Democrats Are Taking An Unnecessarily BIG RISK With Hillary-- And For What?

[Segami]

Hillary has two positive things working in her favor: 1- she's a woman and America is long past do to elect a woman president; and 2- the Republicans are worse than she is. There are no other reasons for a progressive to vote for her and for people who think the lesser-of-two-evils is still evil, the Democrats' strategy will flop badly. I'm old and in my lifetime, we've never had a candidate like Bernie before, an opportunity for the change some Democrats naively thought Obama stood for. Tulchin Research, presumably hired by Bernie's campaign to survey the lay of the land came up with some findings I want to share. Recent polls for major news organizations contained "very encouraging news" for Sen. Bernie Sanders and warning signs on Hillary Clinton's general election prospects should she win the nomination, according to a memorandum by polling and strategic consulting expert Ben Tulchin. Significantly, Sanders fares better than Clinton in many head-to-head matchups with leading Republicans.



The independent surveys show the senator from Vermont continues to close the gap with the former secretary of state while voters' familiarity with Sanders and his favorability ratings are steadily rising, Sanders' pollster said. Moreover, Sanders' agenda has dominated the debate. His message about a rigged economy propped up by a corrupt campaign finance system "is driving the issue agenda within the Democratic primary," Tulchin wrote. Looking ahead to next year's general election, Sanders is much more popular than Clinton with independents and he is much better positioned with Republicans, factors Tulchin said raise "real questions as to which of these leading Democratic candidates is in fact the best positioned for the general election."

~snip~



Hillary is the candidate of the corrupt and hated establishment. This is the wrong cycle to be running an establishment candidate. People are sick of it and she's the wrong standard bearer-- on every conceivable level-- for progressives. She has nothing to offer whatsoever except more of the same... and, when it comes down to it, no one wants more of the same. And while the Republicans who are rejecting their establishment are going for implausible sociopaths like Ben Carson and Trump or an actual fascist (Ted Cruz), the best Hillary can hope for from disaffected Republicans is that they'll stay home. Bernie, on the other hand, has won among Republican voters before and polling shows that Republicans horrified by Trump or Cruz or Dr. Ben on the one hand-- or by Jeb Bush on the other hand-- will see Bernie as a viable, non-corrupt, alternative. As Tulchin puts it, "In an intriguing development, Bernie Sanders is much better received among Republicans than Hillary Clinton. The Vermont Senator’s favorables have increased twofold among Republicans since this summer, rising from 13% in July to 26% in the most recent ABC News/Washington Post poll. His net favorability rating (-30, 26% favorable to 56% unfavorable) is 40 points better than Hillary Clinton’s net favorability ratings as her negatives with GOP voters are extremely high (15% favorable to 85% unfavorable) and have been for a long time. The fact that Sanders is seen in such a different light by Republicans indicates he has more potential to win a larger share of Republican voters in a general election than does Clinton."



~snip~

This morning I was surprised to find a rather assertive headline for the Washington Post: Bernie Sanders is right: The top 0.1 percent have as much as the bottom 90 percent. The accompanying article by Max Ehrenfreund was an analysis of Bernie's spectacular Georgetown address which is getting so much attention today. Trump called him a communist but Ehrenfreund reorted that Bernie explained that "being a democratic socialist means believing that government must guarantee its citizens' material well being in order to truly protect their freedom, citing President Franklin Delano Roosevelt."


cont'

http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com

[onehandle]

1. INSERT BOLD HTML, LINKS, AND IMAGES HERE. nt

[SunSeeker]

46. LOL nt

[peacebird]

102. You forgot to add any content. Guess you have nothing real to add to the discussion.

[Shadowflash]

117. Good

A VERY reasoned and well thought out response that counters the original poster's ideas on their merit.

Thanks.

[sabrina 1]

126. Which means you agree with everything stated in the OP. Thanks, me too.

[Scootaloo]

155. Best pro-Clinton argument I've seen all week

[JaneyVee]

2. Yeah, we should nominate the guy who can't even break 25% in his own party.

A guy polling at 8% with black voters. 20% with women voters. 12% with latino voters. Talk about taking a risk. Sorry, but SCOTUS has launched an all out assault on my rights. We need a fighter, not a whiner.

[Cali_Democrat]

4. Bingo....

Why should we nominate someone who struggles to get support from minorities and women?

Two major Democratic constituencies which are the key to winning the Presidency.

It makes no sense.

[daleanime]

41. Yeahup, let's keep doing what we've been doing for the last 30 years....

it's worked so well for us. But you seem fairly happy with the status quo so I guess that's good for you. Have a lovely evening.

[Laser102]

61. Status quo? The last eight years our President has been Obama. One of the best presidents ever.

I would say he is anything but status quo!!! Right?

[daleanime]

74. ........

[SammyWinstonJack]

118. Unbelievable, isn't it? smh.

[Unknown Beatle]

84. Really? Do you really think that Obama is one of the best presidents ever?

Even after the TPP, the drone program, killing American civilians overseas without due process, protecting the banks and Wall St. after the crash of 08, filling his administration with Monsanto people, Obama's appointee to head FDA is a big pharma person, and a few more things that a true progressive would hate.

[ViseGrip]

131. ^^^^^this^^^^^

[PosterChild]

148. Best president in decades . ..

.... sincerely at least LBJ and maybe even fdr.

[rury]

178. AMEN!!!! I wish I could vote for him again

In fact I think I will write in "Barack Obama" on my Democratic primary ballot. Yes I will.


Signed,
"Not Ready For Hillary."

[Fast Walker 52]

180. he's been a real mixed bag-- he's done many huge things but he's undercut progressives

in many ways. Hard to call him one of the greatest with these unresolved wars.

[treestar]

112. Bernie being President wouldn't cause any major changes

he could only wield the power of the Presidency.

If you wanted real change, you'd either start some revolutionary cell or at least work on local elections and Congress.

[newthinking]

132. The president has the "bully pulpit". They can raise awareness and change the debate

Yes, in this time they could also take a lot of heat and nast, but people *will* respond and the dialog will change.

That has ALWAYS been the most powerful tool of the modern Presidency. The opportunity to LEAD the people to a better place.

The bully pulpit is more powerful that even right wing radio and TV, if onl we would stop this freaking fear of actually articulating a progressive populist message and actually use it to form a popular consensus.

The President also has tools he/she could use to stop the false narrative that are propagated and reduce the power of the MIC and others from undermining the message.

The Presidency is VASTLY powerful in a time like this if a good leader were to use it in it's intended way.

[treestar]

137. oh the bully pulpit miracle explanation

no, people are allowed to think for themselves in this country and even the POTUS has to deal with opposition.

[MsLeopard]

140. Once Bernie wins a couple of primaries

the battle cry will be, "Coattails, baby!" If his political revolution is going to come about, we will need to drive out the Thugs and blue dogs so he will have a Congress he can deal with. That will give him the power to make change, but we the people need to bring many progressives to Washington for anything to happen.

