Warren isn't running and Bernie could never win. So let's talk REALITY.

[RBInMaine]

Last edited Sun Nov 16, 2014, 09:07 AM - Edit history (2)

Warren isn't running. Do people hear that? SHE IS NOT RUNNING. She has said so CLEARLY, EXPLICITLY, and REPEATEDLY.

Bernie is a great guy with real passion, BUT HE CAN NOT WIN A NATIONAL ELECTION.

Much as some here would like the nation to be on the far left, it isn't. The nation remains, on balance, essentially centrist, but in presidential cycles one, with high turnout of young people and minorities, that has moved to the CENTER-LEFT. But NOT the far left. We need to show we have a STRONG ECONOMIC PLAN THAT WILL GET RESULTS FOR THE PEOPLE. People want to know in CONCRETE TERMS what is "IN IT FOR ME?" The R's always say, "Vote for us and you'll get lower taxes." Same old same old, but it works for them. We have to be able to offer concrete incentives and a strong and compelling plan on the economy.

Hillary Clinton would certainly be the frontrunner if she declares a candidacy, and in the end we need to get firmly behind the nominee.

To hear some on the far-left constantly bash her candidacy in hopes of Warren or Bernie is voluntarily living in non-reality and foolishnesss. Whether a person is on the far right and out of reality or on the far left and out of reality, out of reality is out of reality.

I for one will choose reality and support the nominee whomever it is. I think if Hillary runs, it will most likely be her, and we would have the opportunity as a party to AGAIN make history, elect the first woman president, and a STRONG one at that. The people want STRONG leadership, and there is no question she is tough as nails. I have great respect for Obama, but he is a strong CAMPAIGNER. He simply has not projected himself as a strong LEADER in office. He is barely even coming out and strongly and consistently touting his own accomplishments. It is utterly stunning that the R's were just able to win big because they labeled Obama as a failure who is heading us in the wrong direction when he has under his belt the creation of over 10 million jobs, the deficit cut in half, no new ground wars, millions more with healthcare, lower gas prices, and a booming stock market. Americans want STRONG LEADERSHIP. And they sure as hell didn't get it from our national party apparatus in this last election. They didn't define the election, they didn't theme it, and they didn't message it. They instead allowed the R's to define the election on their terms while we had our candidates "Stand On Their Own." It totally FAILED and totally SUCKED.

Make no mistake. Clinton would define the election, and she and her team would run a strong campaign. I love Warren and Bernie, but one IS NOT RUNNING, and the other just can't win a national election. Never gonna happen.

[merrily]

1. You don't want to talk reality. You want to talk Hillary.

Nothing wrong with that, as long I am very clear: No one knows who is or is not going to run yet and no one knows who can or cannot win an election yet. In November 2006, I wouldn't have bet on Obama.

But, okay, let's say yet again that Hillary is the inevitable Democratic nominee, even if we have no way of knowing that now, anymore than in 2006.

In reality, I think that Hillary would lose the general, if she is the nominee. I thought that in 2007, before I ever heard of Warren or Sanders. Before I even heard of the DLC or Third Way or any of that. I had one thought then and one alone: "More so than ever before in my entire Democratic life, I desperately want the Democratic nominee to be the next President."

I thought Kucinich did not have a prayer of winning a general. Out. Thought Biden and Dodd had too much baggage (and Hillary made them look they were traveling light). Out. That's why I started donating to Obama in the fall of 2007 and didn't stop until maybe a week or two before election day, when the polls seemed beyond dispute.

Now that I've learned more about politics in general and Hillary in particular, I think today, much more than in 2007, that, if Hillary is the Democratic Presidential nominee, Democrats will lose the 2016 general.

[Sherman A1]

2. Agreed

She may be the nominee, but I don't see her winning.

[merrily]

3. Trying to go against the perpetual motion meme machine is a bear, isn't it?

[Sherman A1]

4. Bears!

I like bears. But, I am afraid you are correct.

I would think Bernie Sanders or any candidate could do well running on progressive ideas. It would appear that although the GOP came out on top this last election, that progressive proposals did as well in many states such as minimum wage increases. If that is what the people are thinking perhaps we should listen to them.......?

[RBInMaine]

6. Bernie has a good message, but he isn't a messenger who can win a national election.

[MoonchildCA]

132. Whether he can win or not, his message is extremely important to the national debate.

And, I think, no one can deliver it as simply, clearly, and concisely as he can. He's really brilliant that way.
If we don't have a progressive voice in the election to speak for the average American, then all we have are corporate-backed candidates arguing center and far-right policies.

The base needs a voice, whether that person is elected or not, at least the one that is will have heard it.

This is where Warren, if she runs, and Bernie, who I believe is running right now, whether he stays in or not, are indispensable to this race.

[AgingAmerican]

226. Cuz you say so...

nt

[merrily]

7. If I were Jon Stewart at the Daily Show, I might say, "Sherman AI, meet me at camera three."

Jon seems to think that no one can hear him at camera three, other than the person he is addressing. However, I do know that everyone can see my posts to you. So, I am going to zip my lip for now about Bernie and Elizabeth.

I want to see who actually (a) declares and (b) declares unconditionally before I hurt my hair too much pondering the election of people who may never run. So far no one has done that, no doubt thanks to people who have been saying for two years now that the nom is Hillary's, if she wants it. (I have a strong sense that other things have been said behind the scenes to potential challengers, but that is just me.)

When there's even a semblance of field of hopefuls who admit they're hopefuls, I'll start thinking hard.

[pangaia]

84. Your last paragraph raises an interting point.

Why do we have to wait until THEY select the field that we can then choose from?
We can not WE select the field?

I know. You are using 'they' for different people than I am but I think it is a valid question.

[merrily]

95. People have to want to run. They also have to have money or access to money.

And if the DNC is as bent on backing Hillary and only Hillary, as it seems to be, they REALLY need money or their own access to money. And also access to well liked people who will endorse them. Preferably, they would also have some name recognition on a national level, like a well liked federal politician or an athlete with some national following.

My strong suspicion is that Hillary was promised something. I could be wrong, but I see no other possible explanation for why every single MSNBC host and Democratic strategist and pundit started saying--before Obama was even re-elected, that, if Hillary ran, no Democrat would even challenge her. Never in my life have I seen or heard anything remotely like that.

But, I digress. How do you suggest we go about identifying and choosing from the group I described above? I am absolutely open to suggestions. Open to working on it, too. Right now, though, the only specific thing I know for certain is that Bernie Sanders has said he will run if he knows he has support. So, those who want Bernie to run even, may want to start donating.

Some people will seek the endorsement of the state Democratic conventions; and I can vote there there.

Other than those two specific, I have no idea what to do.

[arcane1]

234. For two years now? More like since the day after Obama was nominated!

[merrily]

235. I started hearing it all over TV, like a modern Greek chorus, shortly before the 2012 election.

If you heard it sooner, it's even worse.

[arcane1]

236. Good point, the "inevitable" stuff is more recent.

After 2008 it was more of a "she'll get her chance in 2016" kind of thing.

[merrily]

237. I do remember hearing "inevitable" in 2007, but then it stopped, as far as I heard.

(Obviously, I can speak only for my own observations.)

The thing that made my jaw drop starting around 2012 were comments from Democratic strategists, MSNBC anchors and others like this: "The nomination is Hillary's, if she wants it. If she decides to run, she'll clear the field. No Democrat will even oppose her."

When in your life have you heard that when no incumbent was running? Especially four years out from the election? Hell, even when an incumbent is running, there should be a primary, not a coronation. The nomination should belong to Democratic voters.

[brooklynite]

173. Flip that sentence around.....

"It would appear that although rogressive proposals did as well in many states, the GOP came out on top

[Sherman A1]

199. Please,

Proceed...........................

[brooklynite]

210. Simples...supporting progressive policies does not translate to supporting liberal candidates

If Sanders is going to run, he's going to have to convince people to actually vote for HIM, no matter how compatible he and voters are on the issues. I still don't see how he does it.

[Sherman A1]

222. And yet,

I see no mention of bears?

[VanillaRhapsody]

31. the polls beg to differ....

[peacebird]

68. Polls TWO YEARS out are utterly worthless. In 2006 HRC was polling to have a cakewalk coronation

How did THAT work out for you?

[VanillaRhapsody]

69. Yeah you keep telling yourself that 64% is going to vanish...

how does THAT work for you???

I don't know about you....but I want to WIN. I cannot afford Republicans owning all three branches...even if its only 2 yrs. How about you? Can you afford that? Are you willing to risk President Jeb on your Ideals?

[peacebird]

76. It will vanish, all she has to do is speak off the cuff. She forgets the internet is here....

From an article on her book tour: ""I have a strong record. I have a great commitment to this issue [LGBQTI rights]", Clinton told Terry Gross. No one, no one, who supported one of the most anti-gay pieces of legislation in history, DOMA, can ever say she/he has a strong record on the issue of gay rights. When she ran for the Senate in 2000 Clinton said, unashamedly, that she too would have signed DOMA. And so when she says today that she has always thought marriage should be left up to the states (a deeply problematic position in itself), Clinton is lying. But that was vintage Clinton on NPR: weaselly and insulting."
See, internet lets us see how she actually voted and what she previously said.
Remember the other little nugget from her book tous - the comment about being POOR when they got out of the White House... ?

Her lead is from name recognition, unfortunately the more people see her(as her book tour showed), the LESS they like her.

[VanillaRhapsody]

79. and THAT is your plan????

you are pinning your hopes that Hillary fails and that some nebulous other Dem can possibly beat Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush.....

Good luck with that....you are leaving out a big portion of the American electorate in your "miscalculations".

[peacebird]

85. You think we should settle for a warhawk centrist because they run with "D" after their name?

Have fun with that. She can't win. And folks like you can't beat folks like me up enough to make us help her. I will work hard to get another Dem nominated and elected. If the DLC thirdway centrists foist HRC on us and she somehow gets the nomination, I will wish you good luck. But she will not get my vote.

[VanillaRhapsody]

86. that is what YOU say...here is my proof to the contrary....you don't get to cherry-pick issues.

