Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

whatthehey

(3,660 posts)
4. The analog did in 2000
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 11:28 AM
Apr 2016

But the morons who believe this need a known patsy to vote for instead of "Tweedledum or Tweedledee" for a start. Jill Stein ain't hip enough to do that kind of damage. They also are fighting against demographic changes that means we have fewer places where privileged armchair radicals can tip the EV balance.

But yes we should thank Vishnu that Sanders has both the sense to know he'd be an enabling spoiler if he went 3rd party and the integrity (I firmly believe, if not I want my donations back) to keep his promise that he wouldn't do so. In the absence of that catastrophic possibility, I don't see a Nader-like quisling on the horizon who could inspire enough idiots who can't tell the difference between a pragmatic center-left Dem and a howling fascist Rep to do any real damage. I suppose some celebrity hipster could tempt away the disaffected young, but since they hardly bother to vote any way, the loss of votes will be fairly insignificant.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

it matters a great deal-remember Nader? Gothmog Apr 2016 #1
Look at the data from 08 Bluerome Apr 2016 #5
Agree, most Sanders supporters (and all the Sanders supporters I know) will vote for Hillary SharonClark Apr 2016 #11
most people don't even follow the election at all right now Bluerome Apr 2016 #14
Naming Sarah Palin to the ticket got a number of PUMAs to agree to support President Obama Gothmog Apr 2016 #25
Nader's so full of shite, too. Mahalo for his record of history, Goth. Cha Apr 2016 #43
I don't see Sanders vision as the future of the Democratic Party. Hillary is a progressive who gets Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #2
We dems know there's a huge difference, and of course we always reiterate that Bluerome Apr 2016 #8
He puts Medicare for All, Sanders is not on Medicare, it is not free and has restrictions, co-pays, Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #16
totally agree that there are differences b/t Hillary and Bernie's plans Bluerome Apr 2016 #18
Hillary wants to improve on ACA, she is not against a single payer or national health plan Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #26
Medicare Part B is NOT optional. Once you turn 65 Pathwalker Apr 2016 #20
You don't have to take Part B, Part A is what is free. If a person is still working and has Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #23
OK. They (SS) told me otherwise. I love my Medicare Pathwalker Apr 2016 #28
My point was it is not free, currently I pay the Part B and have part D insurance Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #34
I edited my post to reflect what you said - Hillary has the same vision, just a better strategy Bluerome Apr 2016 #15
Vanity. "Our candidate is so pure!" NurseJackie Apr 2016 #3
right on Bluerome Apr 2016 #6
Hahahaha! ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #42
Except BS is more pure coming in @ 100% Cha Apr 2016 #44
The analog did in 2000 whatthehey Apr 2016 #4
totally agree. Bluerome Apr 2016 #10
45 state have sore loser laws, though only two - including TX - specifically apply to presidential stopbush Apr 2016 #17
well put! Bluerome Apr 2016 #19
We heard that tripe in 2000 and we soon learned WhiteTara Apr 2016 #7
This year is very different than 2000. We're running against Trump, not Bush Bluerome Apr 2016 #9
Until there is another Democrat in the White House WhiteTara Apr 2016 #21
+1 Cha Apr 2016 #45
I think some see it as the most hurtful thing you can sling HillareeeHillaraah Apr 2016 #12
It's the anger stage, they'll get to depression and acceptance, or they won't and will self-destruct Bluerome Apr 2016 #13
Ironically, Hillary's approach to Wall St is more like FDR's than Sanders' Rose Siding Apr 2016 #22
Good read, and a reminder that Bluerome Apr 2016 #24
It really interested me Rose Siding Apr 2016 #29
Go for it Bluerome Apr 2016 #38
Great Post Rose... Walk away Apr 2016 #50
I think it matters. apcalc Apr 2016 #27
It's the same old Chomsky/Nader anti corporation bromide that leads nowhere. The_Casual_Observer Apr 2016 #30
Those guys defeat their own agenda with their extremism Bluerome Apr 2016 #37
Unless one plans on living in a cave or up a tree one must The_Casual_Observer Apr 2016 #39
It matters JSup Apr 2016 #31
And we should continue to refute them Bluerome Apr 2016 #32
The only fretting I do anymore... JSup Apr 2016 #33
It's always been that way Bluerome Apr 2016 #35
Good article. creon Apr 2016 #36
Nader + voter suppression. Yes, it matters. Hekate Apr 2016 #40
I used to believe that ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #41
It's the quiet non Rock Star Rallies Revolution.. Cha Apr 2016 #46
"Not always easy to get a 2nd Democratic Presidency after the 1st one has had 8 years in Office." BlueCaliDem Apr 2016 #47
Yeah, pre President Obama it wasn't.. and then along comes Hillary.. Perfect Storm! Cha Apr 2016 #48
Thanks to President Obama, the revolution BS always talks about, has already happened. BlueCaliDem Apr 2016 #49
You are a little Cha Apr 2016 #51
Guilty as charged! BlueCaliDem Apr 2016 #52
Wow! That's so gorgeous, BCD! Mahalo for creativity! Cha Apr 2016 #53
Thanks, Cha. :-) eom BlueCaliDem Apr 2016 #54
I like to circle back to the words of one of their heroes HillareeeHillaraah Apr 2016 #55
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»Does it matter that some ...»Reply #4