I believe he can do it and am working my butt off for him (and the country).

[treestar]

141. Seems like a dream to me

Heard it said before. The lower offices can't just be disregarded like that. Putting it all on one guy and his "coattails" makes it easier to think about, but it doesn't happen for real. Someone polling at 25% with Democrats is not going to sweep the entire nation off its feet like that.

[Voice for Peace]

66. not sure of your sources but they are inaccurate

There isn't a struggle going on. For every poll showing Hillary with the big leads, there's one showing the opposite. The endorsement from the lady in Cleveland is also a big deal.

[Cali_Democrat]

68. Show me poll showing Bernie leading with minorities or women.

Every poll I've seen for months shows him losing big with women and minorities.

[Voice for Peace]

73. sorry i have no links or facts at hand and limited access

to internet. But I have seen polls and read quite a bit from sources I trust. His support is growing exponentially and more in media are taking note.

It often seems here on DU that either people are pretending there's no viable, and principled, competition -- or they're being fooled by disinformation.

[Babel_17]

79. Zero sum polls

If a woman chooses Secretary Clinton, then the poll shows that as representing zero support for Senator Sanders. The better, more expensive, polls really go into the levels of preference. And this is where it gets interesting.

Clinton supporters generally would support Sanders if he was our nominee. But of the many Independents, Democrats who don't always vote, and young voters new to the game, who are coming out for Sanders, there is less crossover to their willingness to show up and vote Democratic to support Clinton. This can seem unfair to Clinton, but the point to take away is that many/most of these voters weren't really for the taking by our party. It's Sanders that has brought them out.

To sum it up, with Sanders we get extra voters in November 2016. Without somebody who can generate his enthusiasm among the disenchanted class of voters, we could suffer a net loss of voters, regardless of how fondly that candidate is embraced by the majority of Democrats.

[Baadger]

127. Well said

n/t

[KingCharlemagne]

160. Eerily reminiscent of Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and '56 - nt

[Beartracks]

170. Not just a net loss of Dem voters....

... but a gross gain of Republican voters. That's what I fear: Hillary will galvanize Republicans to vote in whatever loon is their nominee simply to keep her out of office.

==========

[eridani]

83. Let's go instead with the candidate who has nothing for the 63% n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

110. Because he is going to attract millions and millions of disaffected working class voters ...

and republicans, too.

I read that on DU.

[PosterChild]

150. Must be true! eom

[1StrongBlackMan]

153. Well ... That seems to have been the model from Day One. n/t

[Starry Messenger]

9. Right?

Good lord. "Hey, we think people who don't usually vote will vote for this new guy." Oh, ok!

[-none]

106. The only one running that is not a member of any of the lesser of the evils, that represent more

of the same?
Hell yeah, I'll vote for him.

[zeemike]

25. Right, in a poll of "likely Democratic primary voters"

But polls winning against likely GOP candidates in the GE. And Hillary polls struggling against the same ones.
Can you see the disconnect here?
Likely Democratic primary voters make us a very small percentage of the total electorate. And in fact Independents outnumber both D and R.

Those poll voters you talk about will not win the GE.

[ejbr]

26. True

Latinos, women and blacks will so quickly vote for a Republican rather than Bernie. I mean Latinos will ignore the Republican immigration policy, women will forget that they want to control their bodies, and well blacks, they will accept that Republicans are trying to prevent them to vote!

Yes, too risky.

[hughee99]

38. Well said.

It's not as if only Clinton can get their vote in the general election.

[George II]

39. Nominating Sanders isn't risky - we KNOW the republican, whichever it is, will win in November.

[A Simple Game]

120. Thanks for clearing it up.

We do know from the polls that Bernie does better in the general election than Hillary. But you really didn't have to post a picture of the candidate that will lose to the Republicans.

[reformist2]

49. This makes no sense. We can't argue for a candidate who isn't already the frontrunner???

[tecelote]

94. +1

[NurseJackie]

69. !!! TRUE !!!

He will be the loser sooner than he thinks.

^H

[2pooped2pop]

93. if so, we all will be. n/t

[NurseJackie]

108. No we won't.

[pangaia]

135. yes we will

[pinebox]

144. Ya we will Jackie

and so will they!

[1StrongBlackMan]

109. In all fairness ...

A guy polling at 8% with black voters.

There is that poll that has Bernie at 16% with Black voters ... and several Black facebook pages with a couple hundred anonymous likes.

[nyabingi]

177. Hillary's support among potential Black voters

has everything to do with her name recognition (not her policies) and Bernie's lack of it thus far.

Many older Black Americans are fond of the Clintons (I don't know why), but Bernie is starting to win some converts slowly but surely and if he intensifies his outreach efforts he will win more. My parents are both pro-Hillary at this point simply because they aren't as familiar with Bernie (although my dad, who's very politically-aware, knows him and likes his policies), but they are both beginning to say "I like what that Bernie Sanders has been saying." His message is one that is destined to win over voters if they have a chance to hear it and can drown out the pro-Hillary media who coronated her a while ago.

If Bernie wins the Democratic election, he stands a much better chance at winning the general than another Clinton who is reviled by every Republican and not liked too much by more than a few Democrats.

[1StrongBlackMan]

179. Thank for telling me what is going on ...

In the Black community ... a community that I am very active in, politically and socially.

And, here is my observation ... Bernie's lack of traction IS NOT merely a matter of name recognition; nor, is that the basis of HRC's support.

[nyabingi]

184. Like I said, too many Black people

are operating under the erroneous notion that the Clinton's are allies of the Black community (with Toni Morrison even having the nerve to call Bill our "first Black president&quot when they've been anything but. Too much attention has been given to the lip service and not to the actual policies she has been supporting. Sure, she's saying she's against mass incarceration now, but he natural instinct on that matter was to appease the racists and support jailing as many Black people as possible.

Do you think Hillary's ideals are more appealing to the Black electorate than Bernie's? Is that why you think she's leading him right now in the Black community? Other than simple name recognition and familiarity, I can't see any other possible reason she's ahead in the Black community right now.

[1StrongBlackMan]

186. Question ... Are you an African-American? ...

Do you think Hillary's ideals are more appealing to the Black electorate than Bernie's?

I think, and from what I am hearing, "IDEALS" only matter to dreamers, actions and ability to put those actions into action is what counts ... and that is the primary reason for his lack of traction among the Black electorate ... The Black electorate has little confidence that Bernie will be able to put any of his plans into action.

(And ... I believe that lack of confidence is well founded, based on his legislative record ... No votes right; but, has shown little leadership on matters of my concern; nor, does he have the support among his congressional peers.)

Funny ... When I first read that, I read, "IDEAS" {no "L"} ... to which I would have said, NO, Bernie's ideas do appeal to the Black electorate.

[nyabingi]

187. I've been one strong, PROUD Black man

for all of my 44 years and I will be 'til I take my last breath. I thought that was apparent from what I was saying but I guess you can't be too sure when talking to people online whom you can't see or talk to directly. If you need actual proof of my Blackness, it can be provided lol.

