority for you. It is for me.

[pdsimdars]

86. then you better get behind Bernie, because Hillary will lose to Trump.

I can't understand any gay backing Hillary. Bernie had the first gay pride march in Vermont. He has supported gay rights for decades. Hillary DIDN'T. She "evolved" after everything was already achieved.
Who supports someone who was AGAINST them all along and throws someone under the bus who fought for them for decades? Only someone who is either seriously UNINFORMED or has some other reason. But you backed someone who was against you. How misguided is that?

[dbackjon]

93. The Clintons were there for the LGBT Community in the 90's

They were the first to take HIV seriously.


Sanders opposed Gay Marriage until 2009.


Both evolved. Both are LGBT supporters now.



And Clinton is the nominee. She will win if people wake up and are sensible.


She is liberal. She is a good candidate.

[seabeckind]

96. I remember that... don't ask, don't tell, wasn't it? n/t

[dbackjon]

97. Which was a step better than the outright ban before

Rome wasn't built in a day.

[seabeckind]

100. It wasn't a big step at all.

It was a crumb thrown at a social issue rather than a direct solution.

Now do DOMA.

[dbackjon]

106. It was a big step.

DOMA was unconstitutional from the start. Anyone with a brain knew that.


But it did prevent a very real push to amend the US constitution, which likely would have passed.







I love all these straight people that didn't give a rat's ass about LGBT rights, HIV etc now trying to use it as a political football.

[seabeckind]

115. So why did the head brain sign it?

Not even a symbolic veto.

Nada.

Sounds like he didn't give a rat's ass about LGBT, doesn't it?

Next let's do outsourcing and factory closures. And then after that the Gramm bill.

Or are you one of those LGBT folks who doesn't understand that personal freedom starts with economic liberty?

[dbackjon]

140. You are clueless.

How many LGBT people did you know in the 90's?

How many LGBT in service did you know back then?




And what about outsourcing and factory closures? You are blaming Hillary for those too?

Newsflash - with or without NAFTA, those jobs were gone. Hell, most ended up in Asia, without a free trade agreement.

[litlbilly]

216. Sorry, you are the poor clueless soul here.

[okasha]

116. Likewise.

Some gay Hillary supporters have been viciously attacked on DU by homophobic Sanders supporters.

I'm tired of the hypocrisy and the straight splainin'.Fortunately the perps should be gone next Wednesday.

[Amimnoch]

138. Really. Just Love being told what my lifes experiences actually were.

By people who didn't go through them.

[seabeckind]

188. That comment works both ways, doesn't it? n/t

[Amimnoch]

189. No it doesn't.

If your relationships weren't ever "illegal" and actively sought out and prosecuted, it doesn't work both ways.

If you've never sat before an officer in a MEPS station who would interrogate you, and force you to either lie about yourself or be barred from serving in the military.. It doesn't work both ways.

If you've ever loved someone, made the commitment to spend the rest of your life with that person, built a home and a family with that person, yet been told you have no legal rights as a couple and will not have any legal rights by law, it doesn't work both ways.

I don't know you. I don't know your background. It is not my place to judge your experiences. I am, however absolutely confident in my assertion, that you were not gay and in the military during the period before and after the implementation of DADT. I can't fathom anyone who was serving in that period referring to it as "crumbs". It wasn't anywhere close to equality yet, but it was a huge difference in atmosphere almost immediately for those of us who were.

Just a bit of immediate effect that I directly and personally perceived:
In 1989/1990 going through bootcamp and Electronics Tech A school, and Nuclear Power school, Shore patrol would go all up and down Orange Blossom trail looking for recruits and people going through school coming out. That entire section was considered off limits, and your career could be ended just for being found in that area with an other than honorable or bad conduct discharge.

In Norfolk VA at that time, there were 2 bars that I'd frequent. The 2 bars were called Nutty Buddies, and the Oar House. Before DADT:
Shore Patrol would photograph license plates in the Parking lots of those 2 establishments that had the base access stickers on their windshields, and you could count that you were going to be called up by legal if they got you.
Shore patrol would wait just outside those facilities and interrogate people that looked like sailors. If you were caught, even if you denied being gay, you'd very likely end up getting an other than honorable, or bad conduct discharge.

