Sanders campaign loses $150 Million Dollars if we fold to DNC politics

[sixthson]

A lot of those Latinos who fled socialist revolutions in Latin America really do not respond well to Bernie pushing the same message.

Maybe more Americans, especially those supporting Bernie, should take a lesson from our Latin American brothers and sisters?

 

[CoolBlue71]

and bernie is a fringe candidate, etc, etc. the problem with progress policy is politicians and supporters inside the democratic party like you, not republicans.

hillary tried to stand in the way of change in 2008 too. i guess people easily forget. and im guessing the same people who voted and supported hillary in 2008 for dumb reasons are the same ones doing it now.

A fringe candidate doesn't carry the voting-age base of the Democratic Party, to the level of 4-to-1, in a year's primaries when the frontrunner of the party was anticipated and expected to win nomination quite handily. (I thought Hillary Clinton would carry around 40 to 45 states en route to nomination.)

The Democratic Party, in 1992, was being branded in the media as New Democrats. In 2009, Bill Maher, on his HBO series, called them New Republicans. So, a lot of what's been shaking out feels like a combination of power plays and passings of time.

If Hillary Clinton wins the 2016 Democratic nomination for president of the United States, I will not vote for her in the general election unless she is convincingly the second coming of Franklin Roosevelt. I'm even more enthusiastically ready to move past the New Democrats/New Republicans for an ideologically left-wing political party. The Democrats can take their "Big Tent" bullshit and stick it up all their asses.

 

[rareboy]

All well and good.

I suppose you are content then to let the GOP get control of the Supreme Court and to define the direction of the judiciary for the next 20 years?

I feel sorry for Americans.

They have allowed themselves to be conned into accepting a single party state for the last 40 plus years under the guise of the two party system which leaves all those on the far left and the far right without a voice and demands governance from a centre that hasn't shifted since Truman.

But there is no credible or viable third party. There is only ever the independent who puts the Republicans in control of the White House.

I'm sure that the GOP is salivating at the prospect of a strong left wing independent candidate.

 

[MisterB]

If Hillary Clinton wins the 2016 Democratic nomination for president of the United States, I will not vote for her in the general election unless she is convincingly the second coming of Franklin Roosevelt. I'm even more enthusiastically ready to move past the New Democrats/New Republicans for an ideologically left-wing political party. The Democrats can take their "Big Tent" bullshit and stick it up all their asses.

I have read your many many postings about varied political races/campaigns over the past year or so. You write well. From what you wrote, I assumed you to be quite the political junkie, yes? When i see such extensive details and analyses, I assumed you were quite consumed by the entire political process. I sincerely hope I am not wrong.

That brings me to the point of my post and why I bolded the portion of your quote above. Would you really not vote in the National election? If yes, then I for one will skip any of your future postings. That's because I strongly believe that if you don't vote, you don't get to bitch about the election outcome. Period. I wish you well.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

He didn't say he wouldn't vote, he said he wouldn't vote for Hillary. I agree with him that she needs to prove and give people reasons as to why she should have other supporters base votes. She has not done that yet, merely being a better option to the alternative is not a convincing enough reason for everyone.

 

[TX-Beau]

He didn't say he wouldn't vote, he said he wouldn't vote for Hillary. I agree with him that she needs to prove and give people reasons as to why she should have other supporters base votes. She has not done that yet, merely being a better option to the alternative is not a convincing enough reason for everyone.

Anyone who says any variation of this is not going to vote for her anyway, who are you people going to vote for?

Let's see, petulant refusal to participate, useless protest vote?

 

[MisterB]

^ Based on that assumption, I concluded he wouldn't vote altogether. my bad...

That he might vote for the Republican candidate this year is even more disturbing...

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Anyone who says any variation of this is not going to vote for her anyway, who are you people going to vote for?

Let's see, petulant refusal to participate, useless protest vote?

How would I know who they are going to vote for? I am just saying there are other options for people to vote regardless if you don't like the options that are left to choose from.

You can play the blame game and point fingers all you want because of the possibility of a republican candidate, but make sure that blame is also held onto the candidates who are not doing right by proving why these people should vote for them. People are tired of the lesser of two evils votes and tired of a system that has shown over and over again that it isn't exactly working for the people.

Instead of spinning things and insulting people because they don't want to vote for your favored candidate, which by the way is their right not to whether you like it or not, maybe you should be providing why they should vote for her. You know outside of the opposition being the main one.

 

[Alistair]

What does the OP have to do with the thread title? Did I miss something?

 

[TX-Beau]

How would I know who they are going to vote for? I am just saying there are other options for people to vote regardless if you don't like the options that are left to choose from.

