They are fools.
When Bernie himself has said “support the Democratic candidate at all costs, whether it’s me or Hillary,” ignoring that and refusing to vote (or voting Green, which is the same thing, really), is foolish. And yes, it’s as good as voting for Trump. So, have fun with that.
I dunno. The Liberals in Canada are putting together a committee on electoral reform up here, despite having just won a majority.
Of course, the Conservatives are complaining that the system the Liberals favour would have given them a larger majority, so maybe it works if you say, “nobody ever changes a system they just won with to make it less favourable for them.”
That sort of talk is very convincing.
It’s also how the (D) partly lost most of (enough of) the Dean supporters to Nader. By being fools. Just. Like. That.
Clinton talks about uniting, but she really needs to reach out to Sanders and respond to the issues he brings up. That will bring more Sanders supporters over.
Given that 30% (not sure about that number, but hey, it’s out there) of Democrats are supposedly ignoring what their candidate has said out of sheer stubbornness, I’m certainly not expecting to convince anyone. But I can surely feel that they are fools for acting that way.
She does say a lot of things, out both sides of her mouth. That’s leadership!
Your capacity to fail to understand the issues AS THEY ARE and resort to name calling is astonishing.
And it really does look like Sanders may be starting to pivot toward that goal, which will hopefully lead to better policy.
*Possible surprise for some, I’d prefer that Sanders be the nominee. Didn’t work out. I guess the difference is that I really never had much hope due to his poor performance with African American primary voters, so I’ve been used to this idea for quite a while.
Ah, that myth again. Direct your ire to the hundreds of thousands of registered Democrats who voted for Bush in Florida.
Not a myth. If you’re a registered democrat and you voted for Bush, then you got what you wanted. If you would have preferred Gore over Bush, lived in Florida, but still voted for Nader, then you’re an idiot.
I disagree.
Although as it happens, I would bet money that my precinct will choose Clinton, and my state will chose to smear itself in feces and set itself on fire.
And probably Stein won’t even be on the ballot, although whatever inbred paint-huffing abortion clinic bomber the Constitution Party vomits up will be. (There’s your greater evil than Cruz, for those who were wondering.)
oh, but with talk like that, you will.
http://www.planettolive.com/forums/images/smilies/dude.gif
Is it not being stubborn to refuse to support the Democratic candidate, against the actual, spoken wishes of your chosen candidate? That’s something I have a hard time understanding.
Maybe a few years of Trump will shock everybody into taking some action and get the USA on a better course.
I can’t imagine a few years of Hillary having even that effect, that is why, if I had a vote (I’m not from the states) it would not go to Hillary. It would most definitaly not go to Trump, but not to Hillary either.
A change is needed, Hillary will not bring it, she will continue the slow decline. I’d prefer Sanders to bring change but it seems that is no option. If it takes a idiot like Trump to make those changes, well… With the luxury of being in another country, I’m curious to see what will happen if it comes to that.
It wasn’t 30% of Democrats, it was 30% of Sanders supporters, i.e. less than 15% of Democrats. I would expect that number to steadily decrease over time once Sanders concedes.
I will. And I will sleep soundly knowing that the person I vote for isn’t a war hawk, and will not get us tangled in more endless wars abroad. When Hillary gets elected, you’ll have to live with the fact that by helping to put her in office, you are also partially responsible for what she does when she gets there.
So that’s it then? A “choice” between neo-liberalism and fascism? No other opinions allowed?
Well, that’s it for me. It’s been educational, I guess.
Ⓐ☭
neoliberalism isn’t really an option either, nobody seems to actually know what that term actually means, little more than a leftist bogey word at this point.
In a war that Hillary voted for. That’s hardly an irrelevant consideration.
That’s something I have a hard time understanding.
Clearly.
People support Sanders because of what he stands for – reintroducing the progressive aspect of liberalism into mainstream politics, re-enfranchising the citizens, and removing the corrupting influence of big money. These are all radical changes to the body politic and go absolutely against the current trend.
If voting for Hillary would help achieve those ends, Bernie’s supporters should vote for her. But she’s the poster child for the establishment they despise, and it wouldn’t, so they shouldn’t. Why should Berne’s ‘actual, spoken wishes’ mean anything? It’s utterly irrelevant unless you’re playing personality politics, which is a moron’s game.
you do realise that Sanders was far from a dove in terms of foreign policy? he voted for the war in Afghanistan, was broadly supportive of what happened in Libya, and has pretty much a status-quo position on Israel. I don’t think Clinton is as hawkish as her detractors make out either, I’d say she’s probably less so than Obama turned out to be.
You forgot to thank us for all the fish.