These witch hunts ended almost immediately after DADT was implemented. You still couldn't be out, you still couldn't be yourself when on the base or on the boat, but at least you weren't undergoing the interrogations and threats. You weren't being actively hunted down at known gay establishments. If you did come out, you were no longer automatically relegated to a BCD or Other than honorable discharge. If your record was otherwise spotless, you'd still get an honorable discharge, although you would still get an RE4 (re-entry code 4-not elegible to reenlist) with a reason of HCA or "Homosexual conduct acts" on your DD-214 (discharge paperwork).

So, I'm sorry, but no it doesn't.

[seabeckind]

194. How the f' would YOU know my experiences?

And how in the world would YOUR take from YOUR experience have any possible relationship to MY experiences.

Take your f'in time.

[Amimnoch]

196. Am I wrong? Were you in? Enlighten me.

I guess we differ. See, I'm willing to read and learn from yours.. That is if you feel so inclined to share.

As to your strawman, I don't claim to have any possible relationship to your experience. My experiences do apply to the subject. Does yours?

Also, read much? Clearly stated I don't know your experiences or you seabeckind. You might catch up on the first line of my 2nd paragraph:

I don't know you. I don't know your background. It is not my place to judge your experiences.

As you say.. Take your time.

[seabeckind]

198. I care about facts as they are presented.

Your take from your experiences start and end between your ears. I'm not interested in joining you in there.

At the same time I don't care to relate my life experiences to you.

Each of these is irrelevant to the discussion which is the position of the candidates on the issues that I feel are most important to the future of our country.

It's obvious from your comments that you are a single issue voter. That your life experiences are totally based on how conditions in this country affect you ... and you alone.

The clintons are not altruistic. They have done nothing that didn't result in a personal political advantage.

I don't expect that to change. Maybe you can be happy that it took almost 20 years to reverse the lousy position they took on the LGBT issues but there are a lot of people -- who were like you -- who died waiting.

[Amimnoch]

199. Sooo.. Don't know. Don't care. Don't want to know.

It's most interesting, and telling how you criticize me for assuming that I know you, even though my statement was clear in asserting that I don't.. Then follow up with you claiming that you know me to be a single issue voter based on a discussion about a single issue.

Apparently I'm a "single issue voter". Well apparently you have no actual interest in discourse.

Fair enough. goodbye.

[seabeckind]

200. Thanks very much for reinforcing exactly what I said.

It's all about you and you don't want to talk about anything else.

So much for discourse.

[Amimnoch]

137. LOL, those who didn't benefit from it don't get it.

They selectively forget that before DADT all new recruits were interrogated and threatened repeatedly.. At the MEPS station, upon arrival at bootcamp, on the "day of truth". If anyone even "thought" they were, they got pulled in by legal and interrogated for the crime of possibly being gay.. The Shore Patrol, or MP's that would run stings to catch us coming out of a Gay bar that was near the bases.

I served from 1989 to 1995, I saw the changes it made and they were HUGE for the time. I still wasn't able to be out and myself, but at least I was no longer being regularly interrogated and forced to lie about myself or face a possible bad conduct discharge or other than honorable discharge at best.

[dbackjon]

139. Thank you for your service and your personal experience

People look at the 90's through the lens of 2016 and forget what it was like back then.


And 90% of them were likely against gay rights in the 90's.

Hell, even 6 years ago most of DU didn't support gay rights.


But now they are still using us as pawn in their games.

[Amimnoch]

143. Really, if DOMA or DADT was passed now, there'd be good reason to criticize.

But 1999 was the first year that 50% of people were okay with just gay relationships being legal.. Not marriage mind you, but just us having relationships should be legal.

2012.. That's 2012!!! Was the first time that 50% supported our right to marriage.