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right
(+5 points on Social scale) Lift ban on stem cell research to cure devastating diseases: Favors topic 1
Respect Roe v. Wade, but make adoptions easier too: Favors topic 1
Alternatives to pro-choice like forced pregnancy in Romania: Strongly Favors topic 1
Must safeguard constitutional rights, including choice: Favors topic 1
Remain vigilant on a woman’s right to chose: Favors topic 1
Keep abortion safe, legal and rare: Favors topic 1
Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion: Favors topic 1
Supports parental notice & family planning: Opposes topic 1
No abortion for sex selection in China: Opposes topic 1
Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus: Favors topic 1
Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women: Favors topic 1
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Expand embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill for emergency contraception for rape victims: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime: Favors topic 1
YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives: Favors topic 1
NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1
Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale) Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
We’ve come a long way on race, but we have a long way to go: Strongly Favors topic 2
Apologize for slavery, but concentrate on civil rights now: Favors topic 2
Human rights are women’s rights: Neutral on topic 2
Women’s rights are human rights: Favors topic 2
OpEd: "18 million cracks" meant "lingering sexism": Strongly Favors topic 2
Equal pay is not yet equal: Strongly Favors topic 2
1988: Instituted gender diversity Report Card within ABA: Strongly Opposes topic 2
Argued with Bill Clinton about diluting affirmative action: Strongly Favors topic 2
Shift from group preferences to economic empowerment of all: Neutral on topic 2
Sponsored bill maintaining role of women in armed forces: Favors topic 2
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Reinforce anti-discrimination and equal-pay requirements: Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination: Strongly Favors topic 2
Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale) Increase America’s commitment against Global AIDS: Favors topic 3
DOMA discrimination holds us back from a more perfect union: Strongly Favors topic 3
I support gay marriage personally and as law: Strongly Favors topic 3
Let states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds: Favors topic 3
2004:defended traditional marriage; 2006:voted for same-sex: Strongly Favors topic 3
Federal Marriage Amendment would be terrible step backwards: Favors topic 3
Gays deserve domestic partnership benefits: Strongly Favors topic 3
Military service based on conduct, not sexual orientation: Favors topic 3
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees: Strongly Favors topic 3
YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3
No opinion on topic 4:
Keep God in the public sphere
(0 points on Social scale) Partner with faith based community in empowerment zones: Strongly Favors topic 4
Tap into churches to avoid more Louima & Diallo cases: Favors topic 4
Community involvement helps, but only in short term: Favors topic 4
Link payments to good parenting behavior: Opposes topic 4
Allow student prayer, but no religious instruction: Opposes topic 4
Character education: teach empathy & self-discipline: Favors topic 4
Change what kids see in the media: Favors topic 4
Co-sponsored bill to criminalize flag-burning: Favors topic 4
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 4
Rated 100% by the AU, indicating support of church-state separation: Strongly Opposes topic 4
NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration: Opposes topic 4
Strongly Favors topic 5:
Expand ObamaCare
(-5 points on Economic scale) Outcry if AIDS were leading disease of young whites: Favors topic 5
Lower costs and improve quality and cover everybody: Strongly Favors topic 5
Supply more medical needs of families, & insure all children: Strongly Favors topic 5
Medicare should be strengthened today: Favors topic 5
Smaller steps to progress on health care: Favors topic 5
Guaranteed benefits & focus on prevention: Neutral on topic 5
2006: If I can't do universal coverage, why run?: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care will not work if it is voluntary: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care coverage by the end of my second term: Strongly Favors topic 5
We need a uniquely American solution to health care: Favors topic 5
Health care initiatives are her first priority in Senate: Strongly Favors topic 5
Establish "report cards" on HMO quality of care: Favors topic 5
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage: Favors topic 5
Let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations: Opposes topic 5
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record: Strongly Favors topic 5
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn: Strongly Favors topic 5
NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium: Favors topic 5
NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit: Favors topic 5
NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit: Opposes topic 5
YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics: Favors topic 5
YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug: Strongly Favors topic 5
YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D: Favors topic 5
NO on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000: Opposes topic 5
YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D: Favors topic 5
YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare: Favors topic 5
Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale) 1997: Hillary warned against privatizing Social Security: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Soc.Sec. one of greatest inventions in American democracy: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Social Security protects families, not just retirees: Strongly Opposes topic 6
All should join the debate now to preserve future solvency: Opposes topic 6
Create Retirement Savings Accounts: Favors topic 6
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 6
NO on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security: Opposes topic 6
Strongly Opposes topic 7:
Vouchers for school choice
(-5 points on Economic scale) OpEd: Common Core recycled from Clintons in 1980s and 1990s: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fully fund special education & 21st century classrooms: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice; but not private nor parochial: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers drain money from public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fight with Gore for public schools; no voucher “gimmicks”: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Charter schools provide choice within public system: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers siphon off much-needed resources: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Parents can choose, but support public schools: Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice and charter schools: Favors topic 7
Solemn vow never to abandon our public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Offer every parent Charter Schools and public school choice: Opposes topic 7
Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes: Strongly Opposes topic 7
YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies: Opposes topic 7
Strongly Opposes topic 8:
No 'rights' to clean air and water
(+5 points on Social scale) $5B for green-collar jobs in economic stimulus package: Opposes topic 8
Voted against and consistently opposed to Yucca Mountain: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Scored 100% on Humane Society Scorecard on animal protection: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Remove PCBs from Hudson River by dredging 200 miles: Opposes topic 8
Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes: Strongly Opposes topic 8
EPA must do better on mercury clean-up: Opposes topic 8
Grants for beach water pollution under Clean Water Act: Opposes topic 8
Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Opposes topic 9:
Stricter punishment reduces crime
(+2 points on Social scale) Longtime advocate of death penalty, with restrictions: Strongly Favors topic 9
Address the unacceptable increase in incarceration: Opposes topic 9
Mandatory sentences have been too widely used: Strongly Opposes topic 9
Give kids after-school activities to prevent gangs: Opposes topic 9
Spend more time with kids to prevent violence: Opposes topic 9
Supports citizen patrols & 3-Strikes-You’re-Out: Favors topic 9
Supports “Three Strikes” and more prison: Strongly Favors topic 9
End hate crimes and other intolerance: Favors topic 9
Require DNA testing for all federal executions: Opposes topic 9
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program: Opposes topic 9
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance: Strongly Opposes topic 9
YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program: Opposes topic 9
Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale) Rein in idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Against illegal guns, crack down on illegal gun dealers: Opposes topic 10
Get assault weapons & guns off the street: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Background check system could prevent Virginia Tech massacre: Opposes topic 10
Congress’ failure at Littleton response inspired Senate run: Opposes topic 10
Limit access to weapons; look for early warning signs: Opposes topic 10
License and register all handgun sales: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Gun control protects our children: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Don’t water down sensible gun control legislation: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Lock up guns; store ammo separately: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons: Opposes topic 10
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology: Opposes topic 10
NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence: Strongly Opposes topic 10
NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Strongly Favors topic 11:
Higher taxes on the wealthy
(-5 points on Economic scale) Rescind tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year: Strongly Favors topic 11
Pay down debt & cut taxes within balanced budget: Favors topic 11
GOP tax plan would hurt New York’s students: Favors topic 11
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes: Strongly Favors topic 11
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising the Death Tax exemption to $5M from $1M: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on allowing AMT reduction without budget offset: Favors topic 11
YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates: Favors topic 11
YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction: Favors topic 11
NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years: Strongly Favors topic 11
YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut: Favors topic 11
YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax: Strongly Favors topic 11
Favors topic 12:
Pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens
(+2 points on Social scale) Introduce a path to earn citizenship in the first 100 days: Strongly Favors topic 12
Consider halting certain raids on illegal immigrant families: Favors topic 12
Deporting all illegal immigrants is unrealistic: Strongly Favors topic 12
Illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses puts them at risk: Opposes topic 12
Oppose granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants: Opposes topic 12
More border patrolling on both Mexican AND Canadian borders: Opposes topic 12
Anti-immigrant bill would have criminalized Jesus Christ: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sanctuary cities ok; local police can’t enforce immigration: Favors topic 12
Comprehensive reform to get 12 million out of shadows: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill covering child resident aliens under Medicaid: Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill funding social services for noncitizens: Favors topic 12
Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities": Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on establishing a Guest Worker program: Favors topic 12
YES on building a fence along the Mexican border: Strongly Opposes topic 12
YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program: Neutral topic 12
NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on comprehensive immigration reform: Strongly Favors topic 12
Opposes topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(-3 points on Economic scale) Smart, pro-American trade: NAFTA has hurt workers: Strongly Opposes topic 13
No fast-track authority for this president: Opposes topic 13
Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India: Favors topic 13
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program: Opposes topic 13
Globalization should not substitute for humanization: Opposes topic 13
Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights: Strongly Favors topic 13
Build a rule-based global trading system: Favors topic 13
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on removing common goods from national security export rules: Favors topic 13
YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam: Favors topic 13
NO on extending free trade to Andean nations: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore: Favors topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile: Favors topic 13
NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on free trade agreement with Oman: Strongly Favors topic 13
Opposes topic 14:
Maintain US sovereignty from UN
(-3 points on Economic scale) US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Support UN reform because US benefits: Opposes topic 14
2002 Iraq speech criticized both Saddam and U.N.: Opposes topic 14
Urged President to veto UN condemnation of Israel: Favors topic 14
Engage in world affairs, including human rights: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills: Opposes topic 14
2002: Attacking Iraq "not a good option" but authorized it: Favors topic 14
Voted against Levin Amendment: it gave UN veto over US: Favors topic 14
Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror: Opposes topic 14
YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees: Strongly Opposes topic 14
YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods: Strongly Opposes topic 14
NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad: Strongly Opposes topic 14
No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the military
(0 points on Social scale) There is no safe haven for the terrorists: Favors topic 15
Our troops are stretched; so increase size of military: Favors topic 15
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 15
Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11: Favors topic 15
Improve mental health care benefits for returning veterans: Favors topic 15
YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding: Opposes topic 15
YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months: Opposes topic 15
Strongly Favors topic 16:
More enforcement of the right to vote
(+5 points on Social scale) Voter suppression revives old demons of discrimination: Favors topic 16
Stand for public financing and getting money out of politics: Strongly Favors topic 16
Presidents should reveal donations to their foundations: Strongly Favors topic 16
Move to public election financing, not banning lobbyists: Strongly Favors topic 16
Verified paper ballot for every electronic voting machines: Favors topic 16
Called for ban on all soft money in 2000 campaign: Favors topic 16
Prohibit 'voter caging' which intimidates minority voting: Favors topic 16
YES on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations: Favors topic 16
YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads: Favors topic 16
NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity: Opposes topic 16
NO on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress: Strongly Favors topic 16
Favors topic 17:
Stay out of Iran
(+2 points on Social scale) Smartest strategic choice is peace: Favors topic 17
Extend peace treaties to Palestinians, Syrians & Lebanese: Favors topic 17
Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged: Strongly Favors topic 17
Up to the Iraqis to decide the future they will have: Favors topic 17
Demand Bush to explain to Congress on his plan on Iraq: Favors topic 17
Deauthorize Iraq war, and don’t grant new war authority: Strongly Favors topic 17
Phased redeployment out of Iraq, beginning immediately: Strongly Favors topic 17
Withdraw troops within 60 days after taking office: Strongly Favors topic 17
Voted for Iraq war based on available info; now would not: Favors topic 17
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence: Favors topic 17
No troop surge: no military escalation in Iraq: Strongly Favors topic 17
Require Congress' approval before military action in Iran: Favors topic 17
YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq: Strongly Opposes topic 17
NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007: Strongly Opposes topic 17
YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008: Strongly Favors topic 17
Strongly Favors topic 18:
Prioritize green energy
(-5 points on Economic scale) $100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
Remove energy dependence on countries who would harm us: Strongly Favors topic 18
Stands for clean air and funding the EPA: Favors topic 18
Reduce air pollution to improve children’s health: Favors topic 18
Ratify Kyoto; more mass transit: Strongly Favors topic 18
Supports tradable emissions permits for greenhouse gases: Favors topic 18
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy: Strongly Favors topic 18
Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances: Strongly Favors topic 18
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence: Favors topic 18
Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness: Favors topic 18
Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025: Strongly Favors topic 18
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards: Strongly Favors topic 18
Gas tax holiday for the summer: Opposes topic 18
NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill: Favors topic 18
YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%): Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Favors topic 18
YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning: Favors topic 18
YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies: Strongly Favors topic 18
Opposes topic 19:
Never legalize marijuana
(+2 points on Social scale) Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use: Opposes topic 19
Divert non-violent drug offenders away from prison: Strongly Opposes topic 19
Address drug problem with treatment and special drug courts: Strongly Opposes topic 19
End harsher sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine: Opposes topic 19
Require chemical resellers to certify against meth use: Favors topic 19
Strongly Favors topic 20:
Stimulus better than market-led recovery
(-5 points on Economic scale) Wealthy should go back to paying pre-Bush tax rates: Favors topic 20
Want to restore the tax rates we had in the ‘90s: Favors topic 20
Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks: Strongly Favors topic 20
Minimum wage increases haven’t kept up with Congress’ wages: Strongly Favors topic 20
Co-sponsored bills totaling $502B in spending thru 2005: Strongly Favors topic 20
End Bush tax cuts;take things away from rich for common good: Favors topic 20
Social issues matter; wrong time for tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 20
Use tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure, not for stadium: Strongly Favors topic 20
America can afford to raise the minimum wage: Strongly Favors topic 20
Just Say No to GOP tax plan: Strongly Favors topic 20
YES on increasing tax rate for people earning over $1 million: Strongly Favors topic 20

[peacebird]

91. Now you are just being redundant. I answered this below. Nice try!

[VanillaRhapsody]

92. No you didnt....you think its an online game Hillary herself played.

It is not. You were wrong!

Did you even look at that link to see for yourself? Of course you didn't ....wouldn't want to ruin a false "narrative" now would you? Can't afford a paradigm shift!

[leftofcool]

121. Fantastic list. Thanks for posting this.

[VanillaRhapsody]

125. you are very welcome

I won't suffer fools lightly....

[Scootaloo]

178. It will inevitibly diminish

As I've explained to you at least ten times now, Clinton is "ahead" because she is the only person running. When others enter the race, her numbers will diminish. it's not exactly a zero-sum game during the primaries, of course, but it's inevitable that some of the other contenders will draw away some of Clinton's support into their own camps. And then the campaigns start. Candidates run on their strengths and their opponent's weaknesses. These inevitably have an effect on poll results.

And then there's the general election, where the campaign is zero-sum. Back in 2008, the Republicans were chomping at the bit to run against Clinton. when it became clear she wasn't going to be the nominee, they started dropping out in rapid succession; McCain pretty much became the Republican nominee by default (it surely wasn't through being the most high-quality candidate.) 2016 won't be any different. The Republican's want to run against Clinton. It means they'll get to vent that twenty years of putrid bile they've been saving up for just such an occasion

Clinton is a liability in elections, VR. Rightly or wrongly, she is; there's a reason Obama chose Biden over Clinton as his running mate. She's a great choice for cabinet positions. But put her on a presidential ballot and all you'll get is seven months of the worst bile and hatred you've ever seen followed by a Republican win.

[VanillaRhapsody]

180. Independents would rather FERVERENTLY wish for Hillary's demise.....

and risk a Jeb Bush or a Ted Cruz victory...on folks who are only in single digits....and who have no record of beating ALL Republicans....

Do you guys not play sport AT ALL? When you are down in the 9nth inning or 4th quarter....do you throw in rookies....just to see what happens? Or do you go with your best...with the best records and stats?

[Scootaloo]

182. This isn't the 9th inning of the 4th quarter. It's not even the preseason yet

Maybe instead of flipping your lid and flailing around with your rants, you could pay attention to what people keep telling you. You don't have to take it to heart, but for fuck's sake, at least realize that there are two years ahead of us.

Save some juice for the primaries, man

[VanillaRhapsody]

183. You will think so if Ted or Jeb wins....

[Scootaloo]

184. Or you can stick your fingers in your ears and keep ranting

[Cal33]

74. You are correct. RB is expressing only his/her own opinion -- and it's exactly that, nothing more.

[RBInMaine]

5. No, Warren isn't running and Bernie can't win, and anyone on the real planet knows it.

If Warren ran, great. It would be a great addition to the mix. But she isn't, has said so, and so it is therefore insane for anyone to waste energy on that pipedream. What is it about "I AM NOT RUNNING" that people don't understand?

Bernie is extremely hesitant to even declare because he knows that he may not be able to muster a winning campaign. He has said this very clearly. He's testing the waters but may well not even declare. If he does, he has already said he would change from Indy to Dem because he certainly knows an Indy can not win. If he got in the game, I think he'd add a lot to the debate, but he could never win the nomination. Too far to the left and too unknown. Not gonna happen. He could never win the general election.

I said I would support the eventual NOMINEE. I said it would MOST LIKELY BE Hillary. I never said it would DEFINITELY be Hillary. But yes, I think if she gets in it will most likely be her, and I will strongly support her if that happens. Right now anyone near reality knows this. TeaLeft thinking is as far out of the realms of reality as TeaRight thinking. Being grounded in reality is an important thing.

[merrily]

8. Insulting me and repeating yourself is not going to change my mind. I wrote my thoughts

[peacebird]

61. The same posters are going to keep pushing the same inevitability meme until the primary is over

Unless you really enjoy constantly getting beaten over the head with this meme, Ignore is your friend.
: )

[merrily]

66. When it's my friend, I use it. Maybe you should recommend ignore to the meme machine.

RBI seemed a lot more upset by my reply than I was by his or her OP or reply to me.

[peacebird]

70. : )

[INdemo]

27. Agreed

Republicans have built their strategy against Hillary since 2006 and we thought they were a dying political breed and no one would vote for the Tea Party candidate...Surprise.
Yes Hillary will lose if she is the nominee.