I used the word "ideals" because it goes a bit deeper than "ideas". "Ideals" are one's core beliefs and they set certain parameters to gauge how a person is going to react to any given situation. Bernie's ideals have been immutable and pretty unchanged for many decades of public service (from supporting civil rights for non-white Americans, LGBT Americans, the poor and working classes, economic fairness and corporate accountability, etc.). His core ideals are towards the left end of the political spectrum, and they are, in my opinion, more in line with what the Democratic Party represented before the rise of the right-wing, pro-corporate wing of the Party, represented by the likes of Hillary and Obama.

The same can't be said of Hillary, however. Her core ideals always manifest on the right of the political spectrum - indeed, pretty much on the Republican end. From corporate accountability, minimum wage issues, gay rights, hawkishness on foreign policy, etc., Hillary reliably comes down on the right side of the political spectrum until polls tell her otherwise. Her ideals are essentially Republican on many issues but she's managed to persuade many people to ignore that facet of her basic character. Once in office as president, I question whether she will maintain her "progressive" facade when her ideals are pretty much right-wing on too many issues.

What would be the benefit to anyone if Hillary (who apparently has a magic wand which will summon obedience on legislation from her Republican colleagues) can "get things done", but those things are harmful to many Americans? What good is foreign policy experience if your experience leads you to think more war and defense spending is a good thing (Dick Cheney also has a lot of experience for that matter)? Hillary wouldn't be able to get any more legislation passed than Obama has, so why bet on the candidate who's going to sell out our interests (as Obama did by omitting the public option from the ACA) simply to get a bit of what they want in some bad legislation?

If Bernie were president, he'd have a much larger audience to present his views (which are not out of line with many voters) and have the constituent backing to increase pressure to compromise from reluctant politicians in DC. Politicians will only vote for certain bills if they feel they will receive negative publicity from voting against it, and that's the power that the presidency can provide to get things like universal health care passed in Congress. It will ultimately be up to the people of this country to force our politicians to take action.

[1StrongBlackMan]

188. Okay ... I asked because I have seen a lot of non-Black, Bernie supporters ...

Last edited Tue Nov 24, 2015, 02:20 PM - Edit history (1)

writing, with authority, about what is happening in the Black community ... name recognition (or lack thereof) and all. And what they report is in wild contrast with what I see and hear in my circles of activism. In fact, I have yet to meet a Black Bernie supporter in real life ... the only place I have encountered Black Bernie supporters has been on the internet ... despite being active in my local Democratic Party, my local Urban League, and my Fraternity (on the local and national level).

Further, while virtually everyone that I know, knows who Bernie is (and his record/history), but I have met less than ten (10) Black folks that have worked with, or knows anyone that has worked with, Bernie; whereas, I know, literally, hundreds of Black folks that have worked with, or knows anyone that has worked with, HRC. And of those people I know, the former group's reported impression has been tepid (at best), and the latter group's impression has been positive.

Bernie's ideals have been immutable and pretty unchanged for many decades of public service (from supporting civil rights for non-white Americans, LGBT Americans, the poor and working classes, economic fairness and corporate accountability, etc.).

And yet, he appeared(s) loathe to put voice to those decades of ideals (beyond tying them to economic inequality).

Her core ideals always manifest on the right of the political spectrum - indeed, pretty much on the Republican end. From corporate accountability, minimum wage issues, gay rights, hawkishness on foreign policy, etc., Hillary reliably comes down on the right side of the political spectrum until polls tell her otherwise.

I will agree that HRC's ideals fall to the right of Bernie; but, are far from the right of the political spectrum, as a whole, or even of the Democratic Party ... Rather, HRC falls right about in the middle of the Democratic base.

If Bernie were president, he'd have a much larger audience to present his views (which are not out of line with many voters) and have the constituent backing to increase pressure to compromise from reluctant politicians in DC. Politicians will only vote for certain bills if they feel they will receive negative publicity from voting against it

This, simply, is no longer true ... witness "gun control", even after Sandy Hook ... thanks to the post-2010 gerrymandering.

[nyabingi]

189. I think as Bernie continues his campaign and gets in front of more Black

audiences, we will warm to him and his message. He is facing a monumental task in convincing Black voters to abandon Clinton in his favor because if anything, we as an electorate are faithful to a terrible fault.

The general consensus among many politically unsophisticated Black voters (i.e., those who only get their news from corporate-owned and regulated sources and thus have a limited and narrow perspective on many issues) is that Bill Clinton was a good president and since Hillary Clinton served under Barack Obama (the nation's first Black president), she in turn must be good. From back in the days to when Bill played saxophone on the Arsenio Hall Show, Bill worked to create the impression among Black people that he was "down", that he empathized with our concerns and aspirations. It worked, despite the fact that much of his tenure was spent cajoling conservatives and signing off on their bad legislation in order to appeal to white voters who were never going to vote Democratic again unless the party reverted to its pre-civil rights era stances.

Hillary is benefiting from that familiarity and the trust Bill established and Obama cemented by having her in his administration. And you're right, almost all of the Black people I'm associated (from immediate family to distant friends) with are in the pro-Hillary camp, but Bernie's ideals are actually more appealing on many levels. Unless they've actually looked into him on their own, many of us haven't had much exposure to what Bernie is talking about.

I'm not a Sandernista, and I've had to jump on more than a few white Bernie supporters for stepping out of line when the BLM movement was showing up at his protests. I have serious reservations with his foreign policy (and by "serious reservations", I mean hate) and I could never call myself a Sanders supporter with that being the case. Bernie has also been close to the weapons industry and I believe his hawkishness in terms of defense is tied to the economy of Vermont and the industries there. These are too big faults that give me pause, but I can say in no uncertain terms that I would NEVER cast a vote for Hillary Clinton.

I think the political spectrum in this country has shifted so far to the right since 9/11 that yesteryear's moderate conservatives would be considered liberal or even progressive today. Hillary and the DLC/Third Way crew are part of the reason behind that shift, and this is why I continue to say that her core ideals express themselves to the right of the spectrum (as witnessed by her recent speech on her hawkish Syria/Middle East stance). I think American voters hungered for a distinctive move back to the political left when Obama was first running in '08 (especially after eight years of virtual fascism under Bush), but he turned out to be more in the model of the rightist Clinton type Democrats. Bernie's support is coming mainly from voters who are still hoping the same thing in 2015.

I've always voted for Democrats even when I changed my official registration to independent but I'm finding it harder to do it now simply to make sure a Republican doesn't get elected - the guilt of voting for a bad apple is a little more poignant at this point in my life (guilt I'm still feeling from my 2012 Obama vote). My civic engagement has always been mainly through more left-of-center political parties, anti-war groups, and popular democracy organizing. My dad is an Alpha (JCSU class of '64) but after a disastrous first semester at UNC, I spent the next year and a half getting my GPA back into good status and felt I missed the Greek boat when it sailed lol, got into politics and haven't thought too much about it since then. The Omegas and Kappas are more prominent in my hometown, and both have houses pretty close to where my parents live. Whichever frat or sorority, I think they all have important roles they can play in our communities.

