2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIt's so fucking stupid to say you're not going to vote for xxx candidate if they win the nomination.
Some people take their votes and act like it's a goddamn high school election. There's nothing more mind-numbingly dumb than coming on a message board full of Democrats and telling us you're not going to support the nominee unless it's your guy (or girl, for that matter). What a selfish, childish bullshit thing to do. I'm also guessing you're the type of person who holds their breath and stomps their feet because their mother didn't let 'em eat pizza for dinner.
"BUT MOOOOOOM!"
Jesus. We've seen, over the last six years, the difference between a Democrat and what the Republican haves to offer. The contrast between 2001-2009 and 2009-2015 couldn't be more stark. And yet, some are willing to forego any progress in the name of complete regression just to make a political point.
No, you're not a good progressive if your vote openly assists the Republicans winning in 2016. That's a fact. You can try to twist your lame-ass logic all you want but it won't change the fact the next president is likely to replace ONE liberal Supreme Court justice and potentially could shift the ideology of the entire court - so, no, you're not a good progressive for standing up for your purist ideals.
Those so myopic in their support of just one candidate must have buried their heads the last few months when the Supreme Court handed down some monster rulings. Guess what, though? None of those rulings go our way if, say, in 2008 McCain had won. If Hillary supporters had PUMA'd their way to the polls and backed an independent or decided to not vote, and Obama lost in 2008, it's entirely possible Justice Stevens, who's fucking 95 years old today, could be off the court. McCain, or another Republican, appointing his replacement, even if he did his best to hold out (and Stevens would easily become the oldest serving justice ever - plus with the stress of working that job, who knows if he would even be alive in that scenario), the likelihood he'd be on the court in 2015 is minimal. A McCain appointment, in the mold of John Roberts or Sammy Alito, ain't voting to allow marriage equality. You can't call yourself a progressive and deny that fact. You just can't. You're not a progressive.
You're not a progressive if you can easily ignore the Supreme Court's gutting of the Voting Rights Act - a ruling that solely happened because of the Bush administration. Had Gore taken office in 2000, or Kerry won in 2004, and the Voting Rights Act is intact. You can't say black lives matter, pretend they matter, and dismiss the power of the Supreme Court. If you're an ally for black America, you've got to know the fight goes beyond just the ballot box and the ideologically best sounding candidate - it goes to legacy. Bill Clinton? Mediocre liberal president - but he gave us one of the most revered Supreme Court justices in history. You can't claim to be a fan of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, speak of her importance, and dismiss who appointed her.
She's reached icon status among many, many progressives. It would have never happened had Clinton lost in 1992.
You're not a progressive if you're willing to hold the entire nation hostage because you didn't get your way. You can claim Hillary is a hawk, and that she might potentially take us to war - but you know what? I KNOW the Republican will take us to war. You wanna know how I know that? Because they don't shut the fuck up about it - they'll go take us to fight Syria and ISIS and Iran.
If that's what you're willing to risk, fine. But don't call yourself a progressive. You're not.
If it's Bernie, you better fucking believe I'll be casting my vote for him in 2016.
If it's O'Malley, absolutely I will be voting for him in 2016.
If it's Hillary, for sure I'll be voting for her in 2016.
Why? Because there is no second option. Not in America politics anymore. A vote against the nominee is a vote for the Republicans. It's a vote for their agenda. You can excuse it all you want, but we all know how this country's politics works and not voting, or writing someone's name in on your ballot, might give you warm fuzzies all over - but you'll be getting those warm fuzzies at the expense of your fellow countrymen - the people who count the most on your vote.
Now hit me all you want. Tell me you're cool with that. Tell me this is the only way we're going to get change. But I don't fucking care. It's stupid and frankly, makes you look stupid.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Save your next one for the convention, please
sgtbenobo
(327 posts)....Place ham hocks, onion and garlic into a large cooking pot. Add
enough water to fill the pot about 3/4 full. Boil 1 to 2 hours or until the
hocks are tender. Add pinto beans and water as necessary and
continue cooking 1 to 2 hours more until the beans are done. If you
soaked the beans before hand, the time required for this part may be
reduced. If you like them zesty, a couple of Jalapeno peppers may be
added here. Taste is important here. I like to cook mine until the beans
begin to fall apart and the broth begins to look like thick bean soup, but
I feel this greatly enhances the flavor.