Where does one draw the line for a center left or center or right. Is center left like at 11 o'clock or 10 o'clock or where does one differentiate?
The Candidate that best represent the working class of and the college students will win. We know where the interests of the Republicans are. With Hillary she has the blessings of the Wall Street class and that is not what we want in a candidate

[merrily]

58. There is at least one other demographic Hillary might lose as well.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025792533#post199

[RBInMaine]

93. Warren isn't running. It is insane to think she is and hang non-existent hopes on it.

[Legalequilibrium78]

90. Yet you think that your heroes Elizabeth Warren

Or the socialist Bernie Sanders can win the Presidency? That is some crazy shit you are smoking for you or any of your ilk to believe that. You guys simply don't have a record of winning elections, what you and the rest of your cohorts have is a record of failures in winning elections. That is the reason why the much maligned and criticized group like the D.L.C. came to existence to reverse the beat down that the Democratic party experienced 2 preceding general elections; 1980, 1984, 1988. Each of those losses where freaking lopsided that things has to change and something compelling was needed to be done.

The rise and the election of Bill Clinton proved that this country is not a fucking super left country as some of the super left here thinks and pontificate. If being Liberal was a winning formula to win elections then no stupid politicians - whose aim and existence is to win elections to govern - would run away from such a label, or that you would see every single piece of govt. programs enacted, and the current one's strengthened. But that is not reality, not the reality you and your supporters simply refuse to accept the cold hard truth is that neither one of your candidates can win National elections. So find your candidate that can beat Hillary Clinton. She will be the President of this country whether you like it or not.

[RBInMaine]

94. The ultra left is as tone deaf to reality as the ultra right. This crowd backed Kucinich.

You and I would probably both agree that Warren and Sanders are passionate and right on many or most of the issues. Truth is, they can't win. They'd get slaughtered. They are great for ginning up the base and framing a populist message strong with the base, but we need someone who can win a national election. Obama did it because he was able to put together the right coalitions in big numbers. A Sanders or even Warren couldn't do it nationally. I will support whomever is the nominee, but I think Hillary, so far, has the best chance to be able to do it. And I think she'd be a great president.

[merrily]

110. He or she posted to me, not a crowd. As to me, your bit about Kucinich is a lie, as

clearly stated in my first reply on this thread.

Also, your firm belief in something does not make it "the truth." We had a lot of "truth" about Hillary in 2007 that turned out to be dead wrong. Ergo, it was not truth, but the opinion of people who equate their opinion with "the truth." It is the opinion of a lot of posters on this thread alone that Hillary will lose if she is the nominee. And not only DUers, either. Pundits are expressing doubt as wel.

If you want to believe that your opinion is superior to that of everyone who does not agree with you, that's up to you. But it's really, realy good to at least know the difference between your opinion and "the truth."

[noiretextatique]

189. you seem to have a problem with the primary process

do you think we should just eliminate it and crown clinton? i am sure most people here will vote for the democratic nominee, and some people don't want it to be clinton. myself, included, because i do not believe she will win.

[davidpdx]

191. Ultraleft, Tealeft, what other names do you have for those on the left?

What you are doing is an excellent plan for dividing Democrats and I applaud your effort. Your candidate hasn't even announced nor won and you are showing the level of obnoxiousness that I thought could only be seen in Republicans. Bravo!

[merrily]

100. Link a post of mine saying Warren and/or Sanders is my hero. Try to get yourself some civility, too

[LawDeeDah]

152. Yep.

There will be a field to choose from in the primaries, as there always has. If Warren and Sanders are out this does not mean no one else will be in - it's just a Clinton tactic, one that is being used way too early in the game and people are getting sick of it already. Her, *ahem, book tour (sure!) was the campaign starter, feeler and it was way too soon. And I will say again, people are getting sick of hearing about inevitable Hillary and her dissing of the President and all the tone deaf things she says.

[airplaneman]

197. I worry about Hillary not winning also.

A lot of people are prejudice out there and wont vote for a woman.
We will have to take this step by step. I will vote democrat no matter who it is.
-Airplane

[merrily]

230. I don't think that is it.

I think more people will vote FOR her because she is a woman than will vote against her because she is a woman. And, because she is a woman, she will get a lot of donations, too, and not just from EMILY's list. No, I think most of Hillary's problems with voters, if she runs, will be because she is Hillary, not because she is female.

Speaking for myself, and probably a lot of other females, I am most eager for a woman President However, and again, speaking only for myself, I vote my principles. I do not simply vote my ovaries.

[vadermike]

9. hillary

Hillary can indeed win the general, i so support her, and she is not perfect.. others should definitely run in the primary such as Bernie etc.. but i think the only way Hillary can lose if she does it to herself.. It will be hard for the rethugs to beat her.. she is looked at even by some Repubs as a moderate.... I think she has great credentials and is to the right on some stuff .. but i don't think she is GWB type or any BS like that as some would have you believe.. I think she can win the primary and the general... will the general be tough? Yes, but the Clinton's know how to fight .. we need a fighter.. and I love Pres O. But he needs to fight more.. now he is but its the end of his term.. and i think he should have been a little more agressive at the beginning with these douches... anyways.. I like Pres O and Hillary both.. i would have voted for her last time if she had made it to the general.. (i caucused for Pres O) We need to fight for 16 like there is no tommorow (cause there wont be literally if the Dems fold in 16) There will not be a Dem party (more or less) if we lose in 16... THe Rethugs will be one party state and i fear everything will be gerrymandered including the Senate and Presidency after that point with a most likely 7 -2 Conservative court....and thats the reality if we lose in 16.... whoever the nominee is so there you are, we need to fight

[peacebird]

60. If HRC is the nominee then we will get a continuation of the militaristic, procorporate regime

That is not working out for young people, or for most of the rest of us.
She would completely energize the right, and they would come out in force just to defeat her. They despise all things Clinton.
She would not energize progressive lefties like me. I will not vote for her, nor work for her. I will work hard to get other folks in the primary and to support them actively in the hopes that she shoots herself in the foot again like she did in her book tour and loses the nomination.
If we run HRC & she wins our nomination then we as a country lose. It is time for some fresh blood, and fresh ideas - neither of which is Hillary.

[Thinkingabout]

122. Are you wanting a TP Ted Cruz? How much do you think he would push your cause?

HRC is for middle class people, is for increasing minimum wages and so many other issues which Democrats.

[kysrsoze]

196. FFS... is there not a primary nominating process?

You know...the one Clinton LOST 6 years ago, to someone who ended up winning the general election. What is with all this inevitability bullshit? You're all trying to convince people fully intent on voting that your candidate of choice supercedes the need for primaries. It's not going to happen and she doesn't have to convince DUers. She needs to convince the general public she is better than any challenger and convince them to actually vote for her. It's a huge leap of logic to assume many of us want Cruz or another TP freak to win the White House, assuming that person even has a snowball's chance in hell of even winning the Republican nomination.

I'm not going to get into comparing candidates. I'm only going to say the primary process needs to run its course. If Hillary Clinton is indeed as wonderful and infallible as The Inevitables say, she'll have no problem trouncing everyone in the primaries. We are two years from the next election and anyone with any kind of sense will not deny the primary process exists and serves an important purpose.

If Clinton comes out the winner of the Democratic primary process, I will vote for her. But many of us here at DU are not naive or shallow enough to want to forego this process and assume things will turn out exactly as we planned. And if nothing else, we want Bernie Sanders and others to make her answer for her positions which we dislike or question, and perhaps pull her to the left from economic and foreign policy perspectives.

[Thinkingabout]

212. Actually I was responding to peacebird, I did not mention the primary process.

This is not the first time I have seen a post "I will not vote for HRC" and it indicates to me some would rather not vote in the election. A non vote helps the GOP as we have seen in the 2014 election, they prefer low voter turnout. My point is with HRC's record of standing for the middle class, is for increasing minimum wages, does not agree with wage disparity, has fought for Civil Rights for many years.

I am not afraid of the primary process, I don't like this non voter stand if one's candidate is not the winner of the primary.

[lamp_shade]

10. Agree. To me that has always been obvious. n/t

[shenmue]

11. Reality

is not where some people want to be.

[GeorgeGist]

12. Boo

[IdiocracyTheNewNorm]

13. Stating that Warren or Sanders cannot win is a defeatist attitude settling for Hillary is just that

settling.

People no longer are willing to settle.

[freedom fighter jh]

20. +1 nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

32. have you seen their polling?

Have you seen Hillary's?

[IdiocracyTheNewNorm]

36. Don’t believe the hype!

[VanillaRhapsody]

37. that is NOT hype....they don't pull those numbers out their asses!

64%!

[IdiocracyTheNewNorm]

46. OK You Win! You are now superior and I bow to the greatness of the highly

scientific and 100% accurate and reliable poll numbers provided.

[VanillaRhapsody]

48. Good come down to the ground where reality lives!

Ideologues....pffffffttttt!

[IdiocracyTheNewNorm]

54. Your reality is a path to doom, enjoy, happy trails!

[VanillaRhapsody]

57. My path is not to be an idealist and lose ALL THREE branches in the next election....

I have NO intention of suffering through that! I pull for the winner....the one with proven stats to beat ANY Republican comer even Jeb Bush.

Poll EW and Bernie against Jeb Bush....You willing to risk that?

[IdiocracyTheNewNorm]

115. From where I am sitting if it were between Hillary and Bush we will be looking at

GOP Having WH, Senate and House

More people HATE* Hillary in the real world then like her the RWNJ's will come out in droves to vote against her and hate is the best motivator for the right we see it time and time again.

Your reality and mileage may very

*Irrational hate not for any valid reason oh like say her economic policies

[VanillaRhapsody]

161. From where you are sitting that is utter horseshit....

more people do NOT hate hillary...she has a 64% approval rating and she polls ahead of EVERY Republican. Now if you are trying to say that both parties (including Hillary) are the same...you can peddle that shit elsewhere. THAT is what depresses the vote!

[IdiocracyTheNewNorm]

167. See http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=386992

As far as Horseshit goes well that is a matter of opinion.

[VanillaRhapsody]

168. I have seen it.....

promoting the election of DEMOCRATS...Hillary is one Bernie is not!

[IdiocracyTheNewNorm]

169. I never said anything about Bernie why do you try to put words in my mouth?

[Odin2005]

154. Polls are 100% meaningless this far out from the election.

Get back to me a year from now.

[peacebird]

62. Bingo. Young voters feel hoodwinked by Obama, right or wrong, and will not mobilize for the same

old same old

[RBInMaine]

98. Warren isn't running, so that point is moot. Sanders can't win nationally, and even he knows it.

Sanders, first, has said he would only run by becoming a Democrat. He also knows it would be VERY difficult to win. He has said so.

Why hasn't he already announced? Because he is testing the waters. He may well declare, but he knows it will be to affect the platform and make the argument, not because he knows he can definitely win. He is a confirmed socialist, and he would get smashed in a national election. I really like him and agree with much of what he says, but he can not win nationally. And I don't think Warren could win either. Hillary is MUCH more electable, and that is what we need.

[IdiocracyTheNewNorm]

104. It could be Carrot Top and Bozo the Clown Running

Everyone knows nobody is declared yet!

To many are missing the big picture

[LiberalElite]

137. But but

there's no where else for the "far left" to go!

[kysrsoze]

198. Nicely said. Thank you. I'm tired of settling for the establishment candidates

And so are others. If we all had sense, we'd welcome someone like Howard Dean. And someone like that will most likely come along.

[ellennelle]

14. ok; reality:

one: warren's responses have gotten less emphatic over time, not more so. i find the dem promotion to leadership interesting; either the powers that be want to cage her from running, or encourage her; hard to say, but i'd bet on the latter.

two, they said obama couldn't win, either.

three, hillary? so here's the reality about that. there is so much baggage with her, imagined and real, where to begin. the thing is, rove is salivating to trot out all their trash on her; it would never end!

and there is some real trash. i just finished reading an article about her in harper's, and it was not fan mail, but it echoed a lot of my thoughts, too. she's deeply embedded in the DLC and middle way approach, closely tied to wall street, and she is a hawk. in fact, her history is deeply conservative, truly!

i have never wanted her to run for numbers of reason, but one of them is, we have to stop with this dynasty business in america's democracy. it's yet another way we show what an aristocracy we are, in reality.

see, the way i read your argument is this; here, almost 2 years out, we have a frontrunner with loaded name recognition, so we should just settle for that and not fight for the BEST candidates for the country. in other words, we should just settle.

the LAST thing we need to do in 16 is settle!!

the last thing we need is a 'strong' candidate on paper no one can get excited about.

[VanillaRhapsody]

50. so you want to draw to an inside straight?

with Republicans owning 2 of the 3 branches now????

This is your plan?

[peacebird]

65. Not at all. Progressive IDEAS won in 14, and can win the presidency in 16 if we run a progressive

campaign highlighting progressive ideas

[VanillaRhapsody]

67. Ideas don't run for president...Candidates do.

and Hillary IS a Progressive whether YOU like it or not.

[peacebird]

82. Where is the data behind the pretty picture?

She supported DOMA. She says gay marriage is a states issue, it clearly isn't. It is a matter of Equal Rights for all.
She is a war hawk, she is wall streets best friend, very corporatist and a DLCer.

How is it you define her as progressive?