All politicians are pretty much compromised by their allegiance to their hometown electorates and their own moral principles (Bernie's rather pro-gun stance for example). I truly hope that things can be changed in DC because if it always means abandoning what is truly good and beneficial for the majority of Americans, it's not really worth being in DC in the first place.

[1StrongBlackMan]

190. Thank you for your response ... and I mostly agree ...

well, not with the whole name recognition/Black folks don't know who Bernie is stuff ... No one that says this can explain how/why politically sophisticated Black folks support Bernie, in roughly the same percentages, as those termed politically unsophisticated.

[Tommy2Tone]

122. Truth JaneyVee

[rhett o rick]

123. Goldman-Sachs doesn't care about your social justice issues. If HRC wins she will find some

excuse to explain why nothing is done. Just remember Obama and Gitmo. Those that hitch their wagons to the billionaires limo's are going to be disappointed. They are the reason we are where we are. They are backing HRC for a reason and it sure as hell isn't social justice.

[sabrina 1]

128. Haven't seen the latest poll from NBC have you? Bernie is closing the gap even in those

'traditional' polls and is now only 16 points behind Hillary. An absolutely amazing accomplishment for someone who was unknown just a few months ago.

And he will continue to do so as more people learn about who he is.

This is why DWS is trying to stop the public from learning about him, because when they do, his ratings increase as they have even with all the attempts to depress interest in the debates. I guess they forgot about the New Media.

[PosterChild]

145. +100 !! (NT)

[humbled_opinion]

157. LOL no we should nominate

the one with a national trust deficit... a party where less than half trust her on the issues and hope that somehow Republicans and the middle won't worry about email scandals, Benghazi leadership, and the current world wide TERRA scare.... but maybe she will be indicted and that will render all of this bickering moot, or will it????

[Hekate]

3. Twaddle

[BootinUp]

6. Doesn't everyone remember the last time we elected

a politician that use Bernies rhetoric and out-of-the-norm policy proposals to win the white house?

What president is Bernie most similar to in our history? (and this must include how they campaigned)

[99th_Monkey]

11. What exactly is so "out of the norm" about FDR's New Deal and his 2rd Bill of Rights? nt

[BootinUp]

12. Do you have some insight on how he campaigned?

What I am interested in is whether Bernies strategy is sound based on history.

[99th_Monkey]

14. You will need to be more specific as to what you mean by "Bernies strategy"

Do you mean for winning in the Primary? ... or maybe for winning in the GE?

or do you mean his strategy for implementing his proposals to level the economic
playing field once he's elected in the GE?

Simply asking "whats his strategy?" could mean any number of things.

[Live and Learn]

15. His honesty? Integrity? Consistency? That is all I got. nt

[Drunken Irishman]

23. FDR campaigned on cutting the budget and portrayed Hoover as a Big Spender.

Things changed when he got elected, though. FDR, however, trumpeted a balanced budget on the campaign trail.

[99th_Monkey]

31. I see what you mean now. Thanks

I think Bernie's strategy for winning both primary and GE is abundantly clear,
to be truthful with the electorate about WTF is really going on with our economy
and how fucked the Middle Class is getting, and will keep getting, with more of
the same Establishment politics in DC, now more than ever thanks to CU.

There's no deep dark secret about it.

If the electorate ends up putting another Establishment politician into the WH,
they'll have no one to blame but themselves, because Bernie is giving us a REAL
choice, a rare politician who tells the truth, who walks his talk, and who has a 3-
decades long record to prove it.

[treestar]

113. Congress was involved in that too

and he had a very favorable Congress.

[tblue37]

146. Bernie might have coattails. I honestly don't think Hillary will. nt

[treestar]

147. People don't want to work on the lower office elections

this kind of attitude of putting all on the Presidency is why we have such a Republican congress.

It's nice to think it's so simple that one man/woman can be inspiring enough for people to completely change Congress.

[Art_from_Ark]

185. He had a lot of opposition from Southern Democrats

Most notably, Senator Carter Glass of Virginia, who decried the New Deal as "Communism".

[PosterChild]

151. Fdr was not...

.... a self-descrbed socialist . FDR ran against and defeated four socialist candidates. Bernie is out of the norm because he decided to run as a socialist first and as a Democrat only for convenience and necessity .

[99th_Monkey]

156. Yes, Bernie is a political anomaly, an unapologetic Independent Democratic Socialist, a rare gem

IMHO, who has caucused with Democrats in DC for over 25 years, voting with Democrats more than
many of his colleagues with a "D" after their name.

So what if Bernie is a "self-described socialist"? Does that scare you off, from looking at what he
actually stands for, or considering his long and distinguished record of voting consistently over decades
for progressive, pro-worker, pro-LGTG, pro-environment, pro-middle-class policies . ?

So what if FDR 'ran against' a few obscure also-ran nobodies with an "S" after their name in his GE?
These guys barely pulled 1% of the vote if they were lucky; why should this dissuade me from voting
for Bernie Sanders again?

[PosterChild]

166. Me, Scared?

LOL, This isn't about me.... it's about winning an election. So what if bernie's a socialist ? Well, the american public is more likely to elect an athiest than a socialist!

http://www.gallup.com/poll/183713/socialist-presidential-candidates-least-appealing.aspx

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/17/could-a-socialist-actually-be-elected-president/

[99th_Monkey]

168. What's done is done. What exactly is to be gained by quibbling over this issue?

I'd much rather invest energy in educating the electorate about the fact that the kind of FDR/
New Deal/Medicare/Social Security 'socialism' Bernie stands for is as American as apple pie,
just like Bernie is doing, and did so well at Georgetown University the other day.

[PosterChild]

173. Invest all the energy you want in.....

...... educating the electorate. However , imho , you can run a campaign to educate the public or you can run an campaign to get elected, but you can't do both .

In fact, you can’t really run a campaign to educate the public. The public will just ignore you and pay attention to the "serious" candidates. Like that Harvard proff who was running on some single issue.

[99th_Monkey]

175. Oh I see. You're playing "the serious candidate" card. fine

We all know the baggage that carries, including getting bought & sold before the election by
the highest bidders <- who are NOT we the people, but the very corporate interests that are
screwing we the people.

thanks but no thanks. You can keep your "sensible Woodchuck" candidate. I'm sticking with
Bernie, the real deal, who walks his talk.

[PosterChild]

176. No problem, you do what...

..... you want to do. Me, I'm not supporting a candidate that I don't think can win in the general election . I'm a "serious candidate " voter all the way .

[Fred Sanders]

7. The frontrunner is the risk?? The one Republicans set up two committees to get dirt on? Yeah, sure!

The life long socialist with no foreign policy experience is the unacceptable risk.

[PosterChild]

152. +100 !! (NT)

[DCBob]

8. Bernie is by far the bigger risk.

Its obvious to me.