....oh wait, you were saying something. Scoot, I wish I could understand what you have to say but the rest of us and Bernie are just trying to get dinner on the table. Maybe you would like to bring some cornbread?
Sorry, sometimes the truth kicks your ass.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)
boston bean
(36,931 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And what are you doing, leaving out the carrots and celery?
...My point is, I've seen soooo goddamn many of these finger-waggling "vote for Democrats or I will be very cross!" posts over the last YEAR AND A HALF. Nobody's voting yet. And when they do vote next, it'll be the primaries. Who are - as far as i am aware - all Democrats. So the admonishment is moot.
It should be saved specifically for those people who, after the convention are going "hey, fuck our nominee!" 'cause that's the only time it'll matter. Before then, it's just increasingly obnoxious.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Rahm Emanuel wing of the party to know that they don't have to do shit for progressives because "where else are they going to go?".
But people are fed up with their views being dismissed. And not all are guaranteeing unconditional support for a candidate foisted upon them by the 1%.
So the finger wagging is about the right wing of the party checking in to see if people will hold their noses yet again.
Some will. Some won't.
Granted, no Democrats will vote for Republicans. But some may feel that since their views are scoffed at by the party that the 1%'s designated candidate is not worth getting off the couch for.
This discussion arises most often by posters who are baiting for re-assurance that everyone will hold their nose when the time comes, and they are not going to get that assurance. And that makes them nervous.
Raster
(21,010 posts)
MrScorpio
(73,772 posts)
GCP
(8,167 posts)Very righteous rant!
tomm2thumbs
(13,297 posts)Just wow!
ditto to:
If it's Bernie, you better fucking believe I'll be casting my vote for him in 2016.
If it's O'Malley, absolutely I will be voting for him in 2016.
If it's Hillary, for sure I'll be voting for her in 2016.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)Jim fucking Webb.?
Which republican will you vote for
MH1
(19,156 posts)Hmmm...
Webb vs Trump?
Webb vs Bush 3.0?
Webb vs Cruz?
and so forth.
Yep, Webb wins every time.
But I'm with you in saying we really don't want it to be Webb.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)Timothy J Smith. I am a better democrat than any but Bernie. All I need to do is pick good advisers and representatives. I have a net worth about the same as Bernie. I think like Bernie. Certainly a better choice than Webb the republican packed into a donkey suit. What is important. Education, whether intellectual or mechanical , for free. Health for all, for free. Homes for all at reasonable prices and interest rates and jail for the SOBs who try to manipulate that. Big taxes on big earners, unless they shove that money back into businesses for other people to run. No free trade agreements. No more subsidies for farmers or their insurance or their ethanol mandates. Huge waste of money. Food labeling to the max. There is no extra cost to do that than label it in the firs place. No advertising of drugs. Register all guns. The only illegal guns are those that are not registered. Australia actually showed the way. England does a fair job. Anyway, Timothy J Smith, Channahon, Illinois. If Bernie does not get to the nomination, guess who I am voting for?
MH1
(19,156 posts)49 people vote for Webb, the voters who voted for you may as well have voted for Bush 3.0, because that's who wins.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)We are in the mess we are in because we all voted for the least evil. If the SCOTUS got screwed up, it is because of what we have done in the past and voted for the least evil. Do you honestly think Jim Webb is going to appoint liberal justices, or should I say smart justices? I think not. Do you think HRC is going to appoint justices who would put bankers and derivative traders in jail? I think not. It is why candidates should be funded by the government and not some unknown PAC, and really they are not unknown.
One of these days the Koch brothers will realize that they can make money no matter who is in office and do it legally, morally and ethically. But right know do you think the SCOTUS would jail them or any mix of appointees by HRC or JW?