Truth be told though, I'm kind of envious that the younger ones, and the ones that either didn't have to live through it can look back on those days with rose colored glasses and think they were bad things. DADT was a very positive step in the right direction for us. Without that step, the move forward to eliminating DADT into equality wouldn't have happened.... Yet.

DOMA was a horrendous thing, but had Clinton not signed it, the parallel movement to push for an constitutional amendment would have kept its steam, and while wasn't a sure thing (amendments are terribly hard to pass), it most definitely was possible, and those of us who watched in terror as it gained traction and popularity in the 90's, while not at all thankful for DOMA did sigh in relief when that awful law took the steam out of that growing movement.

Really people (not the person I'm responding to, but the others), look at that chart. 68% of people in this country was for that legislation, and only 28% supported us.. Let that sink in. If you think that a constitutional amendment was not possible, you are delusional. It was possible, and had that amendment passed because Clinton Vetoed the law, then the same SCOTUS decision that struck down that awful piece of work would not have been possible.

[Mother Of Four]

145. Here you go

The jackass speaking is abusive, so you may want to just take my word for it how insulting he is and advance to 2:18

And if you haven't read this - it would be a good read. Bernie is NOT your enemy.

https://www.queerty.com/5-times-bernie-sanders-was-championed-our-cause-before-it-was-popular-20160131

[dbackjon]

165. No one is claiming that Bernie is the enemy

But I am objecting to it is people telling me that Hillary is anti-LGBT

[Amimnoch]

191. ∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆This

[Amimnoch]

192. To expand my own feelings on DB's response above...

Make no mistake, I don't see Senator Sanders as being week on equal rights.. At all!

He is, and has been a GREAT ally, and not just for those of us in the GLBT comminity but for all minorities.

I do take exception to the revisionist notion that DADT was a bad thing, or as it was commented on "crumbs". It was a HUGE step in the right direction, and paved the way for the further progress we've had in the last 8 years under yet another great POTUS. The atmosphere that preceded DADT was MUCH worse.

DOMA on the other hand was a shit sandwich. It was foul. It was gong to be passed in that horrible political climate with or without President Clinton's signing. Worse, in preparation for a Presidential Veto, there was a movement, and not a small one, that was pushing and calling for a Constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between 1 man and 1 woman. Did that amendment really have a chance of passing? There's debate on that, however while an amendment wasn't close to a sure thing, with 68% of Americans feeling that it should be defined that way at that time, it was definitely nowhere close to an impossibility. Regardless of if that was President Clintons reasons or not, one thing his signing DOMA into law and not forcing it to undergo a veto override did accomplish was completely diffusing the movement to make it a constitutional amendment. IF it had been made into an amendment during that awful period, it would still be illegal for same sex marriage to exist, and we'd still be a long way off from having the strength of numbers to get an ammendment repealed.

[Garrett78]

90. Outside of the DU bubble, Clinton is widely considered the favorite.

While some Interweb Warriors are convinced Clinton "doesn't stand a chance," most people and organizations clearly feel differently.

[seabeckind]

103. Not in my state.

BTW, your reasoning is a Argumentum ad Populum fallacy.

I gave you the reason pushed so hard inside the clinton bubble -- that everyone has to get behind clinton cause trump is the alternative.

Which falls apart completely if trump isn't the opponent in Nov.

[swhisper1]

221. not in my state either- she got only 30 % and that was dems only

[MillennialDem]

29. I likely just won't go vote at all. Not worth the hassle if it's not for Bernie (not that 1 vote eve

r matters anyway).

[PADemD]

39. One of our local mayors won by 1 vote.

[MillennialDem]

53. Usually everything in my area is unopposed, unfortunately. Down ballot the only

major thing is Feingold, but he's going to slaughter Johnson anyway.

[stillwaiting]

64. Feingold is worth voting for.

I would enthusiastically go to vote for him.

Presidential line, no comment.

[Lizzie Poppet]

42. Lots of downballot stuff for me to vote on.

And I don't have to go anywhere (Oregon is 100% vote-by-mail...has been for years). Will I vote for president? Probalby not, actually. Maybe for Stein...

