Heads Up: Beware of any "Democrat" still supporting a corporate candidate

[Dragonfli]

47. Who do I suspect will be the Democratic nominee? I'll let you know when the primary is over.

You were also off topic and rather than answer the question that as I recall was something like "You'd expect a politician who helped take the party right, to bring it back to the left again?" I have to paraphrase because I would have to close the response window and go back to get the exact wording of the question, but I am certain, I remember the content of the question even if I can't quote it word for word from memory.

You Did not answer the question, but rather changed the subject to someone not even in the party, a rather loathsome person at that, a redirect from the topic and question if you will, to a "boogieman" evasion of sorts, as such my reply makes perfect sense.

Your questions to me do not answer my question in my subject line either, and is also off topic, employing a poor conversation trait by answering a question with a question. (bad form, you should work on that), I think I see a pattern emerging in your method of "discussion" but I will answer anyway, just because you appear confused and I would like to help you get back on track.


Who is the OP advocating that people not support? (your other question)

"Democrats" that are still supporting a corporate candidate.

In other words Democrats that would prefer a President that was one that only cared about corporations and not the actual people that live in the country, (your post makes no sense at all since the poster was not talking about any candidate, just about what I hope is a rarity among our party, voters, ones that would actually prefer a candidate which would favor corporations over their constituency (IOW the people of the nation).

I think a President should care more about the voters than a CEO or a conglomeration of them. Do you disagree? I assumed you thought that Hillary was a person that cared about people rather than Corporations. Perhaps you are projecting something, or perhaps you really do favor Corporate favoritism over the good of the people and I had been mistaken about you previously, by thinking you thought your preferred candidate was one with the people's interests as their motivation for running rather than the Corporations.

For what it's worth I hope my initial impression was correct and you think she is in it for the people and not the Corporations.

It is an important distinction and here is why:

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”
― Benito Mussolini

We already have one of those that might also be running for the Presidency, I would simply assume that "Democrats" that are supporting a corporate candidate would be a crossover vote to this one:



Hillary Clinton is very heavily favored among Democratic politicians by Corporations as can be seen by the overwhelming financial support she receives from them, it remains to be seen if she will favor them for it, and thus actually be a corporate candidate.

That is the reason I hope that those supporting her are not supporting a corporate candidate. That would mean the party has gone in a very bad direction. The fact you assumed she was such actually concerns me very much, perhaps, the smoke does lead to a bit of fire that should scare the living daylights out of every American.

Corporate Candidates are not part of a Democracy, they are only part of two types of Government I know of, one being a Mussolini Fascism, the other being an Oligarchy - neither is good for the people and neither should be supported by the people they would inflict those forms of governance on, those governed by either one should revolt in favor of a democracy.

The close Corporate financial ties to Hillary make me very wary of her as they would any Democrat, as I am sure you must agree proclaiming to be one.

I will be watching her like a hawk should she win the nomination for signs of reciprocation because of that fact, and also because (as I have already explained) what such would mean regarding what sort of Government we would be living under.