What Hillary supporters don't understand

[pinebox]

Ok, I am going to do my best here to explain some things and this is a response to the post here;

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1101227
Bernie JOINED the Dem party to try to become president because he knew he couldn't win otherwise. And yet so many Bernie fans trash the party that he voluntarily JOINED. Such hypocrisy. So pathetic.

And the thing is, BERNIE would be disappointed. I love Bernie, but some of his supporters are saying things that are just plain off the beam. "Hillary is a war monger." "Hillary is a Republican." And on and on and on. Wild eyed and off the beam.

If the Dem party is so terrible, why did Bernie so recently JOIN it?????????

Let me put this into perspective.
I think one of the biggest things that Hillary supporters fail to understand is that people followed Bernie. Look, I'll be honest. I myself am an indy with green leaning who SWITCHED to Democrat in order to caucus for Bernie. Some of you may dislike that but the fact is, Bernie is growing the Democratic party. Period. Hillary is not.

A lot of people are fed up right now, I mean really fed up. People are busting their asses working 40/hrs a week and aren't able to make it. Hillary is seen as a peace-meal approach but you know, we've tried that and it's failed. Wall Street has gotten richer and there are more people on food stamps now than ever before. People are literally suffering in America and Hillary is seen as more of the same old-same old. An enabler of a system that has left millions of people ion the shadows.

One perfect example right now is both the fight for single payer and minimum wage. It's basic math. Despite people saving more with single payer, Hillary supporters spin it about taxes when the truth is the savings in single payer > the tax increase. It's money in your pocket and minimum wage? We are really having this fight? You're Dems FFS! Why should anybody work 40/hrs a week and rely on Gov't assistance? They sure as hell shouldn't be! Fuck that noise!

This is the defining difference, right here---

Many Bernie supporters are voting for HIM and NOT the Democratic party. That is the huge difference BUT if you want then to stay around and still be Dems after the election, well you know what you have to do--start supporting principles which are Dem foundations and not more wars, big money in DC and by God start fighting for a living wage!

People have lost hope, a lot of hope. Bernie gives millions that again.
This what it's about

[4dsc]

1. The DNC won't get this at all

How dare you tell the truth around here. lol

[pinebox]

2. lol Amen.

[newthinking]

226. The Democratic Party has been losing membership (%) for years as

frustrate member have been registering independent.

This is a good thing for a leader in the party who energizes people back into the party. But the entrenched elite will be slow to recognize it.

[redruddyred]

254. this neatly explains why new hampshire is swinging so hard for bernie

50% of the state are registered independents.

i think at least part of this is new england steely independence and unwillingness to give others the benefit of the doubt.

but people here are smart, and i think they also recognize that both parties are corrupt and neither are working for them.

[Ferd Berfel]

28. The DNC is now owned by people and oganizations who's intersts

don't allow for 'getting it'.


In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

- George Orwell

[TryLogic]

85. "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." Wow!

One of the most profound statements I have ever read.

[Hortensis]

99. Well, "Bernie is growing the Democratic party" is not true.

CS Monitor, January 11: "The latest Gallup poll on party identification, published Monday, found that the number of respondents who identify as Democrats reached a historical low of 29 percent in the past year." (Conservatives 26%)

That's because right-wing propagandists have been able to convince the nation in general that the Democrats are responsible (or at least as responsible when they can't shove it all off) as they are for creating their problems. This lie is repeatedly told as truth, but any revolution that results from it can only be devolution.

Here's a little "profound" statement from me: To tell the truth one first has to recognize it.

[A Simple Game]

121. That 29% number has been around for quite a few months, you better have them do a new poll.

But besides that, WOW, are the Democrats in trouble? If the Conservatives are at 26% and I know that the Republicans are also at about 26% the Democrats have a huge hole to dig themselves out of. I thought the Conservatives were a minor party, of course if the Democrats are the largest party at 29% then I guess that makes them all minority parties.

I too am an unaffiliated voter who has rejoined the Democratic party to vote in the New York primary.

Signed: A proud Dino from the left.

PS: I predict a mass exodus from the Democratic party if Hillary wins the nomination and then goes on to lose the general.

[Ferd Berfel]

141. If HIllary wins the nomination the exodus (apathy) will begin before the GE

There will be very little enthusiasm for a Business as usual, Status Quo neocon hawk corporatist

[pinebox]

162. GOP will win if Hillary is the nominee

As it is, polls already show her barely beating Trump and she loses to Cruz.
People will stay home,

[Ferd Berfel]

165. Yes - the sad truth

[Hortensis]

208. Oh, poof. I feel you'd be much happier if

you weren't so mistaken.

No one's going to change your minds, though. So if things are that bad, why hang around and wallow in it? Why not find a more pleasant hobby and just pop your heads out of the fish tank or garden long enough to vote a couple times this year? The primary for real, the general just, you know, because theoretically you should...

[hifiguy]

237. She will be beaten like a gong in the general

if she is the nominee, and the polls back this conclusion. Make book on it.

