For those who think Hillary Clinton will be "too old" to run in 2020, consider this:

[Ken Burch]

189. I don't think you realize how condescending that sounded.

If you disagree with me on the issues of the day, fine, that's cool-but you are not entitled to talk to me as though you are the grown-up and your view is the only sensible one.

As to what the polls say, they are showing more and more people wanting at least a partical democratization of the economy-a real re-prioritizing from the last thirty-six years of unrestrained corporate greed and arrogance towards a balance in which human dignity, human empathy, and creativity are also valued-a replacement of what we've got now towards something that treats all people with the respect we deserve.

Also, there were a LOT of people in the primaries who supported the ideas the Sanders campaign championed(and STILL support them)who chose HRC because they believed she was better qualitied(on balance she was) and "more electable" (a far more problematic assertion). Voting for HRC can not be taken as a rejection of what Bernie proposed-it was simply a rejection of the person.

I agree that the person should not be the nominee.

But what is the harm of embracing the ideas?

And what is the harm of acknowledging that those who backed the ideas have some valid points and are worth making welcome in the party(providing only that they treat the rest of the party with respect in exchange)?

Why insist, instead of that on staying with what this party always does INSTEAD of that-of the OLD tactic of dismissing the ideas, treating those who support them like spoiled children, and then acting as though the people we've treated that way still OWE us their vote?

That approach doesn't ever elect us...what's the point of staying with what never works?

What do you think you'd lose from trying something else for a change?