[Thinkingabout]

30. Agree, I do not trust his decision making when dealing with foreign affairs, too many tough decision

On a shaky bridge.

[Amimnoch]

56. Not to mention.. he doesn't actually accomplish anything.

Great speeches.. nothing more.

Easy for those who do nothing to sit back and cast stones at the ones who do make things happen when something they do is occasionally less than perfect.. then it's easy to cherry pick the things to complain about (not entirely unlike the bible thumpers that have their select verses from their fictional book, but will ignore the rest that is inconvenient to them).

[99th_Monkey]

10. The DWS/DNC/3rdWay Establishment doesn't give a rat's ass about winning the GE

They are making that abundantly clear, by insisting that "It's Hillary's turn, dammit!", while
buggering the Primary debate schedule, and pre-emotively locking up super-delegates, to force
their Wall St. darling down our throats.

Bernie is by far our best GE candidate, and they know it, but are not willing to act in the
best interests of We the People or the nation, because they are blinded by the same lust for
power & money that drives most Establishment politicians to kiss the ring of the 1% Wall
Street greed-heads.

If she's the nominee, we'll be lucky to get "more of the same", because Hillary is much worse
than Obama, and probably will lose the General Election, so we'll get the very thing Clintonistas
warn would be the worst possible outcome -- a Republican in the White House.

It's pathetic beyond words.

[Phlem]

13. Yep!

Pride in ignorance. The greatest American export.

[Live and Learn]

17. +1 nt

[CharlotteVale]

18. Ding ding ding we have a winner.

[BootinUp]

19. Your assertion is absurd. nt

[Phlem]

43. .....

[George II]

42. Funny, I've never heard anyone say "it's Hillary's turn", much less "dammit".

[Amimnoch]

60. It's their imagined meme. Somehow makes them feel better

about the obnoxious name calling if they can imagine some kind of presidential entitlement. Would be humorous if it wasn't so wretchedly pathetic.

[beerandjesus]

91. .

[BainsBane]

48. I have a few questions

Which of her policies are like the GOP? Be specific. I provide them here so you can support your claims.https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

It seems to me you have not actually looked at her policies, or you couldn't possibly make that claim.

Now, perhaps you can tell us which candidate voted for the Wall and the Minutemen, which voted against the Brady Bill, who voted to allowed loaded weapons in state parks, and who voted for immunity for gun corporations? Those are all GOP positions as determined by the majority of Republican votes and positions taken by the GOP leadership.

Explain to me why you think it acceptable for a minority of voters within the Democratic Party to determine the nomination? Why are you and other Sanders supporters, who amount to some 25-30 percent of the Democratic electorate, so much more important that your votes should count more than the sixty odd percent of Democrats who support Clinton?

If you really don't think the party doesn't care about winning the general election, you really have no clue about politics.
What you call "her turn" is the result of decades of hard work. Hard work forming allegiances, cultivating relationships with community groups, congress people and local politicians, unions, education groups, social activists, and going out and asking voters for their support. But no, Bernie shouldn't have to work to build relationships within the party or with voters. The little people owe him their allegiance. He doesn't need to ask for it. He is owed it, just like his supporters are certain they and they alone get to determine who should be president, damn the will of the majority. Who are the little people to think their votes count?

I believe in one thing very strongly: I prefer ever single American vote, even if they choose someone I loathe, than have a minority of voters select someone I want. That is because I believe in democracy. I believe all Americans, indeed all human beings, are equal, and the ones who happen to agree with me, live like me or look like me are no better than others. I see anything that violates that principle--whether it be voter restrictions or determination that the will of a minority should prevail--as reflective of an inegalitarian value system.

[99th_Monkey]

78. I know enough about Hillary to know this: a) she's been bought by Wall St. already (donor base)

b) She and Bill don't just represent Wall St. and the 1%, they ARE the 1% based on their income & wealth,
c) She will say anything to get elected, then do whatever makes her major donors happy,
d) or the inverse of c, she'll work to create the TPP, calling it a "gold standard", then say she's "opposed" to
it with weasel-words that allow her to reverse her position again and back it, once elected.
e) That she's 'invested' over $1 Million for "polling services" already, to endear herself to the industry, if not
buy the results she wants outright.
f) That these polls you cite showing Hillary as the 'front-runner' rarely, if ever, include MANY voters who will
be voting in the Primary.
g) That not even ONE primary election has happened yet, and no one (including the "all-knowing" polling
companies) knows what the actual election results will be, so people should absolutely not base anything
on "what the polls show.." as a reason so back any candidate.
h) Hillary is WAY more hawkish on foreign policy than Bernie or O'M, and that in itself would determine my
vote, even without considering a-g above.

[BainsBane]

82. If the polls are wrong

You have nothing to worry about. You are right that no votes have been cast, but you are angry, acting like it's over, and furious at what you imagine will be the result. That was the tenor of your post, and that is what I responded to.

Yes, Hillary is in the 1 percent. So is Obama, so was FDR, JFK, and Al Gore. How is it that is only a problem this election and not during any other? How is it that Kerry's obscene level of wealth not raise this kind of criticism? What is so unacceptable about Clinton having wealth, when it is substantially less than most of the names I listed above, two of whom are hailed as Democratic heroes?

2) Clinton's donors are ordinary Americans making small contributions, just like Sanders donors. Wall Street money, according to Paul Krugman, is going almost exclusively to the GOP. Of course there are rich Democrats: lawyers, Hollywood, some businessmen, and no shortage of them are contributing to Sanders as well. In fact, those rich Sanders donors have been celebrated on this very site.

3) Your excuse for not examining her policies is you don't believe her. That says a lot about you but nothing about her. It provides ZERO evidence of GOP-like positions and shows that you are entirely uninterested in policy or issues. You dislike her. You don't care what her policies are, so you will not inform yourself.

4) Campaigns pay for polls. There is nothing nefarious about it.

5) How is she WAY more Hawkish than Bernie? I'd like to know, really. Bernie sure sounded like a hawk during last week's debate. He voted against the Iraq War resolution, and good for him for doing so. Yet he voted for the Authorization of Forces Resolution and subsequent bills funding the Iraq war. He supports using US forces in alliance with regional powers to fight ISIS. The main difference in the debate was that Bernie didn't know that all Muslim nations weren't taking the exact same position, that Turkey and Jordan weren't identical in their policy. He also didn't understand the importance of not declaring an ideology and religion the enemy. The difference is a crucial one, and failing to understand that can only increase tensions.

He support the Israeli occupation of Palestine. How is Clinton more hawkish there? He's supported a number of other military incursions, the majority in fact. And he lacks Clinton's diplomatic experience. So how, pray tell, is she "way more hawkish."?

[99th_Monkey]

88. Yes, I "dislike her". True dat.

I admire Bernie's courageously standing in the breach, to attempt to restore something
like an actual democracy in America... unlike Hillary who uses CU while saying she's
opposed to it.