[VanillaRhapsody]

83. Oh you want data? Here you go...

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right
(+5 points on Social scale) Lift ban on stem cell research to cure devastating diseases: Favors topic 1
Respect Roe v. Wade, but make adoptions easier too: Favors topic 1
Alternatives to pro-choice like forced pregnancy in Romania: Strongly Favors topic 1
Must safeguard constitutional rights, including choice: Favors topic 1
Remain vigilant on a woman’s right to chose: Favors topic 1
Keep abortion safe, legal and rare: Favors topic 1
Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion: Favors topic 1
Supports parental notice & family planning: Opposes topic 1
No abortion for sex selection in China: Opposes topic 1
Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus: Favors topic 1
Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women: Favors topic 1
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Expand embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill for emergency contraception for rape victims: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime: Favors topic 1
YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives: Favors topic 1
NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1
Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale) Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
We’ve come a long way on race, but we have a long way to go: Strongly Favors topic 2
Apologize for slavery, but concentrate on civil rights now: Favors topic 2
Human rights are women’s rights: Neutral on topic 2
Women’s rights are human rights: Favors topic 2
OpEd: "18 million cracks" meant "lingering sexism": Strongly Favors topic 2
Equal pay is not yet equal: Strongly Favors topic 2
1988: Instituted gender diversity Report Card within ABA: Strongly Opposes topic 2
Argued with Bill Clinton about diluting affirmative action: Strongly Favors topic 2
Shift from group preferences to economic empowerment of all: Neutral on topic 2
Sponsored bill maintaining role of women in armed forces: Favors topic 2
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Reinforce anti-discrimination and equal-pay requirements: Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination: Strongly Favors topic 2
Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale) Increase America’s commitment against Global AIDS: Favors topic 3
DOMA discrimination holds us back from a more perfect union: Strongly Favors topic 3
I support gay marriage personally and as law: Strongly Favors topic 3
Let states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds: Favors topic 3
2004:defended traditional marriage; 2006:voted for same-sex: Strongly Favors topic 3
Federal Marriage Amendment would be terrible step backwards: Favors topic 3
Gays deserve domestic partnership benefits: Strongly Favors topic 3
Military service based on conduct, not sexual orientation: Favors topic 3
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees: Strongly Favors topic 3
YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3
No opinion on topic 4:
Keep God in the public sphere
(0 points on Social scale) Partner with faith based community in empowerment zones: Strongly Favors topic 4
Tap into churches to avoid more Louima & Diallo cases: Favors topic 4
Community involvement helps, but only in short term: Favors topic 4
Link payments to good parenting behavior: Opposes topic 4
Allow student prayer, but no religious instruction: Opposes topic 4
Character education: teach empathy & self-discipline: Favors topic 4
Change what kids see in the media: Favors topic 4
Co-sponsored bill to criminalize flag-burning: Favors topic 4
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 4
Rated 100% by the AU, indicating support of church-state separation: Strongly Opposes topic 4
NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration: Opposes topic 4
Strongly Favors topic 5:
Expand ObamaCare
(-5 points on Economic scale) Outcry if AIDS were leading disease of young whites: Favors topic 5
Lower costs and improve quality and cover everybody: Strongly Favors topic 5
Supply more medical needs of families, & insure all children: Strongly Favors topic 5
Medicare should be strengthened today: Favors topic 5
Smaller steps to progress on health care: Favors topic 5
Guaranteed benefits & focus on prevention: Neutral on topic 5
2006: If I can't do universal coverage, why run?: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care will not work if it is voluntary: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care coverage by the end of my second term: Strongly Favors topic 5
We need a uniquely American solution to health care: Favors topic 5
Health care initiatives are her first priority in Senate: Strongly Favors topic 5
Establish "report cards" on HMO quality of care: Favors topic 5
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage: Favors topic 5
Let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations: Opposes topic 5
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record: Strongly Favors topic 5
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn: Strongly Favors topic 5
NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium: Favors topic 5
NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit: Favors topic 5
NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit: Opposes topic 5
YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics: Favors topic 5
YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug: Strongly Favors topic 5
YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D: Favors topic 5
NO on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000: Opposes topic 5
YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D: Favors topic 5
YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare: Favors topic 5
Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale) 1997: Hillary warned against privatizing Social Security: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Soc.Sec. one of greatest inventions in American democracy: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Social Security protects families, not just retirees: Strongly Opposes topic 6
All should join the debate now to preserve future solvency: Opposes topic 6
Create Retirement Savings Accounts: Favors topic 6
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 6
NO on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security: Opposes topic 6
Strongly Opposes topic 7:
Vouchers for school choice
(-5 points on Economic scale) OpEd: Common Core recycled from Clintons in 1980s and 1990s: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fully fund special education & 21st century classrooms: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice; but not private nor parochial: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers drain money from public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fight with Gore for public schools; no voucher “gimmicks”: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Charter schools provide choice within public system: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers siphon off much-needed resources: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Parents can choose, but support public schools: Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice and charter schools: Favors topic 7
Solemn vow never to abandon our public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Offer every parent Charter Schools and public school choice: Opposes topic 7
Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes: Strongly Opposes topic 7
YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies: Opposes topic 7
Strongly Opposes topic 8:
No 'rights' to clean air and water
(+5 points on Social scale) $5B for green-collar jobs in economic stimulus package: Opposes topic 8
Voted against and consistently opposed to Yucca Mountain: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Scored 100% on Humane Society Scorecard on animal protection: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Remove PCBs from Hudson River by dredging 200 miles: Opposes topic 8
Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes: Strongly Opposes topic 8
EPA must do better on mercury clean-up: Opposes topic 8
Grants for beach water pollution under Clean Water Act: Opposes topic 8
Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Opposes topic 9:
Stricter punishment reduces crime
(+2 points on Social scale) Longtime advocate of death penalty, with restrictions: Strongly Favors topic 9
Address the unacceptable increase in incarceration: Opposes topic 9
Mandatory sentences have been too widely used: Strongly Opposes topic 9
Give kids after-school activities to prevent gangs: Opposes topic 9
Spend more time with kids to prevent violence: Opposes topic 9
Supports citizen patrols & 3-Strikes-You’re-Out: Favors topic 9
Supports “Three Strikes” and more prison: Strongly Favors topic 9
End hate crimes and other intolerance: Favors topic 9
Require DNA testing for all federal executions: Opposes topic 9
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program: Opposes topic 9
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance: Strongly Opposes topic 9
YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program: Opposes topic 9
Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale) Rein in idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Against illegal guns, crack down on illegal gun dealers: Opposes topic 10
Get assault weapons & guns off the street: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Background check system could prevent Virginia Tech massacre: Opposes topic 10
Congress’ failure at Littleton response inspired Senate run: Opposes topic 10
Limit access to weapons; look for early warning signs: Opposes topic 10
License and register all handgun sales: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Gun control protects our children: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Don’t water down sensible gun control legislation: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Lock up guns; store ammo separately: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons: Opposes topic 10
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology: Opposes topic 10
NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence: Strongly Opposes topic 10
NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Strongly Favors topic 11:
Higher taxes on the wealthy
(-5 points on Economic scale) Rescind tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year: Strongly Favors topic 11
Pay down debt & cut taxes within balanced budget: Favors topic 11
GOP tax plan would hurt New York’s students: Favors topic 11
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes: Strongly Favors topic 11
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising the Death Tax exemption to $5M from $1M: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on allowing AMT reduction without budget offset: Favors topic 11
YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates: Favors topic 11
YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction: Favors topic 11
NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years: Strongly Favors topic 11
YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut: Favors topic 11
YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax: Strongly Favors topic 11
Favors topic 12:
Pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens
(+2 points on Social scale) Introduce a path to earn citizenship in the first 100 days: Strongly Favors topic 12
Consider halting certain raids on illegal immigrant families: Favors topic 12
Deporting all illegal immigrants is unrealistic: Strongly Favors topic 12
Illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses puts them at risk: Opposes topic 12
Oppose granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants: Opposes topic 12
More border patrolling on both Mexican AND Canadian borders: Opposes topic 12
Anti-immigrant bill would have criminalized Jesus Christ: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sanctuary cities ok; local police can’t enforce immigration: Favors topic 12
Comprehensive reform to get 12 million out of shadows: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill covering child resident aliens under Medicaid: Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill funding social services for noncitizens: Favors topic 12
Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities": Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on establishing a Guest Worker program: Favors topic 12
YES on building a fence along the Mexican border: Strongly Opposes topic 12
YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program: Neutral topic 12
NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on comprehensive immigration reform: Strongly Favors topic 12
Opposes topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(-3 points on Economic scale) Smart, pro-American trade: NAFTA has hurt workers: Strongly Opposes topic 13
No fast-track authority for this president: Opposes topic 13
Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India: Favors topic 13
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program: Opposes topic 13
Globalization should not substitute for humanization: Opposes topic 13
Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights: Strongly Favors topic 13
Build a rule-based global trading system: Favors topic 13
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on removing common goods from national security export rules: Favors topic 13
YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam: Favors topic 13
NO on extending free trade to Andean nations: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore: Favors topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile: Favors topic 13
NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on free trade agreement with Oman: Strongly Favors topic 13
Opposes topic 14:
Maintain US sovereignty from UN
(-3 points on Economic scale) US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Support UN reform because US benefits: Opposes topic 14
2002 Iraq speech criticized both Saddam and U.N.: Opposes topic 14
Urged President to veto UN condemnation of Israel: Favors topic 14
Engage in world affairs, including human rights: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills: Opposes topic 14
2002: Attacking Iraq "not a good option" but authorized it: Favors topic 14
Voted against Levin Amendment: it gave UN veto over US: Favors topic 14
Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror: Opposes topic 14
YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees: Strongly Opposes topic 14
YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods: Strongly Opposes topic 14
NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad: Strongly Opposes topic 14
No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the military
(0 points on Social scale) There is no safe haven for the terrorists: Favors topic 15
Our troops are stretched; so increase size of military: Favors topic 15
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 15
Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11: Favors topic 15
Improve mental health care benefits for returning veterans: Favors topic 15
YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding: Opposes topic 15
YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months: Opposes topic 15
Strongly Favors topic 16:
More enforcement of the right to vote
(+5 points on Social scale) Voter suppression revives old demons of discrimination: Favors topic 16
Stand for public financing and getting money out of politics: Strongly Favors topic 16
Presidents should reveal donations to their foundations: Strongly Favors topic 16
Move to public election financing, not banning lobbyists: Strongly Favors topic 16
Verified paper ballot for every electronic voting machines: Favors topic 16
Called for ban on all soft money in 2000 campaign: Favors topic 16
Prohibit 'voter caging' which intimidates minority voting: Favors topic 16
YES on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations: Favors topic 16
YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads: Favors topic 16
NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity: Opposes topic 16
NO on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress: Strongly Favors topic 16
Favors topic 17:
Stay out of Iran
(+2 points on Social scale) Smartest strategic choice is peace: Favors topic 17
Extend peace treaties to Palestinians, Syrians & Lebanese: Favors topic 17
Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged: Strongly Favors topic 17
Up to the Iraqis to decide the future they will have: Favors topic 17
Demand Bush to explain to Congress on his plan on Iraq: Favors topic 17
Deauthorize Iraq war, and don’t grant new war authority: Strongly Favors topic 17
Phased redeployment out of Iraq, beginning immediately: Strongly Favors topic 17
Withdraw troops within 60 days after taking office: Strongly Favors topic 17
Voted for Iraq war based on available info; now would not: Favors topic 17
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence: Favors topic 17
No troop surge: no military escalation in Iraq: Strongly Favors topic 17
Require Congress' approval before military action in Iran: Favors topic 17
YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq: Strongly Opposes topic 17
NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007: Strongly Opposes topic 17
YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008: Strongly Favors topic 17
Strongly Favors topic 18:
Prioritize green energy
(-5 points on Economic scale) $100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
Remove energy dependence on countries who would harm us: Strongly Favors topic 18
Stands for clean air and funding the EPA: Favors topic 18
Reduce air pollution to improve children’s health: Favors topic 18
Ratify Kyoto; more mass transit: Strongly Favors topic 18
Supports tradable emissions permits for greenhouse gases: Favors topic 18
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy: Strongly Favors topic 18
Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances: Strongly Favors topic 18
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence: Favors topic 18
Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness: Favors topic 18
Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025: Strongly Favors topic 18
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards: Strongly Favors topic 18
Gas tax holiday for the summer: Opposes topic 18
NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill: Favors topic 18
YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%): Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Favors topic 18
YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning: Favors topic 18
YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies: Strongly Favors topic 18
Opposes topic 19:
Never legalize marijuana
(+2 points on Social scale) Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use: Opposes topic 19
Divert non-violent drug offenders away from prison: Strongly Opposes topic 19
Address drug problem with treatment and special drug courts: Strongly Opposes topic 19
End harsher sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine: Opposes topic 19
Require chemical resellers to certify against meth use: Favors topic 19
Strongly Favors topic 20:
Stimulus better than market-led recovery
(-5 points on Economic scale) Wealthy should go back to paying pre-Bush tax rates: Favors topic 20
Want to restore the tax rates we had in the ‘90s: Favors topic 20
Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks: Strongly Favors topic 20
Minimum wage increases haven’t kept up with Congress’ wages: Strongly Favors topic 20
Co-sponsored bills totaling $502B in spending thru 2005: Strongly Favors topic 20
End Bush tax cuts;take things away from rich for common good: Favors topic 20
Social issues matter; wrong time for tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 20
Use tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure, not for stadium: Strongly Favors topic 20
America can afford to raise the minimum wage: Strongly Favors topic 20
Just Say No to GOP tax plan: Strongly Favors topic 20
YES on increasing tax rate for people earning over $1 million: Strongly Favors topic 20

[peacebird]

88. My my my. She can answer correctly on an online game. I meant her actions/votes not her weasle words

[VanillaRhapsody]

89. Uh no not just words....those were votes and speeches she has made....you know voting and speaking

are actions right? Right???

Hundreds of her votes right here..

http://ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm



And THAT is how they calculated! It was not an online game Hillary played....cherry picking is what Idealists do....realists look at the big picture.

[LawDeeDah]

158. Likes Puppies

Bathes daily
Wishes good stuff for everyone, especially herself and fam
Favors getting photo ops using 'women and children' as backdrops
Strongly Favors believing liar Bush Sr and Jr when it comes to war
Says YES to confabulations
Really believes in that 'dead broke' thing
Strongly Favors blue to green
If President she could totally obliterate Iran (like, totally, man)
Wants to be richer like her wealthier friends
Thinks Obama is the one Doing Stupid Stuff

anyway, long, long list, probably longer than yours.

[VanillaRhapsody]

160. Uh you need to go look at the site....you obviously do not know what you are talking about.

its all there in black and white...those are based on her votes and speeches....

when YOU have a candidate that can poll winning against ALL Republicans. Let us Democrats know mkay!

[Enthusiast]

15. Completely unrecommended. Far left? What far left? There is no far left.

The policies espoused by Elizabeth and Bernie are dead nuts centrist and right where the American people are when polled on the issues.

Do not listen to this misleading OP.

[VanillaRhapsody]

33. No Bernie is the furthest Left of the group

EW is just a hairs breadth left of Hillary Clinton.

[Alittleliberal]

49. Yes and the furthest left

is still barely left of center.

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. Not in America....THAT is called reality!