MH1
(19,156 posts)When I voted for Obama I wasn't voting for "the least evil".
timdog44
(1,388 posts)I voted for Obama as I thought he would be he next Roosevelt, sadly not. He did do a lot of things good, just not the right things. I think what happened is he let himself get surrounded by wrong thinkers. Also, I think being president is not as independently important as most people think.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)I'm not sure I was entirely aware things were so dire...
NanceGreggs
(27,835 posts)... never fail to point out that everyone is living in a van down by the river.
Thanks, Obama!
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)Thank Obama.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)I never said I did not appreciate the things Obama did in his time. Steps. We need to take steps. He has done that. I voted and campaigned for him. Thanks Obama. Time to move on. Really move on.
timdog44
(1,388 posts)dire comes in. We could be in better shape than now. Single payer ins. was not pursued as well as it could have been. The banker could have been put in jail instead of a slap on the hand. The engagement in middle east is a mess with the drones killing many innocents and making new terrorists. Arne Duncan did not and has not done a good job in his position in education, maybe in basketball. Things would be better if Obama had acted in the last couple years like he is now. So, not dire, but certainly not good.
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)Automatically voting for the Democrat in the general election forfeits any bargaining power you might hold in the primary. If a candidate(and that candidates followers) know your vote is a lock no matter what, they have no reason at all to appeal to you as a constituent, instead they'll spend their time reaching out to those who are on the fence, and those would be the moderates and undecideds in the middle. This is why nothing ever changes, each side just tries to win over the middle, knowing the others are already in the bag.
I honestly don't have an answer to this problem, and do plan on voting for whoever comes out the winner of the primary, but if I could see any alternative, I'd take it.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)We all know how the country's politics work. You not voting, or voting third party, actively hurts the Democratic nominee. That's a fact. You can excuse it all you want but that doesn't change the fact you're indirectly supporting the GOP agenda - and you're actively voting against the next Supreme Court Justice.
It's tantamount to not eating because the food options you're presented aren't the filet mignon you wanted. In the end, if you don't eat, you're starving yourself. The difference is that instead of starving yourself, you're starving the nation.
Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)
we can do it
(13,024 posts)
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)slimeburger is technically hamburger and it will sooth the pangs in my stomach, but if I work really hard I get a nice meaty chuck burger. Chuck is delicious. Pink slime is barely tolerable, but if it comes down to a choice between pink slime or shit on a stick . . . I'll take my chances with the slime.
markpkessinger
(8,912 posts)
InAbLuEsTaTe
(25,518 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(25,518 posts)I don't get it.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)I won't vote for a candidate that does not earn my vote, period.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)
we can do it
(13,024 posts)
irisblue
(37,512 posts)
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)a few hundred long posts. 
markpkessinger
(8,912 posts)Look, I see lots of folks supporting Sanders, lots of folks supporting Hillary, and also folks supporting O'Malley. But I have yet to see anyone actually state that they will refuse to vote for any one of them, should that candidate turn out to be the nominee. I personally hope Sanders wins the nomination. But hey, I've been around long enough to be fully aware, thank you, that elections come down to choices, and that sometimes, the choices aren't necessarily the ones I would prefer to have. And yes, in all likelihood, I will wind up supporting whoever is the Democratic nominee. But this is primary season, and if it's all the same to you, I'm not quite ready to telegraph my unqualified support for candidates I'm hoping I don't have to cast a vote for. Sorry, but I don't want any of the other candidates thinking my vot3e is something they can automatically take for granted. I think many progressives feel the same way.
It is unbelievably arrogant and condescending, when we are still so early in the primary season, for supporters of Candidate X (whom many regard as the presumptive nominee) telling supporters of Candidate Y or Candidate Z that they owe some advance pledge of support for Candidate X. If and when Candidate X wins the nomination, then we'll talk about rallying behind Candidate X, But demanding that kind of advance pledge of support at this stage in an an election cyele is wholly and utterly inappropriate.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)A lot of people are awful upset about Segami's repost of a Dailykos diary entry: "Please STOP TELLING ME I'll Vote for Hillary Clinton Because I'M A CHICK."