Bernie's Georgetown Univ. speech speaks for me as well. Most of us will remain slaves
to the Oligarchy unless and until income inequality is turned around decisively, and
Hillary has not convinced me she's much "into" doing that. Quite the opposite.

She has no interest in standing firm for FDR's New Deal or his 2nd Bill of Rights, or
Medicare single-payer for all, or any of that 'socialist' stuff.

I could go on and on, spend more precious time to counter your insinuations, but I'm
choosing to pass on that, at least for tonight.

Until next time, cheers.

[KingCharlemagne]

161. Sanders supporter here, but you make the best case for her that I've read here yet. Her

Iraq War vote was and is the show stopper for me, but I see your points.

Thanks.

[GoneFishin]

58. Yep. Running a Wall Street candidate screws the Democratic base. She will get zero Republican

cross over votes, even though many Republicans acknowledge that their own candidates are all nuts. I have never met a Republican who does not love to hate her. And she will inspire apathy among Democratic voters who would rather stay home and watch Saved By The Bell reruns.

The Democratic Party does not give a shit about the Democratic base. Their goal is to get a 1%er into the WH, a Democrat if possible, or a Republican if necessary.

[Amimnoch]

63. So.. the biggest benefit of Bernie is that he can get Republicans to vote for him?

And that's supposed to sell me? Interesting.

I think I'll prefer the Democratic Candidate that has the support of Democrats.. women.. minorities.. and the vast majority of everyone else that isn't Republican. But you tell me how this woo the Republicans to our cause thingy works out.

[GoneFishin]

67. No. I'm saying Hillary is a liability because she won't win the GE. But if you are making a couple

of million dollars a year then that won't be important to you because Hillary and every Republican is your friend. Anybody but Bernie, right?

[Amimnoch]

70. Are these the same polls that are saying Bernie won't even win the primary?

Odd how your side finds validity in the GE polls, but feels this great need to "deconstruct" the ones that have him losing in the primary.

Of course, a bit of common sense would dictate that right now All of the candidates.. on both sides of the aisle (including Hillary) are running their Primary campaigns right now (you know the one where she's winning in the polls). You do realize that we are still a couple of months away from the Primaries, right? more than half a way from when the ones that do win the primary start running for the general?

Sadly, I am quite a very long way from that couple million a year that you fantasize about. Also, thank you for quite incorrectly trying to clarify my stance. I'd take Bernie over anyone in the Republican field of candidates. Granted the poor man would either be completely worthless as president or have to greatly disappoint all of you who have put him up on that high pedestal, but I'd take him over any Republican. I just won't chose him over an actual Democrat that will actually give us some progress forward.

Thanks again.

[DocMac]

90. Got that right.

[Scuba]

97. Bingo. Republicans will turn out in record numbers to vote against her while Democrats ...

... will have one of the lowest turnouts in our history.

If Hillary is our nominee, a Republican will likely win the White House, and there will be no coattails for taking back the Senate either.

[raouldukelives]

98. Yep. Except for the fact they kiss the ring of every shareholder.

From the 1% and on down. They both do all they can, within each individuals own power & investments, to assure nothing ever gets better. Well, for anyone but them that is.

[Enthusiast]

100. Huge +1!

[Hepburn]

105. KNR on this post alone...

...although the OP was brilliant, too!

Spot on to both of you!

[Duval]

16. More are hearing his message and like it.

I've been liking it since before he announced on Thom Hartmann's program. His ideas speak for me and I support him 100%. I hope he is our candidate, but if Hillary is I will vote for her. Dems need to win, people. Please vote regardless of the eventual nominee.

Thanks, Segami.

[George II]

44. Sorry, the more people hear "his message" the further behind he drops.

[Amimnoch]

65. Really, he got that good bump in the middle of Summer,

and just like the Republicans, whom apparently his campaign is trying to woo now (one of his supporters stance in this very thread not mine), the longer he goes on, the lower he goes.

[fbc]

20. for $$$$$$$$$

[img][/img]

[smiley]

32. I alerted on your graphic.

It's nothing personal and I agree with the sentiment of the post, but I don't think it belongs here on DU. Obviously others disagree with me, otherwise it would be hidden.

Just thought you should know who it was that alerted on you. I'm not a Hillary supporter at all, but I wouldn't be surprised if I get accused of it because of this action. DU is a strange place for sure.

Go Bernie!

[fbc]

40. I've posted it several times

It got alerted on once before but LEAVE IT ALONE won that time too.


Perhaps it's borderline...

[smiley]

53. First time I've seen it....

It doesn't offend me, but I definitely think it's offensive to those who support Clinton.

But I'm okay with the jury decision too! I figured I'd leave it up to the community.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

136. Meh. It's "attacking" a candidate in the primary...

...which is reasonably fair game.

And speaking as a Clinton supporter, it says much more about you than about her.

Let me explain: most Americans see a candidate being able to bring national prosperity as a positive, not a negative.
So if you want to post graphics that essentially says "Ohh that terrible Secretary Clinton! Wherever she goes, dollars appear", I'm not exactly going to complain.

This is why I've never really disliked Senator Sanders. He's clearly helping Hillary in the general, by showing her to be the adult moderate in the race.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[smiley]

174. why does it say anything about me?

I didn't post the graphic.

Let me explain something, as a Bernie supporter I had a class and alerted on the graphic. But it's absolutely spot on in describing Hillary Clinton and the politics she represents, but it does a horrible job of presenting the argument with class, so I personally would never consider posting a graphic such as this.

But I've never like Clinton. She represents everything that is wrong with politics and the Democratic primary. An ideal you and your moniker seem to embrace. One that I find particularly disgusting. But thanks for filling me in and proving to me the shallow, condescending nature of most of the Clinton supporters on this board. Now maybe you want to go spout your crap to the person who posted it.

Have an wonderful day. Welcome to my ignore list!

[Egnever]

33. The sad state of DU

On Fri Nov 20, 2015, 03:00 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

for $$$$$$$$$
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=833301

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

I'm a Bernie supporter, but this post is disruptive and divisive on a democratic message board and serves to only make Bernie supporters look like republican trolls.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Nov 20, 2015, 03:06 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the alerter.. thanks Bernie supporter! HIDE for stupid
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Meh
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: nice try, leave it, the truth is hard to accept.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This is democratic underground not freepervile. Or at least it used to be.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[litlbilly]

36. The truth is, with Hillary it is all about the money, so that pic is correct in that respect

[coyote]

85. Alert it? It should be its own OP

Brilliant!

[peacebird]

104. Love it! Especially in light of the Clinton Foundation's "mistake"

[smiley]

21. k&r

I couldn't agree more. Thanks for sharing.

Go Bernie!

[Spitfire of ATJ]

22. There are lots of celebrity Democrats "ready for Hillary" to give them high ranking government jobs.

[Lil Missy]

24. Didn't you hear ... Hillary is WAY ahead of Sanders. Bernie is the riskier one. And incidentally,

being the most popular on DU is not how elections are decided. People in the real world will vote too.