[Enthusiast]

170. Wrong! Check the polls on the issues. Continually repeating it doesn't make it reality.

[VanillaRhapsody]

172. Issues are not on the Primary Ballot....

Nor have I ever seen "Issues" name on a Presidential ballot either...

the recent election shows you WHY issues is not the answer.

[Enthusiast]

206. The recent election perfectly illustrates why issues are the answer.

This has been pointed out to you time and again but you refuse to listen. I am done with this.

[Enthusiast]

171. +1

[Reformed Bully]

16. 2016 Obama - Biden

Last edited Sun Nov 16, 2014, 01:52 AM - Edit history (1)

Michelle & Jill

[Hari Seldon]

17. No one is running until a formal announcement

Elizabeth Warren has NEVER said that she would not make a formal announcement.

If she has not made a formal announcement by then end of June, I would agree with the premise of your OP.

Until then, No one is running until someone is.

[DFW]

18. We need a new DNC chair.

Preferably BEFORE the first candidate announces they are going for the nomination.

Granted, Warren isn't running and Bernie won't be more than a Dennis Cucinich in the primaries, albeit with a heavy dose of needed gravitas.

Without a message, we have no chance.

At the 2000 convention, Bill Clinton gave his farewell address saying that the Republicans had predicted fiscal disaster when a Democrat was elected president in 1992. His comment: "Time has not been kind to their predictions."

The Republicans have done EVERYTHING in their power to make Obama's presidency a disaster. Whatever else it has been, it has NOT been a disaster. Why it slipped our party's collective mind to shout this from the highest mountains and rooftops during the last campaign is beyond me. We need Howard to come back, or else someone like him. He was the last DNC chair who had the instincts necessary to get the message out. If we don't win in 2016, we lose the farm. Non-zillionaires who are not robotic conformists will not find America such a great country to live in any more.

If it's Hillary, so be it, although she underwhelmed in 2008 by a serious margin. She's sharp enough to have walked away with it, so she's obviously capable of blowing a sure thing--not exactly confidence-inspiring. If it's O'Malley, so be it. But I can't imagine that's all we have to offer. In 1992, a young Bill Clinton stepped out of nowhere and energized the party and the nation. Are we to believe there is NOT ONE CANDIDATE out there that can step up and do it again?

[GoneFishin]

19. I will only vote for a candidate that represents my interests. It's not HC. Tough S^%$.

If the Democrats want my vote they'll need to earn. It's my vote. Don't tell me what to do with it, or lecture me on what is "inevitable".

That fait accompli manipulation tactic doesn't work on me. And hopefully many others are too smart to be swindled out of their vote by that argument also.

[leftofcool]

25. Maybe Ralph Nader will run and you will have a 3rd party vote

No need to be swindled out of your vote. Just write in your favorite. Maybe millions of Dems will just write in their favorite fictional character if Hillary runs then we can say hello to President Cruz.

[truebluegreen]

29. Pick scorpions or we'll get anthrax! nt

[merrily]

75. Hillary and Cruz are not the only two possibilities in the universe.

Supposedly, we are in the pre-primary period. If this is not the time to advocate for candidates we want, when would that be, exactly?

[HappyMe]

232. Actually, Jill Stein is running for the Green party.

lol! Clinton and Cruz aren't the only people that may announce their candidacy. At this point, there are no nominees.

[VanillaRhapsody]

34. Hello Independent Voter!

If you cannot commit to vote for whom your fellow Democrats ELECT in a Primary......you just became Independent.

[VanillaRhapsody]

59. No you can vote for OUR choice....or not.....but you risk taking some blame for

President Jeb Bush

[RBInMaine]

101. Protest votes are wasted votes. Good luck with wasting your vote on some Nader-like loser.

[ColesCountyDem]

21. Reality is the following:

1.) No one has announced they're running for the nomination-- no one.

2.) No one has a crystal ball that enables them to see into the political future-- no one.

3.) While virtually everyone at DU will support the party's nominee, a great many of us are sick of having Hillary shoved down our throats.

[VanillaRhapsody]

35. but we DO have polling numbers.....

I am SURE you want to discount THAT information!

[ColesCountyDem]

41. Polling numbers mean squat, a year out.

So yes, I do, in fact, want to discount that information.

[VanillaRhapsody]

44. NO they are the FACTS we have at the moment.....

reality remember....RIGHT NOW!

64% is going to be really hard to overcome....good luck Idealist!

[ColesCountyDem]

47. They may be 'facts', but once again, they MEAN diddly squat.

That's reality.

[VanillaRhapsody]

52. Its the reality we have today.....YOU are into dreaming....and Idealist! That is what that means...

the facts on the ground!

come to the realization that YOU are in a minority in this country and especially among voters.

[ColesCountyDem]

56. I'm not dealing with reality, eh?

Ask presidential nominees Muskie, Humphrey, Udall, Brown, Wallace, Jackson, et al, what polling numbers mean, a year out from the caucuses and primaries.

[VanillaRhapsody]

96. No you are not....

Progressive Policies is not a name on any ballot I have ever seen.

how about the reality of 64%....poll numbers no one has EVER seen before.

[ColesCountyDem]

105. I beg to differ.

As much as anything, her numbers reflect name recognition. This is unsurprising, considering that she's been in the national spotlight for 22 years. She also get additional points for admiration-- hell, even I admire her! That said, once again, the numbers mean s-q-u-a-t. Ask any former Deaniac, myself included, and we'll explain the logical fallacy to you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

106. begging gets you no where....the facts ARE she IS Progressive.....

Let me know when you Ideologues come up with a candidate that polls higher than ANY Republican comer including Jeb Bush. And those are the polling numbers that DO have meaning


Until you can do that.....you are NOT facing reality.

[ColesCountyDem]

116. Who appointed you as the supreme judge of what is or is not reality?

I must've missed that election. The fact that people like you continue to antagonize anyone and everyone who is not orgasmic at the mere thought of HRC being our 2016 nominee is one of her biggest problems. You might consider doing HRC a favor, and tone it down until she has a majority of the 2016 delegates.

Just a suggestion.

[VanillaRhapsody]

126. no one but facts bear it out...

[ColesCountyDem]

149. No, they don't...

[VanillaRhapsody]

176. Yes they do....

[ColesCountyDem]

204. No, they don't...

[VanillaRhapsody]

175. the last election....

[ColesCountyDem]

203. Wrong again.

Nice try, though.

[aspirant]

174. What facts

Disagree. Who says polls are facts? They are indicators based on a thousand or so people. If they are facts, how did Grimes lose by 15% when the polls said the race was too close to call?

[ladjf]

38. Good, succinct post. Thanks. nt

[ColesCountyDem]

43. Thank you, and you're welcome. n/t

[merrily]

81. +1

Before the 2012 election, my jaw dropped when Mark Shields threw Obama under the bus for Hillary.

When someone mentioned Hillary's age as a possible negative, Shield nodded his head knowingly and said, "After Obama, people might welcome someone experienced." We were still over FOUR years out from any election in which Hillary might run. And a Democratic pundit said this on TV.

[Robbins]

22. Let's talk reality

Yeah Hillary would likely win as nominee but then what

She will be a centrist loved by wall street in agreement with neocons on endless war.

The clintons are not liberals.People need to accept they are centrists.They are to right of most who post here.

Stop listening to MSM and those cherrypicking her voting record In Senate

Bill Clinton's triangulation with republicans Is not something any liberal should want back In white house.Hillary will be all about pleasing wall street and neocons.There won't be any place for liberals.

Bill Clinton sold out single mothers of al races to Republicans.He allowed many problems we now face with supporting deregulation.

She was suspose to win In 2008 too.

Liberals shouldn't give up without a fight.

[Android3.14]

23. A simple look shows If she runs, she will lose

Republicans hate her. So just a few Rs will vote for her.
A significant portion of Democrats despise her and will just stay home because, once again, the Democratic Party mantra will be "Hey, at least we aren't Republicans", though with Hillary it's hard to tell if she really isn't a Republican. Still, we can expect most Democrats to vote for her.
After the drubbing she will endure from negative campaigning, she will receive less than half the Independent vote.
There are not enough D votes to overcome the R-votes and the I-votes.
She.
Will.
Lose.

[leftofcool]

26. The only Dems that will stay home if Hillary runs are on DU.

[merrily]

87. Keep telling yourself that.

[Android3.14]

141. Thoughtless comment from you

The past election reveals the fallacy of your snark.
If Hillary runs, everyone loses.

[watoos]

24. I'm really confused

The reich wing talking points are that Bernie can't win because "the country is farther to the center." I politely disagree. If Bernie runs, he will win. When saying that Bernie can not win because he is too far to the left, one should at least have a couple of examples of his policies to prove said point. What policies that Bernie stands for are policies that Democrats and Independents would not support? Until some of those "far left" policies are listed I'm sticking with Bernie will win. Saying that Bernie can't win is a defeatist reich wing talking point. If he can't win it will reveal itself in the primaries.

[VanillaRhapsody]

40. You need to stop thinking YOU are part of the majority of Americans....this thread is about reality

Most Americans do not think like you...or even DU.

[Alittleliberal]

53. With all due respect

Most Americans do share the beliefs of the so called "far left" they are just to stupid to realize it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

55. No they do not.....that is called reality....they wont vote for it....

if this last election tells you anything it should be that....

[Alittleliberal]

64. The last election told us nothing but

most of the country has lost faith in the system. It says nothing about the political make up of the country. All it proves is that those on the right will continue to beat their heads against the wall and those on the left have given up. THe country is overwhelmingly left in policy. Gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement and a biased media force us to see a distorted view of the real country. I can't believe I have to explain this to a democrat...

[VanillaRhapsody]

103. No the last election tells us that though people support Liberal or Progressive values...

they don't vote for them at the ballot box...

THAT is reality on the ground.

[Kermitt Gribble]

138. So you're saying we need to run someone who supports conservative values?

I guess that's why you support Hillary.

[VanillaRhapsody]

143. i am saying we need to run a candidate that

Has polls that show them beating every Republican......got one of those anyplace? I know of justone that fills that bill...

[Kermitt Gribble]

151. But you said people don't vote for liberal or progressive values at the ballot box.

That leads me to conclude that you're strategy is to run a candidate that will beat the republicans, running on republican values.

[VanillaRhapsody]

162. No I did NOT fucking say that...

I said they don't vote the same for referendums and candidates....do try to keep up...

[Kermitt Gribble]

213. Post #103

"No the last election tells us that though people support Liberal or Progressive values...

they don't vote for them at the ballot box...

THAT is reality on the ground."

[VanillaRhapsody]

163. She is NOT a fucking Conservative!

http://ontheissues.org/hillary_clinton.htm

What kind of Conservative has a record like this...