DanTex
(20,709 posts)gonna stamp her feet and try to ruin it for everyone else too. A good indication of just how far off the deep end the Hillary bashers have gone.
One of the good bonuses about Hillary getting the nomination is that all the anti-Democritic loons will no longer be able to post here.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)See that kind of arrogance is exactly why I rec'd it.
I'm sick of being told that Hillary is inevitable.
And that women should vote for other women because... vaginas.
Maybe you should ask yourself why so many Dems aren't supporting Hillary instead of accusing us of being traitors.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)If you don't want Hillary to be the nominee, vote for someone else. If enough people do that, someone else will get nominated. If not, then there aren't "so many" of them after all. And either way, once the primary is done and we have selected our nominee, stop with the silly games, and let's get on to the real opponents, the GOP.
I have no problem with Dems supporting someone else in the primary. I do have a problem with 12-year-olds who are afraid that they can't win the primary by actually supporting their candidate, and instead resort to try and blackmail the rest of us with helping throw the election to the GOP if they don't get to personally choose the nominee.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)And you wonder why there's a backlash against those kinds of bullying tactics.
I have a problem with hardliners demanding loyalty oaths before the primaries are over.
And I'm no less of a Dem than you because of it.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Perhaps you are on the wrong message board.
Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Hillary supporters bullying other Dems in the primaries, trying to drive us off, just like 2008.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)threatening to sit out the GE and throw a big tantrum if they didn't get their favorite flavor of ice cream. Now the Bernie people are using the same strategy.
Except they are resorting to it a little early. Usually threats to throw the GE to the Republicans don't come until it's clear that the candidate has no chance of winning. It's basically a Hail Mary.
Could it be that the Hillary bashers are not quite as certain that Bernie is going to win as they pretend?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Falsely accusing me of attacking your candidate while insulting supporters of Bernie, nice.
And by nice I mean predictable and exactly what I've come to expect from some Hillary supporters.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)vote for the eventual Democratic nominee, whether it's Hillary or Bernie or someone else. Let's all remember that the main goal here is to elect a Democrat.
George II
(67,782 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)That leaves 25% split between the others.
Autumn
(48,962 posts)
Oh the horror!!! 142 recs!beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)They're behind this, I just know it.
Autumn
(48,962 posts)Big Rec™ 
I love that, might have to use that.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)So...
And I don't support anyone yet. I'm supporting the nominee.
Kevin from WI
(184 posts)Or are you still deciding on who you will support in primary? Just curious because you said that you don't support anyone yet.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)But I don't know who yet. When Utah has its primary, though, the race will likely be over anyway.
markpkessinger
(8,912 posts). . . to this post, the OP in that thread did not refer -- anywhere -- to the general election. The title was, "Why I can't support Hillary," but the entire context of the post was that of the primary choice between Hillary and Bernie. And frankly, even if someone does say that now, during the primary season, it should probably be taken with a very large grain of salt. When faced with a choice in the general election, I believe most people here will ultimately make the best decision among the then-available options. But we aren't there yet. Right now, people are advocating hard for their preferred candidate, and expecting that people will make advance declarations of support for one of the other candidates should he or she win is thoroughly inappropriate.
And as for the number of recs, even if if the post had said what you read into it, there are many reasons people might choose to recommend a post even when they might not agree with a particular aspect of it.
The time to talk about coming together around a single candidate will be when we have chosen a nominee, not before. But let me ask you something: assuming, for this discussion, that Hillary wins the nomination, do you seriously think that the way to inspire the party to come together around her candidacy is to hector, even insult, those who, during the primary season, express their reservations about Hillary and/or express support for one of the other candidates?
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)I am referring to a post that was made over at Daily Kos that was linked here that said they would not vote for Hillary in the general - they'd either write in Bernie's name or not vote. That post received over 100 recs.
artislife
(9,497 posts)
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)
bonniebgood
(958 posts)if Ross Perot had won. Would we have kept Glass Steigel? Would
NAFTA been a dirty word? Would we have a sit load of private prisons and mass incarcerations? just wondering?