[BootinUp]

28. +1

[Egnever]

35. Well

There is lots of precedent for DU not being very good with predicting nominees. John Edwards was a huge hit here after all.

[BootinUp]

50. Not with me lol

[MADem]

76. Kucinich is The One!!!!

If you enter some variation of "Kucinich can win" in the box in the upper right corner, you'll see that a lot of people believed that, too....

[noiretextatique]

171. Most people in "the real world" don't know shit

And will vote for a candidate with a certain letter after her/his name.

[Lil Missy]

172. As well, most people (in the real world) are glad DU doesn't decide elections. n/t

[Depaysement]

27. To be fair

There is another reason to vote for her. We may not like some of her policies but she is certainly prepared and qualified to do the job.

[azmom]

29. k&R

[stupidicus]

34. yep, if our politics are dictated by our morals

BS occupies the moral high ground on just about every issue of significance.

I thought that obvious from the beginning. That's why his judgement on this and that has been better overall and ahead of hers

[mother earth]

37. For what is right? It's plain to see, we are in Oligarchy, why in the hell would any democrat

want more of the same. We are dealing with Wall St. democrats, republican-lites, and are about to get knee deep in TPP, handing over the sovereignty of nations.

Fuck that. I'm not about to become a willing participant. It's unconscionable.

[dreamnightwind]

143. +1

[cantbeserious]

45. When We Stand Together - No Citizen Need Settle For The Lesser Of Two Corporate Evils - Go Bernie Go

eom

[rtracey]

47. lets try a primary or 2

Lets see how some early primaries go.... I'm all in for a democrat win.

[lobodons]

51. BERNIE IS NOT ELECTABLE!!!!

First of all, I like Bernie. I wish what I am saying is not true. But it is. The GOP are masters at messaging and they would eat Bernie for Lunch with SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM 24 hours a day. Jesus, look at how they have scarred Americans into being afraid of 3 year old orphan Syrian refugees. They have even gotten sane Democrats to go along with their fear fear fear messaging campaign.

[NurseJackie]

71. Especially if he can't get nominated!

[Oilwellian]

81. You really need to calm down

Nearly half of Americans polled said they would vote for a socialist. Bernie's been working hard to increase that number. By the way, what does socialism have to do with Syrian refugees?

[akbacchus_BC]

92. Oh yes, Bernie is electable, he has no scams that the rethugs can find!

He is honest, he did not vote for the invasion of Iraq, hell yes, he is electable, plus the shit about revolution is all about Americans taking responsibility and asking their Senators to do the same.

Go Mr. Sanders, you are on the right track, America needs you to continue President Obama's legacy.

[Alkene]

101. Thank you for four (4) exclamation marks!

[Logical]

114. "First of all, I like Bernie.".....Nice try! nt

[slipslidingaway]

52. "...This is the wrong cycle to be running an establishment candidate..." n/t

[Hepburn]

107. +1

[Tarc]

54. So with all these plain facts about the Tyranny of Hillary

I expect that Sanders will see a huge surge in the polls, yes?

Will you give us a yell when that actually, y'know, happens?

[Juicy_Bellows]

55. KICK and......REC!

[TryLogic]

57. Excellent Information

[GoneFishin]

59. You are correct.

[YOHABLO]

62. Oh my god I can't imagine a Trump presidency. Bush Jr. was enough to get my passport in order.

[WillyT]

64. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[MrMickeysMom]

72. That must be because they think the political process is either at a football game...

... or NASCAR...

Really... I can't think of any other reason of why these two things might rate higher than, say...

* taking an interest in world / American history
* debating the decisions made throughout history
* history repeating itself
* learning BY history.

[TIME TO PANIC]

77. The working class will not elect an establishment candidate.

[Jim Lane]

80. Permit me to voice a minority view here.

The majority view seems to be: "I can assess the 2016 general election quite confidently, it's very obvious which of the two leading candidates would be the stronger nominee, and, lo and behold, the one who'd be more likely to win in November just happens to be the one I'd rather see as President."

You people -- Bernie supporters and Hillary supporters -- are all kidding yourselves. With the election almost a year away, it's really not possible to have complete confidence in a prediction.

For Sanders: He'll motivate a lot of nonvoters to vote, he'll appeal to Republicans and independents because he's seen as a straight shooter, Clinton will motivate a lot of Republicans to turn out so they can vote against her.

For Clinton: She'll appeal to voters in the ideological center who see Sanders as too radical, she's withstood years of Republican attacks and is now bulletproof whereas Sanders will be devastated by Koch-fueled attack ads, she'll get some Republican-leaning women to vote for her to break the glass ceiling.

And you know what? Every single one of these arguments (along with others I didn't list) is correct. To some extent. The "kidding yourselves" part comes in where you're so sure you can assess the significance of each and come up with a net balance in favor of one candidate or the other as being more likely to win the general election.

[Kentonio]

95. Well if you're going to go inserting rationality into this...

[ConservativeDemocrat]

139. Yeah. What is he thinking? This is the DU.

Flame-bait, overconfidence, and argument by assertion is king here.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[ibegurpard]

86. amen!

And she will screw us all the way down the ballot as well.

[akbacchus_BC]

87. To be honest with you, I really want Mr. Sanders to win. He is

more articulated and has more progressive ideas. I do not want to be negative, in as much as he is gaining traction with a lot of young people, I still feel Mrs. Clinton will win over him. Just my opinion. I wish it could be otherwise in favour of Mr. Sanders. Guess time will tell. I cannot imagine a presidency of the US under Trump, the world will be going to the shitters.

The US election process is very long and complicated and one could never envisage the winner.

[JDPriestly]

89. K&R.

[BeanMusical]

96. Kick and R

[Enthusiast]

99. K&R! This post should have hundreds of recommendations!

[peacebird]

103. Agree totally! Great OP Segami!

[SmittynMo]

115. You asked, "For what"?

So they can tell all their friends they voted for the first legitimate female presidential candidate.

Yeah, I don't get it.

[DCBob]

116. And Bernie somehow is a lesser risk??

Here are a few key problems if Bernie is our nominee..

-- His age. I wonder if he can withstand a grueling Presidential general election campaign.
-- His style. Bernie comes off as old, tired and cranky. Not an image most voters prefer.
-- His limited appeal. Bernie's focus is mostly on economics. That's not good enough to run for POTUS.
-- His lack of foreign policy experience. This will be a huge problem given what has just happened in Paris.
-- His lack of appeal to minorities. We cant win a general election without the minority vote.
-- His extreme approach to economic reforms. His ideas are interesting but I think America is not ready for them.
-- His oddball past. Fair or not the GOP with exploit this.
-- He is a self-identified socialist. Fair or not, the GOP with also exploit this to no end.

[NurseJackie]

119. Thank you.

Great post!

[Tommy2Tone]

121. What a horrible post

The only reason we could support Clinton is because she is a woman and she is better than a Republican?

You should avoid the yellow snow.