You can play the blame game and point fingers all you want because of the possibility of a republican candidate, but make sure that blame is also held onto the candidates who are not doing right by proving why these people should vote for them. People are tired of the lesser of two evils votes and tired of a system that has shown over and over again that it isn't exactly working for the people.

Instead of spinning things and insulting people because they don't want to vote for your favored candidate, which by the way is their right not to whether you like it or not, maybe you should be providing why they should vote for her. You know outside of the opposition being the main one.

I don't have a favored candidate and frankly if one is so petty and butthurt that their favorite candidate lost that they'd refuse to help stop a fascist fuck, they deserve all the blame heaped on them.

- - - Updated - - -

What does the OP have to do with the thread title? Did I miss something?

It's and evanrick thread, they never make sense.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

As expected. Keep it up you are really winning people over.

 

[Rolyo85]

As expected. Keep it up you are really winning people over.

Over to what? The democratic primaries ended last night.

 

[MakeDigitalLove]

Maybe you should keep up with the conversation before commenting.

 

[TX-Beau]

As expected. Keep it up you are really winning people over.

What, you think any of us believe you haven't already made up your mind?

 

[BenDan]

Maybe you should keep up with the conversation before commenting.

the next time will be the first time

Bernie supporters have no reason to support Hillary currently

She uses the word "progressive" in victory speeches and debates but that's as far as it goes

Independents and young people are at risk - the former from voting another way and the latter to not vote

It's the responsibility of Hillary to reach out and give them a reason to vote for her

She certainly has not done that to date

 

[frankfrank]

Bernie Sanders supporters...would abandon him within 2 years not realizing how the legislative, executive, and judicial branches interact.... not to mention state and local governments.

Key here is taking back state houses for the 2020 census while holding the presidency. Redistricting is the key to the House.

I posted somewhere in here a few weeks ago, that the political attention span of Americans (and their dominant inability to absorb and remember nuances of the process that can't be explained in 20-second soundbites) would, despite the certainty of the House stalling or voting-down all progressive legislation, blame ALL of the failures on Sanders...only. Yes, kind of like there are too many who blame all of the failures (such as no Single Payer healthcare) on OBAMA ONLY. The Constitution was written to prevent absolute presidential power, and because nearly all the Republicans in Congress hate that a "n*****" is in office, a recalcitrant House and a filibuster-happy Senate have made sure that nothing happens (as much as possible). Too many people STILL blame the lack of progressive gains entirely on Obama, and many of those who do include Congress in the blame do not properly think about "the Republicans" but Congress as a whole. By and large, it's Republicans causing the problems.

Because Bernie would be unlikely to get much done through Congress, he would be seen in 2020 as extraordinarily weak, and (even if for no other reason than his age) Democrats need to come up with a new candidate in 2020. Not to mention that age could be a major issue with HRC by then, as well. If Sanders is considered "weak" then, by extension, ALL DEMOCRATS are likely to be considered weak as well...guaranteeing a Republican president and very likely sweeping victories into Congress, not to mention down-ballot in the state races. That would follow the Republican deluge that already happens in 2018 when the public already thinks Sanders (and, by extension, ALL Democrats) is really weak. It's a fallacious and illogical conclusion (that ALL Democrats are weak because Sanders is), but Americans will inevitably believe it.

And the Republicans ENTIRELY know this, and all they have to do is block everything in sight.

if your going to come to america, do it legally.

how many people have came out in support of gay rights when they had everything to lose? i cant name one politician that did. hillary sure as hell didnt

That would be much easier to say if immigration was streamlined. Why, with databases in so many places, should it take 5, 15, and more years to grant legal residence to some people? That is SOOOO 1789, back when smoke signals and horseback were the fastest way to communicate. I assume even some of the originating countries (such as Mexico) have decent databases by now. Why can't the immigration process be done in a month or so? No longer people come illegally, they don't want to wait DECADES in some cases. I think a streamlined system would eliminate much of the illegal immigration.

I feel that I CAN ACCEPT that Hillary apparently "went pro-gay" rather late in the game. Politicians should be leaders on these kinds of issues, but I also accept the very real possibility that, as with TENS of millions of other Americans, she merely "evolved" into being accepting of gays. She is subject to the same potential for prejudice, etc., as in the neighbor who lives above you, across the street, or down the road a ways, or who is driving that red car that just went by your place. At least she DID. I doubt there will be very many, at all, of the current crop of Republicans who will "go pro-gay" in their lifetimes, and they will take their hatreds all the way to their graves.