[swhisper1]

222. please vote bernies choice for downticket

[pengu]

34. Absolutely not

This primary has been dirty. I don't care how many posts you hide of mine, this primary was won by lying and cheating. From her lies about single payer to the blatant cheating in Nevada, the results of this primary are not legitimate.

You go ahead and keep hiding to get your forced unity on this site. It won't make a lick of difference outside of the echo chamber. We're Bernie voters and we're pissed off at what you've done.

[leftofcool]

48. Were you pissed when the bernie campaign stole data from Hillary?

[-none]

51. The DNC, backing Hillary, had full control of the data server you are referencing.

Bernie's campaign stole nothing.

[leftofcool]

76. You really should read that legal brief again.

[pdsimdars]

81. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Amen! ^^^^^^^^^^^

[840high]

181. Sing it loud!

[qdouble]

43. Why do BoBers love bullshit internet polls?

If you ever seen the chat during his stream, his audience mostly consists of rabid hillary haters...it is in no way representative of most Bernie voters.

[pdsimdars]

83. Like most other Hillary supporters, you didn't actually BOTHER yourself with actually WATCHING

the video and LISTENING to what he said.

do all of you think you can just make up the reality you want?

[qdouble]

91. Are you being obtuse?

He admitted that his poll was completely unscientific and knew the majority of his viewership doesn't like Hillary. Why would you think it has any basis on what the majority of Bernie supporters feel?

[still_one]

57. Almost every analysis regarding this primary that has been prestented on their

Last edited Fri Jun 10, 2016, 02:56 PM - Edit history (1)

program has been wrong. This will be another wrong prediction from their very unscientific poll

[Tarc]

61. Wow, a Diehard Berniefan group polls Diehard Berniefans. Results are shocking!

[itsrobert]

63. If we go by online polls, Bernie's the nominee

by 83 percent to 15 percent with 2 percent (undecided/someone else).

[Yonnie3]

66. He says it's not a scientific poll but ...

doesn't say outright that is a self-selecting internet poll. Opt-in internet polls often do not present a clue as to what would really happen. If internet polls and Facebook likes were at all indicative of voting, Senator Sanders would have won every primary by double digits.

[pdsimdars]

85. He made it quite clear. You just don't like the results.

His show gets more views than the other networks combined. so even though it may not be representative, it says something.

[Lord Magus]

87. No, it really doesn't say something.

Unscientific polls mean literally nothing.

[Yonnie3]

98. You are not correct ...

I don't care at all about the results of this survey.

Please don't assume you know what my thoughts are.

Have a nice day.

[demwing]

147. well, don't misrepresent the truth

Cenk was clear the poll was not scientific, and the respondents were self selecting.

I wasn't aware that "I'm with her" meant we had to lie with her as well.

[RAFisher]

209. Right

At best we could say this represents the views of TYT viewers. It says nothing about the general voting public. Scientific polls I've seen show 70% of Sanders supporters are supporting Clinton. That just illustrates how inaccurate internet polls can be.

[libdem4life]

71. The DNC, IMO, set this up so that Ds would be obligated to vote for HRC

Apparently, it was the only way...or maybe the easiest way...to insure a win.

They neither ran or supported anyone else in the Establishment as it was her tur...oh well, we all know. Plus a lot of other hyperpolitical Bull Crap. So, nature abhors a vacuum...thus, Bernie Sanders.

Now they want to shame US into voting for a seriously publicly flawed person against a bigoted blowhard...that's just plain political bribery.?

There's an old saying: Your failure to plan does not constitute an emergency for me.

[kadaholo]

73. A Never Hillary Vote...

here!

[grossproffit]

99. tick tock tick tock

[Duval]

151. No, it's more like "drip, drip, drip".

[dbackjon]

74. If you are a Bernie fan, and don't vote Blue

Then fuck off.

Seriously. Spoiled and privledged. Trump has to be stopped. My marriage could be voided by his appointments.