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Too many people have blinders on to the actual damage done by the Clinton administration, they only remember it was a good economic bubble at the time. But he left a big ole mess in his wake by enacting all those rethug policies. "Centrist" my ass.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)Both your scenario and mine are about as likely. Wanna know what really I'd l8kely? A GOP president, regardless if it's Sanders or Clinton. If you're not supporting the nominee, you indirectly support the GOP and their agenda.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)artislife
(9,497 posts)....hell, it's gonna be a long week.
Goodness gracious...
joshdawg
(2,965 posts)"A vote against the nominee is a vote for the Republicans. It's a vote for their agenda."
That statement tells it all.
dembotoz
(16,922 posts)
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)
PADemD
(4,482 posts)Also, a mandatory retirement age for Justices and cameras in the Court.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)Voting for the lesser of two evils is no longer an option. Voting for the lesser of two evils is what got us to the point that evil is usually the only choice.
Of course many here think ' ok there's a D next to his/her name thats good nufff for me' , Sorry ,integrity is not something I will toss aside just please the Democratic lap dogs.
Did your condescending rant make you feel better? Yes? Good....
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Dumber, does the GOP represent your beliefs? We did this in 2014, result, Republican congress, good win for GOP, bad loss off our beliefs.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)anniebelle
(914 posts)I've voted for the democratic candidate each and every election for 50 years and will continue to do so unless you give me a viable alternative. To NOT vote is a vote for the republican candidate, pure and simple.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)There are many who think they would walk away from Omelas, somewhat fewer who actually would.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas
http://engl210-deykute.wikispaces.umb.edu/file/view/omelas.pdf
ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)And imagining that it has anything much to say about politics, is at best a sign of disassociating from reality.
Ursula LeGuinn is a very good writer, so don't do her the disservice of treating her like some sort of liberal Ayn Rand.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... vote against the Republicans by selecting Hillary on my ballot.
I would have to hold my nose, real hard, because I don't believe there's a whit of difference between Hillary and the Republican field on economic, foreign relations and military issues.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Gothmog
(179,869 posts)
BooScout
(10,410 posts)Anyone not voting for the nominee is a spoiled child and needs to grow the hell up.
still_one
(98,883 posts)confederate flag as a symbol of "southern pride", is against the Iran deal, and has come out saying Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are not "his" democratic party. I guess "his democratic" party would be the democratic party during the time of Lincoln.
Mr. Webb, the democratic party that you long for, no longer exists, it is now the republican party, so I strongly suggest you go back to being the republican you were before you became a democrat for what you perceived at the time for political expediency.
My point being I have no problem casting my vote for Sanders, O'Mailey, Clinton, and even Chaifee, but there is no way I could vote for Jim Webb if he became the nominee.
Fortunately, the odds are very much against that
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)I doubt either will get out of the single digits for long.
still_one
(98,883 posts)particular candidates word view could be so offensive that one could legitimately argue they could not vote for that person
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)the young and politically uneducated or the silver spooners.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)It sucks, but you are entitled to it.
And btw, you don't get to tell anyone except yourself what their political stripe is. Please stop insulting our intelligence.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)Even the ones who somehow wind up with a -D after their names. And I make no apologies for this. If you think you're going to harangue me into violating this principle, think again.
CentralMass
(16,971 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Toodles, sunshine.
polichick
(37,626 posts)Doing the same thing over and over (Clinton, Obama, Clinton) and expecting a different outcome is pretty fucking stupid.
A vote for a Democrat, over & over, who isn't a Democrat is pretty f*cking stupid.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)...
TM99
(8,352 posts)Not all progressive leftists are loyal members of the Democratic party. We don't owe the party shit especially if they are stupid enough to put a New Dem as their candidate.
So, if you think insulting us, berating us, attempting to control us, or pissing us off is the right strategy to get such a sorry candidate elected, well, then you are living up to your DU name. 