Hey, consider where Hillary spent much of her life. In Arkan-fucking-sas, where antigay sentiment has been VERY dominant like, forever.

As such, HRC is NOT going to name (and hopefully appoint, once the Senate consents) a SCOTUS Justice that will actively fall all over himself/herself to aggressively get rid of every possible shred of civil rights for gay people...just as CERTAINLY as any and all Republicans (yes, including Trump with the feedback from a compliant Senate) will require an extreme litmus test "victory" before anybody is named.

The Democrats can take their "Big Tent" bullshit and stick it up all their asses.

Didn't the Republicans actually start the "Big Tent" thing, like in 1992 or 1996?

being a better option to the alternative is not a convincing enough reason for everyone.

Well, when "the alternative" is GUARANTEED DEATH OR THIRD-WORLDIZATION OF THE UNITED STATES, I consider the "better (hold-your-nose) option" to very much be a sufficient reason.

 

[Cormac135]

How would I know who they are going to vote for? I am just saying there are other options for people to vote regardless if you don't like the options that are left to choose from.

You can play the blame game and point fingers all you want because of the possibility of a republican candidate, but make sure that blame is also held onto the candidates who are not doing right by proving why these people should vote for them. People are tired of the lesser of two evils votes and tired of a system that has shown over and over again that it isn't exactly working for the people.

Instead of spinning things and insulting people because they don't want to vote for your favored candidate, which by the way is their right not to whether you like it or not, maybe you should be providing why they should vote for her. You know outside of the opposition being the main one.

Once Bernie has to pull out who will be getting your vote, Trump/Cruz or HRC ?

 

[jbrown329]

the next time will be the first time

Bernie supporters have no reason to support Hillary currently

She uses the word "progressive" in victory speeches and debates but that's as far as it goes

Independents and young people are at risk - the former from voting another way and the latter to not vote

It's the responsibility of Hillary to reach out and give them a reason to vote for her

She certainly has not done that to date

Then they are fucking idiots. Because so much shit will hit us all if Drumpf or Cruz gets elected. Cruz has already intimated that there will be a religious test for any Justices that he would appoint. How bad would that be?

Behold:
Lawrence v Texas, overturned.
Obergefell v. Hodges, overturned.
Religious exemption laws allowed in all 50 states.
A woman's right to choose (abortion) completely gone.
Unions, completely gone. Right to work nation wide.

That's the short list. So if you know any Bernie supporters that will not vote for Hillary, you'd damn well share that list. I am a Bernie supporter. But I'm not going to screw the entire nation over and have a hissy fit if he's not the nominee. I will vote for her.

 

[frankfrank]

Once Bernie has to pull out who will be getting your vote, Trump/Cruz or HRC ?

If somebody fails to vote for HRC and - yes - **WASTES** a protest vote on Green Party or something, the difference between that vote and "could have voted Democrat" is one vote. Same deal if somebody stays home and votes for nobody at all.

If somebody votes REPUBLICAN because "their Bernie" lost, the difference is TWO votes from if the vote had been for Hillary. Minus the opportunity-lost vote for Hillary. Plus the vote for Trump or Cruz or...; that adds to TWO votes.

On other issues - for example - I don't inherently trust Hillary to maintain or change the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in a way that continues to protect Net Neutrality. However, get a Republican president in, and NET NEUTRALITY IS **ABSOLUTELY** GUARANTEED TO DIE.

At that point, and especially if they also find a way to control the phones, you can kiss any hope of ever seeing any kind of progressive candidates ever winning again, in any election. When TammyBaldwinForPresident.com is heavily penalized with blocked or throttled bandwidth in 2024 (even though they're paying 6 & 1/2 times as much as NugentNewsNetwork.com and MikeBickleForpresident.com), the game is lost.

 

[frankfrank]

So if you know any Bernie supporters that will not vote for Hillary, you'd damn well share that list. I am a Bernie supporter. But I'm not going to screw the entire nation over and have a hissy fit if he's not the nominee. I will vote for her.

So agreed. So absolutely agreed.

The alternatives are so awful and toxic that I won't even be holding my nose WHEN I vote for Hillary in less than nineteen weeks. In any normal year, I would hold my nose, but I don't want my country to be KILLED - or, at least, for EVERYTHING GREAT about "being American" to be killed and turned into a theocratic Iran-of-the-West.

I say this as being a Bernie guy entirely-all-the-way (or, at least, assuming that he would be able to get his ideas working...probably the best ideas of any politician anywhere in the world in more than 100 years) and, no, I am NOT having a hissy fit as he loses. As in the post a little above this, I'm thinking WAY ahead and worrying about 2020.