[backscatter712]

124. A lot of people are going to stay home on Election Day if Hillary is the nominee.

She has a trust problem. Quite a few people do not trust her, see the OP for why.

So bluntly, I question her ability to be competitive in the general. Lackluster candidates like Hillary do not get the Democratic base fired up and ready to go in election season, and that could land us with President Trump.

Yes, the American people are indeed stupid enough to let an assclown like Donald in the White House. Never underestimate the power of stupid.

[DCBob]

125. This election will be seen as one of the most consequential in decades.

The GOP is framing this as a do or die for the Republicans and their platform includes all sorts of crazy, extreme and scary plans to "reclaim" America for the conservatives. It will be very easy to motivate Democrats to get out and vote next November... the loony RW is doing all the hard work for us!

[backscatter712]

130. The "We suck less than those mean Republicans" platform is a loser.

We tried it in 2014, and got our asses kicked. Thanks, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.

You can't motivate enough voters by saying "TRUMP! BOOGA-BOOGA-BOO!". Too many people don't give enough of a shit to get out and vote that way. At the same time, the GOP has their megachurches, and they'll have their Kevin Swansons ranting and raving, and getting the teabaggers to the polls like a horde of Mordor orcs.

Democrats have to have something to fight FOR, and Hillary doesn't have it. All she's got is "I suck less than Trump or Jeb!" and that's not good enough. She pays some lip service to progressive values, but then she weathervanes and fails to deliver. So people aren't going to be motivated very well.

[DCBob]

133. That's not the message.

The message is the GOP is trying to tear down everything Democrats hold dear. The Democratic nominee and the party is the only thing stopping them from accomplishing that. I guarantee Democrats will show up and we will win.

[backscatter712]

134. You phrased my message in a different way.

If all we've got is "Hillary is the only thing to stop those mean Republicans", that is the same as "We suck less."

And it's a losing message, proven repeatedly, most recently in 2010 and 2014. That's all Hillary's got, and it puts our entire party in jeopardy next fall.

[DCBob]

138. No.

There is much more to Hillary's message but stopping the RW is certainly one of the biggest, if not the biggest, motivating factors.

[ibegurpard]

149. you have obviously not been involved

In ground level GOTV a efforts to be making such a stunningly naive statement.

[DCBob]

165. I have been.

You must be stunningly naïve one.

[asjr]

159. This has been the most tiresome election I have

seen. DU has become a place to go in order to blast our would be presidents.
Democratic presidents. The words socialism and money hungry should be forbidden. I have not seen any post against Sanders that even comes near to being that of the Hillary haters. I have said from the beginning I would vote for either Hillary or Bernie. Either would be good for Democrats. I was blacklisted by the Bernie people about six months ago for whatever reason I will never understand. I was in the Bernie Sanders forum. I do not play that way. And, guess what --I can still not post in that forum. Maybe I misspelled his name. The Republicans must be having a good day reading the nasty things we say about our candidates! Could be we have a multitude of Republicans slyly jumping in on the same game of blasting Democrats. We must stand together! Otherwise we will just continue to be enemies.

[Thinkingabout]

129. Why should the Democrats take a bigger risk with Sanders as the nominee. Yes the GOP would love to

run against Sanders, he is not as strong of a candidate as Hillary, first they would crush him on foreign affairs, not that they have a candidate except for Lindsay Graham and he will not be the republican nominee and the song they would sing about his socialists standing would never end.

[pinebox]

142. The new meme--Bernie is a risk!

Really? Bernie is the risk? REALLY?

No, he sure as hell is NOT the risk. Hillary is!

Tell us oh great Hillary supporters, how many more people are going to die under Hillary because she isn't for single payer and people don't have access to health care or can't afford insurance.

Tell us oh great Hillary supporters, how many more people aren't going to be able to afford their student loan payments because her EDU plan requires people to still pay?

Tell us oh great Hillary supporters, how many people are going to have to bust their asses and barely make ends meat or maybe they won't because she doesn't support a living wage?

Tell us oh great Hillary supporters, how many more privacy rights are we going to have to give up?

Bullshit! Bernie isn't the risk when we're looking at someone who's absolutely viled and hated by the right. Bernie does better among Republican voters than Hillary does and it's not even close. Hillary has NO crossover support. ZERO!
Wake up!

[Faux pas]

154. Kicketty Kickin'

[McCamy Taylor]

158. Now you've lost me.

Clinton is either 1) unelectable (tell that to the folks who voted her most admired woman in the US 17 times or 2) she is electable but we must resist the urge to win at any cost.

Light can be both particle and wave, but Clinton can not be both unelectable and electable.

[Fast Walker 52]

182. cute... but I think your analogy is going too far

Clearly she's "electable". But she does pose certain risks.

I know a lot of progressives who won't vote for her. I personally think Sanders will attract more enthusiasm and new supporters who will work hard to get him elected, but no matter what, in the general, we need to support the Dem.

[Douglas Carpenter]

162. If Hillary does lose and lose big in the general election I can make two safe predictions

1. We will hear nonstop that this was the fault of the liberals and progressives.

2. In a few years we will be hearing nonstop that Hillary lost because she was so wildly leftwing and liberal she was unelectable but she won the nomination because the left had hijacked the party and that's why the Democratic Party must now move farther to the right.

Mark my word. They will be saying exactly that.

[fbc]

164. That's nothing to worry about.

Bernie is going to win the nomination.

You've seen the polls: Sanders supporters are Sanders supporters. Hillary supporters are a few die hard centrists and a bunch of people that aren't really paying attention... yet.

[Douglas Carpenter]

183. well, I am very much a supporter of Sen. Sanders and have dreamed of him running for President for a

long time. I also am also very uncomfortable with many of Hillary's political positions. However, it is undeniable that she is the current front runner for the Democratic Party nomination. That is not to say that Bernie does not have a chance. Of course he does. And win or lose at the ballot box he is almost certain to broaden the range of discussion in both the short and long term. But Hillary is still the current front runner and there is a very strong possibility that she could win the party's nomination. If that happens - I think the general election could go either way depending on circumstances at the time.

Facing reality is painful. But it must be endured if we wish to live our lives without the support of comforting fairy tales.

Still, I do feel confident in predicting that if she does win the nomination but loses the general election - which is quite possible - the left will first be blamed for causing her to lose. Then later on we will hear that she was the left's candidate and she lost because the left had hijacked the party and forced a wildly leftwing candidate down the throats of more moderate voices. I have heard it all before.

[MisterP]

169. and low turnouts (unless it's for their permitted, carefully-handpicked candidates) make it easy

to blame the rabble in turn

this endless self-contradiction, corporatism, and hypocrisy, followed by the predictable cyclic wave of finger-wagging blame and crybullying, is what'll lose Clinton the general if it does

[emsimon33]

163. Yep! Big risk.

[MaggieD]

167. Like a socialist isnt a big risk?

[Fast Walker 52]

181. let's face it-- every candidate has risks. There are serious risks with Bernie.

Let's vote with our heart in the primary, and then in the general, we vote the necessity.