Strongly Favors topic 1:
Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right
(+5 points on Social scale) Lift ban on stem cell research to cure devastating diseases: Favors topic 1
Respect Roe v. Wade, but make adoptions easier too: Favors topic 1
Alternatives to pro-choice like forced pregnancy in Romania: Strongly Favors topic 1
Must safeguard constitutional rights, including choice: Favors topic 1
Remain vigilant on a woman’s right to chose: Favors topic 1
Keep abortion safe, legal and rare: Favors topic 1
Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion: Favors topic 1
Supports parental notice & family planning: Opposes topic 1
No abortion for sex selection in China: Opposes topic 1
Voted liberal line on partial birth & harm to fetus: Favors topic 1
Endorsed Recommended by EMILY's List of pro-choice women: Favors topic 1
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record: Strongly Favors topic 1
Expand embryonic stem cell research: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill providing contraceptives for low-income women: Favors topic 1
Sponsored bill for emergency contraception for rape victims: Favors topic 1
Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance: Strongly Favors topic 1
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities: Favors topic 1
Ensure access to and funding for contraception: Favors topic 1
Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception: Favors topic 1
NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP: Favors topic 1
NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life: Strongly Favors topic 1
NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime: Favors topic 1
YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives: Favors topic 1
NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions: Favors topic 1
YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines: Favors topic 1
Strongly Favors topic 2:
Legally require hiring women & minorities
(-5 points on Economic scale) Some world leaders are still misogynistic: Favors topic 2
We’ve come a long way on race, but we have a long way to go: Strongly Favors topic 2
Apologize for slavery, but concentrate on civil rights now: Favors topic 2
Human rights are women’s rights: Neutral on topic 2
Women’s rights are human rights: Favors topic 2
OpEd: "18 million cracks" meant "lingering sexism": Strongly Favors topic 2
Equal pay is not yet equal: Strongly Favors topic 2
1988: Instituted gender diversity Report Card within ABA: Strongly Opposes topic 2
Argued with Bill Clinton about diluting affirmative action: Strongly Favors topic 2
Shift from group preferences to economic empowerment of all: Neutral on topic 2
Sponsored bill maintaining role of women in armed forces: Favors topic 2
Rated 96% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance: Strongly Favors topic 2
Recognize Juneteenth as historical end of slavery: Strongly Favors topic 2
Re-introduce the Equal Rights Amendment: Strongly Favors topic 2
Reinforce anti-discrimination and equal-pay requirements: Favors topic 2
Ban discriminatory compensation; allow 2 years to sue: Favors topic 2
Sponsored bill enforcing against gender pay discrimination: Strongly Favors topic 2
Strongly Favors topic 3:
Comfortable with same-sex marriage
(+5 points on Social scale) Increase America’s commitment against Global AIDS: Favors topic 3
DOMA discrimination holds us back from a more perfect union: Strongly Favors topic 3
I support gay marriage personally and as law: Strongly Favors topic 3
Let states decide gay marriage; they’re ahead of feds: Favors topic 3
2004:defended traditional marriage; 2006:voted for same-sex: Strongly Favors topic 3
Federal Marriage Amendment would be terrible step backwards: Favors topic 3
Gays deserve domestic partnership benefits: Strongly Favors topic 3
Military service based on conduct, not sexual orientation: Favors topic 3
More funding and stricter sentencing for hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance: Strongly Favors topic 3
Provide benefits to domestic partners of Federal employees: Strongly Favors topic 3
YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes: Strongly Favors topic 3
NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage: Strongly Favors topic 3
No opinion on topic 4:
Keep God in the public sphere
(0 points on Social scale) Partner with faith based community in empowerment zones: Strongly Favors topic 4
Tap into churches to avoid more Louima & Diallo cases: Favors topic 4
Community involvement helps, but only in short term: Favors topic 4
Link payments to good parenting behavior: Opposes topic 4
Allow student prayer, but no religious instruction: Opposes topic 4
Character education: teach empathy & self-discipline: Favors topic 4
Change what kids see in the media: Favors topic 4
Co-sponsored bill to criminalize flag-burning: Favors topic 4
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-Family-Value voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 4
Rated 100% by the AU, indicating support of church-state separation: Strongly Opposes topic 4
NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration: Opposes topic 4
Strongly Favors topic 5:
Expand ObamaCare
(-5 points on Economic scale) Outcry if AIDS were leading disease of young whites: Favors topic 5
Lower costs and improve quality and cover everybody: Strongly Favors topic 5
Supply more medical needs of families, & insure all children: Strongly Favors topic 5
Medicare should be strengthened today: Favors topic 5
Smaller steps to progress on health care: Favors topic 5
Guaranteed benefits & focus on prevention: Neutral on topic 5
2006: If I can't do universal coverage, why run?: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care will not work if it is voluntary: Strongly Favors topic 5
Universal health care coverage by the end of my second term: Strongly Favors topic 5
We need a uniquely American solution to health care: Favors topic 5
Health care initiatives are her first priority in Senate: Strongly Favors topic 5
Establish "report cards" on HMO quality of care: Favors topic 5
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage: Favors topic 5
Let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations: Opposes topic 5
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record: Strongly Favors topic 5
Preserve access to Medicaid & SCHIP during economic downturn: Strongly Favors topic 5
NO on means-testing to determine Medicare Part D premium: Favors topic 5
NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit: Favors topic 5
NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit: Opposes topic 5
YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics: Favors topic 5
YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug: Strongly Favors topic 5
YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D: Favors topic 5
NO on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000: Opposes topic 5
YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D: Favors topic 5
YES on overriding veto on expansion of Medicare: Favors topic 5
Strongly Opposes topic 6:
Privatize Social Security
(-5 points on Economic scale) 1997: Hillary warned against privatizing Social Security: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Soc.Sec. one of greatest inventions in American democracy: Strongly Opposes topic 6
Social Security protects families, not just retirees: Strongly Opposes topic 6
All should join the debate now to preserve future solvency: Opposes topic 6
Create Retirement Savings Accounts: Favors topic 6
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 6
NO on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security: Opposes topic 6
Strongly Opposes topic 7:
Vouchers for school choice
(-5 points on Economic scale) OpEd: Common Core recycled from Clintons in 1980s and 1990s: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fully fund special education & 21st century classrooms: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice; but not private nor parochial: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers drain money from public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Fight with Gore for public schools; no voucher “gimmicks”: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Charter schools provide choice within public system: Opposes topic 7
Vouchers siphon off much-needed resources: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Parents can choose, but support public schools: Opposes topic 7
Supports public school choice and charter schools: Favors topic 7
Solemn vow never to abandon our public schools: Strongly Opposes topic 7
Offer every parent Charter Schools and public school choice: Opposes topic 7
Rated 82% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes: Strongly Opposes topic 7
YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors: Opposes topic 7
YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies: Opposes topic 7
Strongly Opposes topic 8:
No 'rights' to clean air and water
(+5 points on Social scale) $5B for green-collar jobs in economic stimulus package: Opposes topic 8
Voted against and consistently opposed to Yucca Mountain: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Scored 100% on Humane Society Scorecard on animal protection: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Remove PCBs from Hudson River by dredging 200 miles: Opposes topic 8
Rated 89% by the LCV, indicating pro-environment votes: Strongly Opposes topic 8
EPA must do better on mercury clean-up: Opposes topic 8
Grants for beach water pollution under Clean Water Act: Opposes topic 8
Strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting: Strongly Opposes topic 8
Opposes topic 9:
Stricter punishment reduces crime
(+2 points on Social scale) Longtime advocate of death penalty, with restrictions: Strongly Favors topic 9
Address the unacceptable increase in incarceration: Opposes topic 9
Mandatory sentences have been too widely used: Strongly Opposes topic 9
Give kids after-school activities to prevent gangs: Opposes topic 9
Spend more time with kids to prevent violence: Opposes topic 9
Supports citizen patrols & 3-Strikes-You’re-Out: Favors topic 9
Supports “Three Strikes” and more prison: Strongly Favors topic 9
End hate crimes and other intolerance: Favors topic 9
Require DNA testing for all federal executions: Opposes topic 9
Increase funding for "COPS ON THE BEAT" program: Opposes topic 9
Reduce recidivism by giving offenders a Second Chance: Strongly Opposes topic 9
YES on reinstating $1.15 billion funding for the COPS Program: Opposes topic 9
Strongly Opposes topic 10:
Absolute right to gun ownership
(-5 points on Economic scale) Rein in idea that anybody can have a gun anywhere, anytime: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Against illegal guns, crack down on illegal gun dealers: Opposes topic 10
Get assault weapons & guns off the street: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Background check system could prevent Virginia Tech massacre: Opposes topic 10
Congress’ failure at Littleton response inspired Senate run: Opposes topic 10
Limit access to weapons; look for early warning signs: Opposes topic 10
License and register all handgun sales: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Gun control protects our children: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Don’t water down sensible gun control legislation: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Lock up guns; store ammo separately: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Get weapons off the streets; zero tolerance for weapons: Opposes topic 10
Prevent unauthorized firearm use with "smart gun" technology: Opposes topic 10
NO on banning lawsuits against gun manufacturers for gun violence: Strongly Opposes topic 10
NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers: Strongly Opposes topic 10
Strongly Favors topic 11:
Higher taxes on the wealthy
(-5 points on Economic scale) Rescind tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year: Strongly Favors topic 11
Pay down debt & cut taxes within balanced budget: Favors topic 11
GOP tax plan would hurt New York’s students: Favors topic 11
Rated 21% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes: Strongly Favors topic 11
Rated 80% by the CTJ, indicating support of progressive taxation: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising the Death Tax exemption to $5M from $1M: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on allowing AMT reduction without budget offset: Favors topic 11
YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates: Favors topic 11
YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction: Favors topic 11
NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years: Strongly Favors topic 11
YES on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut: Favors topic 11
YES on retaining reduced taxes on capital gains & dividends: Strongly Opposes topic 11
NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on supporting permanence of estate tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on raising estate tax exemption to $5 million: Strongly Favors topic 11
NO on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax: Strongly Favors topic 11
Favors topic 12:
Pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens
(+2 points on Social scale) Introduce a path to earn citizenship in the first 100 days: Strongly Favors topic 12
Consider halting certain raids on illegal immigrant families: Favors topic 12
Deporting all illegal immigrants is unrealistic: Strongly Favors topic 12
Illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses puts them at risk: Opposes topic 12
Oppose granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants: Opposes topic 12
More border patrolling on both Mexican AND Canadian borders: Opposes topic 12
Anti-immigrant bill would have criminalized Jesus Christ: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sanctuary cities ok; local police can’t enforce immigration: Favors topic 12
Comprehensive reform to get 12 million out of shadows: Strongly Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill covering child resident aliens under Medicaid: Favors topic 12
Sponsored bill funding social services for noncitizens: Favors topic 12
Rated 8% by USBC, indicating an open-border stance: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities": Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on establishing a Guest Worker program: Favors topic 12
YES on building a fence along the Mexican border: Strongly Opposes topic 12
YES on eliminating the "Y" nonimmigrant guestworker program: Neutral topic 12
NO on declaring English as the official language of the US government: Strongly Favors topic 12
YES on comprehensive immigration reform: Strongly Favors topic 12
Opposes topic 13:
Support & expand free trade
(-3 points on Economic scale) Smart, pro-American trade: NAFTA has hurt workers: Strongly Opposes topic 13
No fast-track authority for this president: Opposes topic 13
Defended outsourcing of US jobs to India: Favors topic 13
1980s: Loved Wal-Mart's "Buy America" program: Opposes topic 13
Globalization should not substitute for humanization: Opposes topic 13
Supports MFN for China, despite concerns over human rights: Strongly Favors topic 13
Build a rule-based global trading system: Favors topic 13
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on removing common goods from national security export rules: Favors topic 13
YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam: Favors topic 13
NO on extending free trade to Andean nations: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore: Favors topic 13
YES on establishing free trade between the US and Chile: Favors topic 13
NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade: Strongly Opposes topic 13
YES on free trade agreement with Oman: Strongly Favors topic 13
Opposes topic 14:
Maintain US sovereignty from UN
(-3 points on Economic scale) US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Support UN reform because US benefits: Opposes topic 14
2002 Iraq speech criticized both Saddam and U.N.: Opposes topic 14
Urged President to veto UN condemnation of Israel: Favors topic 14
Engage in world affairs, including human rights: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills: Opposes topic 14
2002: Attacking Iraq "not a good option" but authorized it: Favors topic 14
Voted against Levin Amendment: it gave UN veto over US: Favors topic 14
Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation: Strongly Opposes topic 14
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror: Opposes topic 14
YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees: Strongly Opposes topic 14
YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods: Strongly Opposes topic 14
NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad: Strongly Opposes topic 14
No opinion on topic 15:
Expand the military
(0 points on Social scale) There is no safe haven for the terrorists: Favors topic 15
Our troops are stretched; so increase size of military: Favors topic 15
Rated 100% by SANE, indicating a pro-peace voting record: Strongly Opposes topic 15
Extend reserve retirement pay parity back to 9/11: Favors topic 15
Improve mental health care benefits for returning veterans: Favors topic 15
YES on requiring on-budget funding for Iraq, not emergency funding: Opposes topic 15
YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months: Opposes topic 15
Strongly Favors topic 16:
More enforcement of the right to vote
(+5 points on Social scale) Voter suppression revives old demons of discrimination: Favors topic 16
Stand for public financing and getting money out of politics: Strongly Favors topic 16
Presidents should reveal donations to their foundations: Strongly Favors topic 16
Move to public election financing, not banning lobbyists: Strongly Favors topic 16
Verified paper ballot for every electronic voting machines: Favors topic 16
Called for ban on all soft money in 2000 campaign: Favors topic 16
Prohibit 'voter caging' which intimidates minority voting: Favors topic 16
YES on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations: Favors topic 16
YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads: Favors topic 16
NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity: Opposes topic 16
NO on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress: Strongly Favors topic 16
Favors topic 17:
Stay out of Iran
(+2 points on Social scale) Smartest strategic choice is peace: Favors topic 17
Extend peace treaties to Palestinians, Syrians & Lebanese: Favors topic 17
Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged: Strongly Favors topic 17
Up to the Iraqis to decide the future they will have: Favors topic 17
Demand Bush to explain to Congress on his plan on Iraq: Favors topic 17
Deauthorize Iraq war, and don’t grant new war authority: Strongly Favors topic 17
Phased redeployment out of Iraq, beginning immediately: Strongly Favors topic 17
Withdraw troops within 60 days after taking office: Strongly Favors topic 17
Voted for Iraq war based on available info; now would not: Favors topic 17
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence: Favors topic 17
No troop surge: no military escalation in Iraq: Strongly Favors topic 17
Require Congress' approval before military action in Iran: Favors topic 17
YES on authorizing use of military force against Iraq: Strongly Opposes topic 17
NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007: Strongly Opposes topic 17
YES on redeploying US troops out of Iraq by March 2008: Strongly Favors topic 17
Strongly Favors topic 18:
Prioritize green energy
(-5 points on Economic scale) $100B per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation: Strongly Favors topic 18
Remove energy dependence on countries who would harm us: Strongly Favors topic 18
Stands for clean air and funding the EPA: Favors topic 18
Reduce air pollution to improve children’s health: Favors topic 18
Ratify Kyoto; more mass transit: Strongly Favors topic 18
Supports tradable emissions permits for greenhouse gases: Favors topic 18
Keep efficient air conditioner rule to conserve energy: Strongly Favors topic 18
Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances: Strongly Favors topic 18
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence: Favors topic 18
Designate sensitive ANWR area as protected wilderness: Favors topic 18
Set goal of 25% renewable energy by 2025: Strongly Favors topic 18
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards: Strongly Favors topic 18
Gas tax holiday for the summer: Opposes topic 18
NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on targeting 100,000 hydrogen-powered vehicles by 2010: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill: Favors topic 18
YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%): Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's ANWR: Strongly Favors topic 18
YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Favors topic 18
YES on factoring global warming into federal project planning: Favors topic 18
YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies: Strongly Favors topic 18
Opposes topic 19:
Never legalize marijuana
(+2 points on Social scale) Medical marijuana maybe ok; states decide recreational use: Opposes topic 19
Divert non-violent drug offenders away from prison: Strongly Opposes topic 19
Address drug problem with treatment and special drug courts: Strongly Opposes topic 19
End harsher sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine: Opposes topic 19
Require chemical resellers to certify against meth use: Favors topic 19
Strongly Favors topic 20:
Stimulus better than market-led recovery
(-5 points on Economic scale) Wealthy should go back to paying pre-Bush tax rates: Favors topic 20
Want to restore the tax rates we had in the ‘90s: Favors topic 20
Help people facing foreclosure; don’t just bail-out banks: Strongly Favors topic 20
Minimum wage increases haven’t kept up with Congress’ wages: Strongly Favors topic 20
Co-sponsored bills totaling $502B in spending thru 2005: Strongly Favors topic 20
End Bush tax cuts;take things away from rich for common good: Favors topic 20
Social issues matter; wrong time for tax cuts: Strongly Favors topic 20
Use tax dollars to upgrade infrastructure, not for stadium: Strongly Favors topic 20
America can afford to raise the minimum wage: Strongly Favors topic 20
Just Say No to GOP tax plan: Strongly Favors topic 20
YES on increasing tax rate for people earning over $1 million: Strongly Favors topic 20

[Kermitt Gribble]

214. You can post that graphic all you want.

She is a liberal on social issues, and that's great. It doesn't change Hillary's right wing stance on foreign policy and economic issues.