Walk away
(9,494 posts)I would vote for Webb if every one else got run over by a campaign bus and he was driving it! Seriously.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Is this a loyalty oath thread or a cat shaming thread?
LWolf
(46,179 posts)Your opinion is noted.
I'm not talking about my vote in the GE at all. We aren't campaigning for the GE.
That said, I respect the right to choose, and that includes the right of each voter to vote their conscience. I could give the same rant, blaming people for the neo-liberal shift that is destroying our country, because they keep electing neo-liberals. In the end, the country gets what she votes for, and if you don't like what the country is voting for, get out there and convince people to vote differently.
If voters don't vote for the Democratic nominee, it's on that nominee for not earning the votes, and the Democratic Party for not nominating someone who can.
Reminding people of the Supreme Court can be an effective way to do so, but probably not if you are ranting and wanting loyalty oaths.
DinahMoeHum
(23,607 posts)from a speech she gave 12 years ago:
http://www.alternet.org/story/15789/don't_stand_in_the_way_of_our_joy
(snip)
There are many among us on the peace trail who will not support a candidate unless that candidate is perfect on every issue.
Politics is about winning.
For us, it is about winning to save lives and raise people up from poverty and illness and loneliness and injustice.
Those posturing on the left sometimes forget that.
Don't tell me that you can't support a particular candidate because of this or that. This isn't about you and your precious political standards. It is about saving nature and our people. We are coming out to win, so please don't stand in our way.
When we have reasonable people in power, let us start our arguments again, for we can not move forward unless we have a decent government underneath us and a Bill of Rights to let us speak freely.
(snip)
Vote progressive in the primary, vote Democrat in the general election.
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)No one is entitled to my vote. If you want it, put up a good nominee. But don't try to feed me a shit sandwich and then act like I'm the asshole when I won't eat it.
DinahMoeHum
(23,607 posts). . .keep waiting forever for that purple unicorn, cause I ain't.
BTW, I'm also supporting Bernie Sanders for the nomination.
If you can, tune into Netroots Nation 2015 this Saturday, as Sanders will be doing a Presidential Town Hall, along with Martin O'Malley. It's around 1:30 pm EDT (10:30 am Phoenix time)
http://www.netrootsnation.org/nn_events/nn-15/presidential-town-hall/
Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)then advocating Hilary to me is like offering me a large dog spray-painted pink with a toilet-paper tube strapped to its head. It's not what I'm looking for and trying to pass it off as such when it obviously isn't, is an insult.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and in this case, trying to beat it into to people with threats of scotus, etc may backfire. people generally do not like being told who to vote for, especially SINCE THE PRIMARY IS NOT CLOSE TO BEING DECIDED YET.
as for me, i am going to vote my conscience. and in the primary, that is bernie.
as for the general, why don't we focus on the nominating process first
rock
(13,218 posts)I've said it before, the Democrat politicians LOVE the Republicans as they don't have to work very hard at all to do better. It's practically like being on vacation. They're so far apart we have to use two scales to measure them. My point, if you vote for the Democrat, even without knowing who it is, you're improving things. I'm voting Democrat next general election!
we can do it
(13,024 posts)
ismnotwasm
(42,674 posts) apnu
(8,790 posts)Persondem
(2,101 posts).
kjones
(1,059 posts)Flying Squirrel
(3,041 posts)
is ok too 
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Im disgusted that so many failed to nurture any candidate. They had years to prepare a candidate. Everyone has known for years that Hillary was going to run. Now, now at the last moment, so many will choose to pass their vote to a Republican unless Bernie is a nominee.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)because then you get patronized with loyalist lectures. 
that being said. I have always voted for the DEM so far.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)I will vote how I please.
Cha
(319,076 posts)rufus dog
(8,419 posts)Based on this part
Jesus. We've seen, over the last six years, the difference between a Democrat and what the Republican haves to offer. The contrast between 2001-2009 and 2009-2015 couldn't be more stark. And yet, some are willing to forego any progress in the name of complete regression just to make a political point.
If a person can't ponder the last SIX WEEKS and determine how childish the statement makes them look then there ain't much hope.
Great post.