Those who accuse progressives of calling for "purity tests" want this party to stand for nothing.

[MADem]

111. Look, the bottom line is this--she with the most votes, wins.

I'm sorry that makes you unhappy, but she's leading him by hundreds of delegates and MILLIONS of votes. She has more votes than anyone else in the race. Were she a man, she'd actually be wearing that "crown" everyone accuses her of wearing as a consequence of her "coronation" and strutting around beating her chest. Instead, she keeps her nose to the grindstone and her shoulder to the wheel. That's why she is winning--she does the hard work.

As for the Democratic Party platform, we've always had a pretty good one--it's not like we ignore the issues of the day. I'm one of the few people, I think, who actually READS the platform when the DNC publishes it (I used to do this BC, too--Before Computers). But the bottom line is this: The WINNER decides where the emphasis is going to be--not the loser. Hillary Clinton--because she worked/played well with Barack Obama when he won in 2008--was able to contribute to his (HIS, mind you--not her) agenda, but she didn't get to make DEMANDS. You join the team of the winner, you support the winner's priorities, you try to exert influence in a postive way, and MOST importantly, you understand your role. That's how it works.

I, personally, do not think that sexists and racists and bigots and haters "rule" in USA anymore. If you think "everything" can go wrong, then I hate to tell you, but you DO think that sexists, racists, bigots and haters have a big enough constituency to prevail--and that's a sad thing for you to believe.