[pdsimdars]

88. Well, right back at ya. If you supported someone who has been against your issues

and your flawed candidate, under FBI criminal investigation, with the worst favorability in the HISTORY of the Democratic party, will LOSE against Trump. . .

Right back at ya.

[dbackjon]

95. Sanders and Clinton have good support for LGBT issues

And always have. Both evolved on gay marriage.




She won't lose if people stop believing right-wing smears.

[pdsimdars]

104. Wrong again Bob.

Bernie was onboard with unions and then marriage, WAY before Hillary. It has only been a few years not for Hillary. After it was all achieved.

As I said, Bernie had the FIRST gay pride parade in VT.

You should do a little more reading and stop believing TALKING POINTS as truth.

[dbackjon]

105. Stop pretending you know shit

He evolved a few years before.



Quite the smug little man, aren't you. You really don't give a shit about LGBT rights, they are just a political football to you.



Sanders I like. His smug arrogant supporters are why many didn't vote for him.

[Orrex]

128. .

[pdsimdars]

214. I guess if you hadn't said you supported Hillary I would have known, because of the reversion

to childish name calling. Birds of a feather.
You didn't refute any fact I said. You can't. Seems you don't know anything. Didn't Hillary just say she supports gay marriage in 2015. Yea, you really know your shit. Better to believe in reality than swallowing all those talking points whole.

http://www.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2015/06/30/32-years-before-scotus-decision-sanders-backed-gay-pride-march

?cb=1435676277

The day after the Supreme Court ruled same-sex marriage a constitutional right, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) assured an audience in Nashua, N.H., Saturday morning that he's no newcomer to gay rights.

Sanders' evidence? His 1996 vote against the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman" and allowed states to refuse to recognize gay marriages performed elsewhere. The bill was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, husband of Sanders' rival for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton.

"Back in 1996, that was a tough vote," Sanders told his audience, according toThe Hill. "Not too many people voted against it, but I did."

That was hardly the first time Sanders went to bat for LGBTQ community, according to records of his tenure as mayor of Burlington, which are housed at the University of Vermont Library's Special Collections.

When gay rights organizers planned Burlington's first-ever pride parade in June 1983 — two years after Sanders was elected mayor of the Queen City — they called on the Board of Aldermen to designate June 25 Lesbian and Gay Pride Day.

"This human rights issue is of great importance to our community," the Organizing Committee of the Lesbian and Gay Pride Celebration wrote in a June 6 letter to the board.

<snip>

"In the city of Burlington and in the state of Vermont, people have the right to exercise their lifestyles," Sanders said. "It's an American right, anyone's right to have a march... This is a civil liberties question."


That was in 1983 you don't know what you are talking about. And when people who don't know what they are talking about get challenged with FACTS, they often resort to name calling. . . . and there you are.

[sarae]

161. +1

She won't lose if people stop believing right-wing smears.

so true...

[Herman4747]

178. Iranian lives could be voided by Hillary

She's happy to be their "enemy"

[Waiting For Everyman]

89. That's worse than I thought.

I thought maybe 1/3 would be hold outs.

[highprincipleswork]

94. It's really too bad that Hillary and crew will likely swing to the Right, instead of embracing these

eager heartfelt Bernie supporters, who only want what Democrats have wanted for so long.

Hope that Obama and Reid and Hillary and Pelosi and Biden can continue to read the tea leaves and writing on the wall a little better than that. There is a vast Democrat-leaning populace out there, if only Democrats acted like Democrats!!!!!!

[sadoldgirl]

107. All of this does not change anything for November.

The important part will be which of those two parties
has more expertise in cheating, because we know now
that both are doing it.

[restorefreedom]

109. this one won't. #bernieorbust #neverhillary nt

[MariaThinks]

118. The answer is clear

Many will vote for Hillary, some won't.

Here's an example: I want a $10,000 raise. I'll take anything over $1000. I'm not going to want 0 or worse, to have no job.


Any true progressive will vote Hillary if they wanted Bernie. Why? Because the evil is the republican party, now extended through TRUMP.