[still_one]

73. Here is why he may not. Let's use the example of Howard Dean. He had built an enthusiasm and

excitement that most thought he had a great chance, until Iowa, and a group of forces from the media to other Democrats misrepresented and distorted the Iowa campaign. They were throwing out things like Howard Dean did not have the right “temperament, similar to nonsense that chuck todd was saying about Grimes how she disqualified herself, except in Howard Dean's case this was an organized campaign to discredit him entirely, and it came from the Kerry camp.

"a group of Democrats calling itself Americans for Jobs and Healthcare had raised one million dollars between November of 2003 and March of 2004 to run incendiary at- tack ads against the erstwhile frontrunner.1 The money came from supporters of John Kerry and the other big name Democratic candidates who had been eclipsed by Dean"

http://www.independentvoting.org/magazine/How_DP_Sabotaged.pdf

The irony was that Kerry ran a terrible campaign, and was subjected to misrepresentations dirty tricks from the swift boaters, with the help of the media, to just not defending himself adequately.

Unfortunately, I can see powerful Democrats trying to do that if Bernie gains momentum and runs as a Democrat. In Barrack Obama's case they tried to do it from both sides at the same time. With Hillary saying that Obama couldn't handle international affairs, and she would trust a John McCain over a Barack Obama for our defense. The republicans were playing the race card, and the weather underground card, etc. The reason why Barack Obama was able to overcome those attacks is because he jumped on those attacks immediately, with live press conferences, and answered questions simply and plainly. If Kerry would had only done a similar strategy, things might have turned out differently during the swift boat garbage.

I have no doubt, as long as Bernie is able to get the airtime, he will be able to defuse any misrepresentation without any problem. The issue will be if the media who is now bought and paid for by corporations will be given the chance. Knowing Bernie, he won't sit around waiting for that chance to happen, he will do everything to make it happen

[redstateblues]

109. The idea that Bernie can win

From my vantage point in a red state, is ridiculous. Hillary has a chance of winning some red states. Bernie doesn't. Never will. Sorry.

[MADem]

28. You're shoveling sand against the tide trying to talk sense to the dreamers, here.

There are people here who believed that Kucinich had a viable national candidacy. They would not be convinced otherwise.

And then, there's another subset that loves to keep throwing those canards out to see elements of DU scrabbling and sniping at one another.

As Ricky says to Lucy in reruns, in perpetuity: "It's just so ridiculous!"

[VanillaRhapsody]

42. YUP!!!! +1000

they have no idea that they are Ideologues....

they truly believe they are not in a minority! Just like Teabaggers do!

[RadicalGeek]

30. What Is 'Far Left'

A living minimum wage, an Amendment to limit corporate influence over politics?

I think that an "Progressive Challenge" from Sanders, Feigold, etc would help HRC see that the 'base' matters.

[VanillaRhapsody]

39. believing in those things....and getting the Republicans out of the way to allow them to happen

are two very different beasts...and this thread is about Reality.

[RadicalGeek]

97. But who defines 'Reality'

To the Right, it's clear that the "%1" and their mouthpieces define it.

Also, I did say that I'd like to see a progressive challenge to HRC to let her know that "Reality" is that the party base wants to see many of the things I mentioned.

[VanillaRhapsody]

99. certainly not ideologues....

Hillary IS progressive...stop the bullshit meme!



and ^^^ that is why you are ideologues.....failure to recognize.

[RadicalGeek]

140. Comapred to whom

Of course that matrix has been proved to be inaccurate.

(Of course, compared to the Theocrats, plutrocrats, insurrectionists, etc that the GOP will be rallying the "Trailer Park Caucus" around, she would be 'Progressive')

[VanillaRhapsody]

142. compared to all the other american candidates

[RadicalGeek]

150. So far

If someone like a Sanders, or someone else from the "Democratic Wing" of the party were to run, she'd be a bit farther to the right.

[VanillaRhapsody]

164. Who you got that polls ahead of ALL Republicans...

until you have one...talk to the hand!

[still_one]

45. I will support without hesitation the Democratic nominee, and have no problem supporting Hillary,

however, if Bernie runs as a Democrat, and he is able to persuade enough people with his ideas, your assessment is wrong.

It is very similar to the case with Rand Paul. The republicans do NOT believe he has a chance, and I suspect the Democrats believe the same thing, but there is a populace resonance that he is able to project, that goes beyond political party. Unfortunately, in the case of Paul those who support him fail to comprehend the major flaws he has regarding civil rights, social security, and medicare. That won't stop them from supporting him.

Bernie also has a very populoust message that if he is able to get out will attract many people.

One thing that Paul and Sanders do is answer questions directly unlike other candidates have done in previous elections. In fact I believe one of the reasons Obama won both times was because he answered questions directly most of the time. I recall when John Kerry was running and asked a yes or no question how he would make the answer so complicated that many wondered exactly what he said.

If Bernie decides to run as a third party however, not only would he not win, but shift the odd to the republican.

You indicate that Clinton would define the election, and run a strong campaign. I hope so. She sure messed up the last time, and with her recent criticism of President Obama is NOT doing her cause very good. If she continues that approach of distancing herself from Obama, criticizing his administration, she will lose, because she will divide the party. However, if she focuses on what SHE will do, and criticizes the republican policies and the mess they have got the country into, she has a very good chance of winning.

It is not clear to me that her "team" will run a strong campaign. Lanny Davis and others within her campaign were abrasive and turned people off. They wanted her to play a macho image, not unlike politicians showing themselves hunting with a gun, as though that somehow makes them more virile. Hopefully, Hillary has learned from her past mistakes

[4dsc]

63. Yet centrist have fucked up the Democratic party

so quit with your centrist defeatist attitude and come along for the ride. Its a long way till 2016 and many things can and will change by then.

[still_one]

80. The fact is that if Bernie runs as a Democrat, one would think that whoever has the most persuasive

arguments would win the nomination.

I have no doubt the mainstream republicans have written off Rand Paul for similar reasoning, and that is a mistake from both parties.

However, if both Bernie and Rand Paul run as 3rd party candidates, they could very will cause the 2016 election to be decided by the House of Representatives, and even if the Democrats win back the Senate, they will NOT win back the house, so in an awful scenario like that the republican would most certainly become the president, which would be as bad or even worse as what happened in 2000 where the SC actually determined the president, the house of representative would.

Of course if we could ever get rid of that outdated electoral college and go by the popular vote, that would not be a problem

[merrily]

114. "very well cause the election to be decided by the House"? A highly unlikely scenario, IMO.

I even think it's highly unlikely that Rand Paul will run as a third party candidate. He broke from the Libertarians to run as Republican. Even his father ran as a Republican, to help set Rand up to run as the Republican nominee. He is still relatively young. 2016 is not do or die for him for the nom.

[still_one]

123. I agree, I do not think it is a likely scenario. If Bernie runs, he will run as a Democrat, and

Paul would run as a republican.

However, I think both parties are underestimating Paul and Sanders populous message that resonate with a lot of people.

The midterms were as dismal as they were because of voter apathy.

[merrily]

124. I don't know about about Bernie. He will run however he thinks he has the best chance.

And, if he thinks he has no chance, he may not run at all.

Rand, too, of course, but I think he and his father made their decision about where his best chances lay years ago. Bernie is still exploring.

The midterms were as dismal as they were because of voter apathy.

Certainly a reason. But, there are lots of others. For one thing, this switch in loyalties has happened to every single two term US President after Eisenhower. Not to this degree, of course, but it is a pattern. Second, there was the extreme gerrymandering after the 2010 census. Third, there was a massive, nationwide "suppress the vote" effort by the Republicans, grass roots, state houses, SCOTUS, the whole nine yards. With also a highly organized voter "registration and education" effort by Republicans.--All those IRS applications we heard so much about a year or so ago? The ones with Tea Party or Patriot in the name? That's what most of them were about. With no remotely comparable counterpoint to any of it by Democrats.

[still_one]

127. No real disagreement with you thoughts, however, I think apathy was a huge reason. This was the

lowest turnout in the midterms since the 40's I think I heard. That is pretty pathetic.

Nothing we can do about the gerrymandering until the next census, and until we start to make gains at the state level.

I don't actually know how much voter suppression occurred, but other than voter suppression, the fact that people have to motivate other people to GOTV is pathetic. If people don't care enough to vote, what does that say about them? I am excluding people with physical issues with getting to the polls, or any voter suppression, and firmly believe that voting should take place on the weekends, but I am cynical enough to believe that a lot of voters will still not vote.

In addition, most of the states being contested were red states. It was an uphill battle by all accounts

[merrily]

130. If the pundits are correct, the state level may be our only shot.

They say the massive victory this months means we are highly unlikely to take the house again for at least a decade. The next census is 2020.

People with physical issues getting to polls--should not be a problem if they are motivated. Besides, there are absentee ballots. But, that is another thing: If voting is such a priority in this country, why is there not mandated time off to vote for federal elections? I live in Massachusetts, one of the bluest states. We vote by absentee ballot or on election day, period. That will not change until 2016 (new law passed recently). And no one is out there making sure everyone gets absentee ballots, either. A guy who works in my building lives about an hour of Boston because he can get so much more for his $ than in Boston. However, he works two jobs in Boston, one from 7 to 3 and the second up the street from 3 to 11. (The guy who relieves him here comes a few minutes early.) When the hell is he supposed to vote?

He barely speaks English and never heard of an absentee ballot until I told him. No clue how to get one, nothing.

I found out only recently, from DUer Le Taz Hot, that California somehow overrode the House re-districting, so there is hope on the state level. Yet, a blue state like Massachusetts didn't jump all over it. Why?

[still_one]

135. you are right. I don't think every state has absentee ballots, not sure though.

I am from California also, so I cannot complain.

[RBInMaine]

218. McGovern, Mondale, & Dukakis got clobbered. Clinton won. Case closed.

[RedstDem]

71. your most happy with Hilliary obviously, but there are so many more Dems.

John Kerry, Joe Biden, Mark Warner, Wesley Clark, Al Gore, Jim Webb....

Think of which candidate can beat Petraeus, than go from there, if winning is your only goal, that puts Kerry, Clark and Webb up front.

[djean111]

72. Why the constant need to push Hillary?

No one has declared yet. If I didn't know that this is a Democrat (and Democratic) website, I would be thinking that the Hillary team is trying to stave off any challengers at all. In advance. No primaries needed.
In any event, I believe that here at DU, the ENTHUSIASM for Hillary is not going to get any stronger than it is right now. Her fans should accept that, and maybe stop with the constant Hillary is the One, so shut up and like it! stuff. Does more damage than good, IMO.

[merrily]

117. I am sure some are sincere Third Wayers and some have economic or other incentives to push.

I would be very surprised if people who work for Hillary haven't been posting here for a long time. Also she is obviously the pic of the party PTB and I would be very surprised if party PTB don't have people posting here. I am not saying that they all get paid to post I am saying that some may have more at stake than an average poster simply posting his or her totally unbiased, arms length views.

[djean111]

119. That would actually explain a lot of the grimly determined Hillary pushing.

One of my favorites is the hunting down of support for any other possible candidate and saying that they have not declared yet. Plus charts and lists about Hillary, of course. Who has not declared yet, either.

If the mission is to deliver a DU 100% ENTHUSED about Hillary, it is doomed to failure. And, again, it looks like that, if Hillary supporters had their way, no primaries would take place at all. Safer that way, I suppose.

[merrily]

144. I don't they they give a shit if we're enthused as long as we vote.

. I don't know if you've noticed, but the emphasis has been shifting some to, "Will you vote for her if she the nominee?" Or "No matter what, I will vote for her, if she is the nominee." This, of course, also has the effect of reinforcing the inevitability. When was the last time some DUer asked you if you would for Warren, no matter what, if she is the nominee? Or Sanders? Or anyone but Hillary?

We have to take a loyalty oath, two years before election, before she even announces?

[djean111]

146. Oh, yeah, I know what you mean......and like everyone else,

she has not even declared yet. Waiting for a fait accompli or something, maybe.
The loyalty oath stuff is getting funny - and, as if it could be enforced.
The Hillary-pushing is going to be, IMO, as effective as the here's my puppy pleez send money emails - someone is not running a very good campaign.

[Odin2005]

156. The Clintonistas are baiting people into violating DU rules.

It's sickening.

[hrmjustin]

192. How so? I am a Clinton supporter and I have baited no one.

[Odin2005]

155. DU is infested with paid DLC shills.

They are obvious because they always use trite, canned talking points and insult anyone who criticizes them with a small list of canned phrases like "out of touch with reality" and "magic ponies".

[hrmjustin]

77. It looks like Hillary will be our nominee and it is going to take a long time for some to get

comfortable with that. I hope we can allsupport her.

[TheCowsCameHome]

78. I don't care, I'll just write them in.

That'll work out just fine.

[Half-Century Man]

102. Here is a tiny bit of reality.

Two years is a lot of time for things to change.

[polichick]

107. Reality: lots of voters won't go to the polls for another corporate tool.

[Nay]

133. This is the absolute truth. The only thing that could save Hillary at the

polls is a burning desire on the part of women of all ages to go to the polls to elect the first female president. If that urge in the populace is as strong as the urge that got AAs out to vote for Obama, then she has a chance.

But, IMO, that is not realistic because there are lots of Republican women. There weren't a lot of Republican AAs.

We'll just have to wait and see.

[Mike Nelson]

108. Looks like the "left" and the "media" will team-up to...

...squash Clinton and put another Republican in the WH... blech...

[aspirant]

181. More fear tactics Can't wait

[craigmatic]

111. Joe Biden 2016

[Scuba]

112. The Democratic Party should endorse the Republican candidate. Then we'd win for sure!!!

Or we could just go with Hillary. That would guarantee the neocons a victory, regardless of who prevailed.

[gwheezie]

113. I voted for hillary before I'll vote for her again

If she runs. I hope she does but I don't think it's a done deal. I hope others challange her is she does run and if a better candidate emerges I might change my mind. I'm not going to bash other dems. I didn't in 08 when obama was running against her. I won't do it now.

[bigwillq]

118. That's fine. But I'm still not voting for Hillary.

If she runs and wins, I'll be fine with it. I will respect the decision of the American people.

But she'll have to win without my vote. I live in CT, the DEM will win that state, so I'll be voting for someone else if Hillary runs.

