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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton [View all]guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)11. Now I partially understand. I think.
When you wrote:
Latina who is turning her back on her people
according to some by not embracing h and her "protection" of us.
BS.
according to some by not embracing h and her "protection" of us.
BS.
that is an interesting viewpoint. That any politician can or could be a savior or protector of people. When people learn that they can accomplish things only by sustained, collective action the country will change. Not before.
Workers did not advance as they did in the 1930's through the 1970's solely by voting Democratic, but by organizing, unionizing, and striking.
SO I think I understand what you are saying, but I still feel that non-voting in the election is a bad choice because of the real possibility of a SCOTUS that is even more activist and fascist than the current Court.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
112 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
You do realize there is a primary first where we can pick the Democrat we really want
LynneSin
Nov 2015
#51
they seem to forget that it's a "Democratic" primary and not liberal or progressive.
demosincebirth
Nov 2015
#57
I quote Cesar Chavez because I was a farmworker as a very young man. I was a teamster stewart
demosincebirth
Nov 2015
#88
In a sane world it would not be a choice between Hillary/Sanders vs. Top Republican Clown
LiberalLovinLug
Nov 2015
#112
But if we nominate Bernie, this whole "hold our noses and vote for a bad Democrat" nonsense
Maedhros
Nov 2015
#12
The 'progressives' voting for Hillary are acting out of fear, playing not to lose.
Maedhros
Nov 2015
#19
They needn't worry. This is not 1972. The historical parameters are very different.
JDPriestly
Nov 2015
#72
But it's this cyclical lament, wrought with much wailing and gnashing of teeth,
Maedhros
Nov 2015
#94
Only if she is the nominee. Even then, she has no appeal to the 63% who sat out 2014 n/t
eridani
Nov 2015
#97
That is just the opposite of wingnuts saying candidates that lose to Dems were not conservative
upaloopa
Nov 2015
#74
You need to prepare people to accept your thinking first. In 2016 that simply is not happening
upaloopa
Nov 2015
#100
Wrong. Here in Wisconsin we elected the "Madison liberal lesbian" to the US Senate ...
Scuba
Nov 2015
#95
Very true. But she was up against Charismatic Obama then. Sanders doesn't have that charm.
randome
Nov 2015
#41
I don't agree about her having it sewn up, but I agree with the rest of your post.
blackspade
Nov 2015
#48
Blah, blah, blah - more twisting of facts to "prove" something - that's why that piece....
George II
Nov 2015
#40
Yet they are, probably because they have bothered to look at her actual policies
BainsBane
Nov 2015
#58
that might convince enough DUers, but there's no way that can win any more votes
MisterP
Nov 2015
#81
but it's not DUers that won't vote, it's millions of Americans who saw the chance
MisterP
Nov 2015
#91
Maybe you'd like the status quo to continue with a corporate Wall Street candidate.
pinebox
Nov 2015
#107