Anyone who says BUST, is not a progressive and we would never have their vote. To get the vote from this group, we would have to enact policies that will lose the vote of many other people and let the republicans win.

Obviously the people who post on this board, myself included, are more passionate and interested in politics than the average. Also, someone can say they really want Bernie, and post stuff about Hillary, and be posers. Who really knows?

[sarae]

159. +1000

[NuclearDem]

124. Somehow, I don't think that's going to move the prediction markets a whole lot.

I don't think 538 is rushing to add this to its projections, either.

[Dawson Leery]

126. Objective polls say 9 out of 10 Bernie fans will back Hillary.

A poll taken by the left wing Glenn Beck is certainly bulls**t.

[HooptieWagon]

153. Good luck with that fantasy.

Hillary will be doing well to get half.

[pdsimdars]

155. And that's all Hillary and also her supporters have. . . slogans and smears. They seem to

be devoid of any content.. . .attack the messenger if you don't like the message. That is always the response of the shallow, the right wing always does it.

[840high]

182. lol

[still_one]

132. TYT are almost holding the same record of wrong interpretations as Dick Morris

and they seem to be following the same pattern:


Six times as many Sanders supporters would shift to Clinton over Trump – poll

Exclusive: SurveyUSA data suggests Sanders voters could help Clinton recapture young people, union members and critical midwest and north-east states

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/10/sanders-supporters-prefer-clinton-to-trump-exclusive-poll

Good thing I don't bet on TYT predictions

Keep up the good work boys

[Godhumor]

135. Did we really get TYT, online poll results and an embedded video in the same OP?

Trifecta!

[felix_numinous]

141. People won't vote for a candidate clearly hostile to them

whoever decided that mocking, dismissing and insulting people day after day was a smart tack to take expecting support does NOT understand human nature!

On top of that to kettle what used to be the Democratic Party between this rock and a hard place--between a neo liberal and neo Nazi as presidential choices is added insult, as well as underestimating the intelligence of millions of people.

This is a LOSING strategy, and to cheat on top of that. The message, once again, is that the powerful moneyed class just goes through these elections as kabuki theatre, to maintain the FAIRY TALE of democracy. What else would calling our representation ponies and unicorns be, telling us to 'get it out of our systems' and censoring open adult discussions? Forcing us to support a hostile candidate is very much like an abusive parent forcing compliance, same exact dynamic.

Attempting to force the removal of a democratically elected candidate and forcing us to vote against Trump is the lowest form of extortion. People have gotten on the wrong side of history on this one, if they ever awaken will rue the day they backed such destruction of our country and planet.

[840high]

184. +1

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

150. I didn't vote for her in the primay and can't see a viable reason to vote for her in November. k&r

[still_one]

152. Survey USA doesn't agree

Exclusive: SurveyUSA data suggests Sanders voters could help Clinton recapture young people, union members and critical midwest and north-east states

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/10/sanders-supporters-prefer-clinton-to-trump-exclusive-poll

[onecaliberal]

156. No chance in hell.

[MFM008]

157. Wow its the 10th of June

6 more days .

[senz]

158. Not the least big surprising.

[Lil Missy]

168. TYT?? Cenk Uygur? Most Democrats have never heard of him.

[rickford66]

171. Ask around.

[840high]

185. You kidding?

[Dawson Leery]

215. Cenk is the left Hannity/Morris/Kristol/Beck rolled into one.

[moth33]

176. abuse of power

Seems like this poll shows that people just don't trust Hillary to not abuse her power in the office. But they trust Bernie. Imagine, a politician we can trust...

http://powerinthepubliceye.org/power-poll/

[840high]

186. yep

[PowerToThePeople]

197. Not this one.

[icecreamfan]

208. I really despise calling supporters of candidates "fans"

as if we're rooting for a sports team.

[swhisper1]

223. thats how I see Hillbots- rabid fans

[still_one]

226. An actual Scientific poll by Survey USA indicates 6 times as many Sanders supporters would

shift to Clinton over Trump
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/10/sanders-supporters-prefer-clinton-to-trump-exclusive-poll