[merrily]

120. The Dem will win my state, too, unless maybe Ike run agains again.

At that, Presidential elections come down to a few counties in a few purple states.

http://www.businessinsider.com/swing-state-counties-florida-ohio-wisconsin-virginia-2012-9?op=1

Trick is, they are not always the same counties and they rarely tell us ahead of time which counties they will be this time. But, the experts do know.

Think of it. Two billion dollars--in hard money alone--for a few swing votes in eight counties. Seriously, exactly how nuts was that?

[RBInMaine]

217. Oh goody, a protest vote to help the Republicans. I think that is entirely insane. But whatever.

[bigwillq]

219. The DEM candidate will win CT with or without my vote.

So it's no harm, no foul.

[onecaliberal]

128. Since when is

A living wage, Heath care, protecting social security, equality for all, clean air and water, ending wars considered far left ideas?

[corkhead]

129. Good luck with that meme

it didn't work in 2007 either.

Nobody is running... YET.

How about Al Franken or Alan Grayson? Either of them would be a breath of fresh air.

[Warpy]

131. Hillary = business as usual

Now I inherited enough money to live on, so business as usual has been great for me. My portfolio is worth 50% above what I inherited, so Doctors Without Borders will get a nice chunk of change when I kick off.

However, it's business as usual that is killing off everybody I know, people who work damned hard for everything they get and who are falling farther behind every year as prices skyrocket and wages stagnate and even drop. While the ACA ended the major abuses of for profit health insurance, I see people still afraid to go to a doctor when they get sick because they can't afford all the copays for the doctor, the labs, the medications--never mind surgery and hospitalization.

This country has become incredibly hostile to its citizens, probably because the 0.1% have decided they only need a few servants and the rest of us only fuck up the scenery and should just die off.

I'm afraid Hillary Clinton isn't quite as electable as the OP thinks she is because people are just not motivated to vote for slow strangulation versus the quick death proposed by Republicans.

[Fearless]

134. Why exactly can't Bernie win?

And why exactly can't we draft Warren?

I've yet to be given real answers on these questions. Their points of view are what America wants. Why exactly are we marginalizing them for more of the same?

[Blue Idaho]

136. Let the System Work.

I hope we have a robust primary season and yes, I hope Warren, Sanders, and others challenge Hillary. Win or not - they serve three important functions in the Democratic Party. First, they will make her work for the nomination, giving her plenty of campaign practice before the rough and tumble general election. Second, they will force her further left than her natural instincts will take her on issues Democrats care about the most. Finally, she could very well fall short. Let's face it, the last thing in the world that the Democratic Party needs right now is an ordination. It may turn out that dear blessed Hillary may not be our candidate for 2016. If we are going to win in 20016 we need to explore more options not fewer.

In short, let the process unfold as it should - it is WAY too early for anyone to hand her the damn nomination.

[Kermitt Gribble]

139. Another Third Way post painting Traditional Democrats as "far left". n/t

[noiretextatique]

190. +1000

desperate.

[demwing]

145. "Much as some here would like the nation to be on the far left, it isn't"

Populism isn't a right/left division. The US is a populist country, and becoming more populist. The reason that Republicans are still functioning is because they've tapped our inait populism--they haven't earned it, but they tagged it.

If there's enough populist mojo to keep the Repugs in office, imagine what it will do for progressives--WHO HAVE EARNED IT.

[jeff47]

147. Did you copy-n-paste this from 2006? (nt)

[Beacool]

148. You know how delusional the Left has become when they propose Sanders as a Democratic nominee.

It's almost funny. In what country do they think they live in where a Socialist in his mid 70s would be a viable candidate who could actually win the general election?????? It sure as heck is not the USA, maybe they think they live in Europe.

It's going to be hard enough to keep the WH in 2016 without attempting to nominate a man who is not even a Democrat.

It's nuts..........

[aspirant]

185. Seattle elected a socialist,what does that say about the trend of the country?

[Beacool]

223. You are comparing Seattle to the rest of the nation?

What happened in Seattle is only relevant to that city.

[aspirant]

227. Who's relevant?

Right-wing dems are saying Sanders could never get elected because he's a socialist. City by city, here comes the socialists. It won't be long now before they eat you all up.The presidential primary is only relevant to the presidential primary and in that world Hillary is a known loser.

[Odin2005]

153. The Establishment Bubble is not reality.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

157. Shrug.

Me, I'd rather not have another 2014 Republican scorecard in 2016. But go ahead and run Hillary if you really want to keep the vote depressed and hand the White House to the Republicans.

[Joe Turner]

159. Reality is Hillary does not connect well with people,

has a 3rd way corporatist agenda--which can be exploited, and is not a good campaigner. To win the presidency Democrats need to elect someone with reformist-progressive political views and is not afraid to articulate them. On that level several candidates come to mind-- E. Warren, Bernie Sanders, and my favorite--Howard Dean. Their political stances will sell a lot more readily to the American People than HRC's warmed over Bush/Obama 3rd Way agenda. The country I believe is ready for a major change.

[Htom Sirveaux]

165. Are you concerned that Hillary's economic plan

(which, sight unseen, is already deemed "strong" and "working for people&quot won't be sufficiently compelling or work for enough people besides the 1% to convince fans of Warren or Sanders to jump on board organically?

[jmowreader]

166. Here's our problem

Hillary: Half the country has hated Hillary's guts since 1991, and the GOP is rarin' to turn 2016 into a referendum on Clinton's penis. Forget ideas...Bill got a blowjob in the Oval Office, and that's all the very far right needs to know.

Bernie: Folks, a self-identifying socialist is not going to win election. The GOP will turn 2016 into a referendum on May Day parades and gulags - neither of which are necessary for socialism, but since most Americans don't know what socialism actually is, they'll do it anyway.

Which leads me to the ultimate conclusion: The only Democrat the Republicans absolutely cannot beat is Brian Schweitzer, and we need to start looking hard at him.

[Ilsa]

177. If Bernie Sanders runs, it is highly likely

that I'll vote for him. Hubby also. He may not win even in the primaries, but his positions are closer to mine than hillary's.

[RBInMaine]

207. And it is highly likely he won't come close to winning the nomination.We need to support the NOMINEE

[Ilsa]

209. I'll probably vote for the nominee. But

I doubt I'll muster any enthusiasm for him or her if they don't have the same ideals I want in a candidate. The only reason I would show up is for the down ticket offices.

Can you imagine getting a call from a "supporter" whose support is tepid? It is hard to get excited about a candidate if you have to proverbially hold your nose when voting for him.

But in a primary, I'd pick Sanders over HRC.

[TheFarseer]

179. no one sees a problem when half our party doesnt like Hillary?

What about Brian Schweitzer or Martin Omalley? Can't we even discuss this before crowning Clinton?

[aspirant]

187. The right path

I'd like the truth. What % of dems are progressive vs Wall Streeters? You say half and half, can you prove that? All I know is there isn't enough Wall Streeters to defeat the aging repubs.So they need the progressives desperately or they will never win.So here comes their tactics, convert to Wall Street side because we are inevitable. If you don't, be afraid, be very afraid because Ted Cruz cometh.Secondly they scream she is ordained to win and if you don't vote for her it is akin to treason. Not much pressure there. So we suggest, come on over to our side and vote for Warren, Sanders,Grayson and they say look at these polls, they can't win. Polls are not facts, they are indicators of roughly 1000 people. If they were facts Grimes wouldn't have lost by 15% when the polls said too close to call. The Wall Streeters are moreover socially correct but are financially lacking. The progressives are socially and financially correct regarding dem Values/principles. So if we unify why isn't to the progressive way. We know nationally their are more registered dems than repubs and I would guess there are loads of independents that are frustrated progressives. So if Grayson wins the primary let's get a list of these DUer's names and states so we ca check and see if they did or didn't vote for him.

[TheFarseer]

195. I dont claim to know any percentages

It just seems like there's a lot of opposition to her candidacy so we might want to at least kick the tires on some other candidates and its more than a little troubling that most of our qualified people don't seem like theyll run if she's in. I really think we can find a better candidate that will stand for traditional democratic principles.

[brooklynite]

211. Prove the "half our Party doesn't like Hillary" argument

Sorry to have to say that DU is not representative of the Democratic Party.

[Zen Democrat]

186. Obama shocked the world in 2008. In 2007 it was all Hillary and he was running third behind Edwards.

Anything can happen in a presidential year. And usually does. It's about passion always winning.

[Warren DeMontague]

188. Why is it so important that everyone agree on a nominee before the primaries even START?

[hrmjustin]

193. Not easy being a Clinton supporter on this site.

[Maedhros]

194. Defeatist nonsense.

Enough of this resignation to defeat.

"Whether you say you can, or say you can't, you're absolutely right."

- Every High School coach ever.

[Zenlitened]

200. When people talk about Warren or Sanders running...

...they are, on some level, talking about their hopes and dreams for the future of the Democratic Party. For the direction it will take.

But the self-proclaimed "realists"? They seem to be doing their damnedest to pretend this conversation isn't happening. Plugging their ears and shouting la la la reality reality reality! as loud as they can. As if doing so will somehow be more effective in 2016 than it was in 2014.

How utterly, laughably ridiculous. Railing against "the left"... stamping out any sentiment that suggests the party needs to remember its roots... insisting everyone accept that the primary has already been decided...

This is the strategy that's going to lead us to victory in 2016? This is the sort of "realism" that everyone must fall in line behind?

"Shut up and vote the way I tell you," is that the party line now?

Save us all from the self-appointed realists, please. They don't seem to have a grasp on reality at all.

[RBInMaine]

216. You have just said that your "reality" is a "dream." Case closed.

I guess you didn't read the whole post. So I'll say it again. Warren and Bernie are great. But Warren said SHE IS NOT RUNNING. Is there anything unclear about that? That is one piece of undeniable REALITY, yet some here seem to think she is lying. She has said she is not running, she will not run, and has essentially endorsed Clinton. Yet some just refuse to believe the very facts before their very eyeballs. This is the crazyland of non-reality I'm talking about.

As to Bernie, first, he is saying he is VERY hesitant about even declaring a candidacy because of how hard it would be to mount. He isn't that well known, he's a confirmed "socialist," and already knows he'd have to go from being an "indy" to being a Dem because he could never win as an Indy. I would welcome him to the primary, but it is very doubtful he could win the nomination.

Again, this idea that Bernie or even Warren would have the kind of NATIONAL recognition and appeal to WIN a NATIONAL election is living a fantasy on the scale of those who thought Nader or Kucinich could win. It was insane to think that could be possible. Do some research on the FULL American political landscape.

Hillary is a modern progressive to moderate with the kind of name recognition and experience that could WIN. Warren isn't running, and Bernie could never win. It is insanity to think otherwise, according to every single bit of evidence we have.

[Zenlitened]

224. "What now is real..."

"What now is real was once only imagined"
--William Blake

I've read your post, your many rants, and find your understanding of the political process... incomplete. To say the least.

And no amount of browbeating, of shrieking about "reality," will change this fact: there's a conversation going on within the party, and it will proceed at its own pace. Not yours.

Good luck.

[silvershadow]

201. Not gonna happen with my help. I cannot make it any clearer. nt

[DonCoquixote]

202. The reason people talk so much of reality

is because the reality was that Hillsary managed to blow an ealry lead and ten of millions of dollars. The reality is that she can manage to screw up a campaign, especially if she and Bill are pampered, catered to, and told yes yes yes.

Now, again, if she is the nomionee, I will not join the Nader Lemmings. Yes, I realize Hillary will be ebtter than Jeb, even if they do agree on waaay too many issues, especially the hate of the poor. However, if you want to soeal the deal, you need to explain to those on the left what can be done to porevent her from selling us down the river.

[CentralMass]

205. The middle class is screwed no matter

which establishment candidate wins. I'll vote for Bernie Sanders if his name is on the ballot. The party has taken our votes fir granted."It's better to vote for what you want and lose. Then it is to vote for what you don't want and win."

[RBInMaine]

220. How did yours work with McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, Nader, and Kucinich?

I will agree that in this last election there needed to a be much better populist/progressive message from the top. Fine. That's a midterm congressional election. We are talking the Presidency. A totally different dynamic. Warren has said she is not running and she is not. Sanders can't win. He'd be eaten to shreds. And anyone with any sense at all knows it. He will NEVER be the nominee, much as I like him.

Hillary will most likely run and be the nominee, and she can win. Only if TeaLeftists want to exist in their fantasy land where they thought Nader and Kucinich could with the presidency, so be it. That is a land of political insanity as bad as those who think Ted Cruz can be president.

[w4rma]

215. Anyone but Hillary. Someone will run against her, in the primary, and I will support them. (nt)

[RBInMaine]

221. Right now no one stands a chance against her. We need to support the nominee.

[Zenlitened]

225. Reality: right now THERE IS NO NOMINEE.

WTF? How does someone claiming the mantle of "realist" make a statement like this:

Sun Nov 16, 2014, 12:22 PM
RBInMaine
221. Right now no one stands a chance against her. We need to support the nominee.

At this point in the process, There Is No Nominee. There aren't even any candidates yet.

Is this all some sort of joke you're playing on DU? Some baffling sort of performance art?

[HappyMe]

231. The nominee?

As of right now, there is no nominee. I wasn't aware that the primary part of this process had been called off.

[PeteSelman]

228. So basically, this country is over and we're doomed to moving ever rightward.

That's what you're saying.

Endless war, corporate personhood, income gap ever widening, deregulation and every other Reaganesque policy that there is.

That's OUR party now. Somehow, people like Warren and Sanders and Kucinich who, a short 40 years ago, would be considered standard middle of the road Democrats, are now "far left".

Why don't we just give the country over to the Birchers and have done with it? That's where we're heading anyway, what's the point in prolonging it?

This is why I often consider giving up on politics altogether. The best we're ever going to get is a Democrat that's actually a Reagan Republican because that's where the party is in "reality".

Never mind that on nearly every individual issue, the People are on the "far" left.

We MUST move right anyway.

[WhoWoodaKnew]

229. I think the OP is pretty accurate.

[quaker bill]

238. Ok then, apparently we are hosed.

Premise accepted. We are simply hosed.

Ms. Clinton, all preferences aside, is capable of running a strong second place campaign. She probably would not lose by more than 2 or 3 percent.