She completely alienates the genuine progressive base - the kind that support actual DEMOCRATIC policies rather than neoliberal/neocon ones - and motivates the cave orc Repig base.

[Hortensis]

171. That 29% was 32% or more last year. As for the

"mass exodus," what would happen if Hillary lost the general is interesting, and your prediction gave me pause, but I predict you're wrong and this is why I do:

Because there's really nowhere to go.

Because most Democrats are liberals who are, by nature, relatively independent, but we join a party to be able to exercise more power collectively than we would be able to standing alone.

Because Hillary is a genuinely good candidate. All three of our candidates are good, and we know it. Our nominee will not be some version of a Trump who the DNC wasn't able to eject and ended up embracing, jettisoning whatever principles it had to do so.

Because liberals tend to be more able to accept hard truths and are less likely than some other types to just start attacking the nearest blame-able targets. Some of the more reactionary types farther left might insist the DNC was infiltrated by conservatives and gave the election away, liberals won't.

But, hey, welcome to the party while you're here. Hopefully it'll be for some time.

[A Simple Game]

212. Nowhere to go? The Democratic party is no longer liberal.

That is why I left the first time and probably will leave again after this election cycle.

The unaffiliated, which go more for Bernie than Hillary, is much more liberal than the Democratic party.

[Hortensis]

219. Well, this is going to be an interesting year,

and I'm glad you're going to be here for a while.

And the rest of it starts tomorrow. Iowa! I'm excited to finally be moving to voting. The general is what will determine the course of our nation.

I strongly disagree that we are not liberal. We are moderate liberal overall and are moving our goals farther leftward and enlarging them as it becomes possible. I'd like to make our goals huge and somewhat farther left, but overall I've been feeling mostly confident since 2007 that we will get there. Sure, some of the midterms were severe blows, but I believe that without Big Money infiltration in government and politics the wave of leftward change would be much farther advanced than now. As it is, Big Money slowed but has not been able to stop, much less reverse, our incoming liberal, progressive wave of change.

[Ferd Berfel]

238. Sad but true.

And that's where I"m at also

If I wanted to vote for oligarchs and corporations I'd vote Republican

[A Simple Game]

240. Nader's "there is no difference" is becoming closer to being true every year. n/t

[Ferd Berfel]

241. THere is little difference Except for Bernie!

There you have a huge difference

[The Far Left]

243. There Are Differences

You may find some differences listed at this site:

http://www.ifyoulikehillary.com/#campaign-finance-reform

I hope that helps.

[A Simple Game]

244. Wow your first post, thanks for the honor and welcome to DU.

No I don't need to check the web site, I know there are differences, I said they are just less and less as time goes by. Except for Bernie who many on this board don't even consider a Democrat. No matter to me, he is more of a liberal than 99% of the Democrats. It's not the title of the person that matters, it's their philosophy.

[pinebox]

271. That is one kick ass link! Thank you & welcome to DU

[The Far Left]

280. Like that? Here are two more...

Bernie is the Real Deal. Bernie is more like FDR:





I love Bernie Sanders...

[tasgator]

236. I'll be gone

Rather than put up with 4 years of nothing. I am a white male with professional degree and I support Hillary. I know she is bullet proof after 26 years of venom from the media and republicans. Bernie refused to be a democrat until last year to take advantage of our ability to get on the ballet in 50 states. The DNC has bent over backwards to accommodate his candidacy to avoid a Nader type problem. But he's been in DC some 30 years and you can't point to anything he has actually accomplished of any note. He goes along with the Democrats usually but voted against gun control and other issues people who support him say are important for them. If he would be so great, tell me what he has actually accomplished in DC in all his time there.

I retire in 7 years. I have been fighting this crap for 40 years. I am preparing my child to be able to emigrate out of this country if the republicans keep control of congress, much less win the White House. Too many of the people supporting Bernie are the same ones who stayed home in 2010 and 2014 to give Republicans a lock on congress. They are the ones who elected
George W. Bush by voting to Ralph Nader. This time, I'll stay home and you young people who are without jobs and are buried up to your butts in student loan debt and the aging hippies who actually think some "miracle" will happen under Bernie can enjoy living under republican rule. And Paul Krugman is right, too!

[pinebox]

273. Ok let's look at what you're saying shall we?

I want you to REALLY look at this.

First on guns...

Hillary has flip flopped on guns. In fact let's look at the debates from 2008 against Obama shall we?

Next up, are you aware of the campaign flier that she used against Obama?



Next up are you aware that Hillary portrayed herself as a church going rifle tottin' kind of gal?
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/12/clinton-portrays-herself-as-a-pro-gun-churchgoer/




Lastly, are you aware that Bernie has been at it since the 80s?


Now, I am quite curious, why is this whole party purity thing so important to you when Bernie embodies what an FDR Dem actually is? From minimum wage to universal health care, these are FOUNDATION DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES yet you choose to stand by the candidate who voted FOR a border fence?

So you cite George W Bush yet Hillary is more closely aligned with him in terms of policy than Bernie is. One only needs to take a look at this http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/6/4/1390529/-Hillary-s-voting-record and it become quite obvious.

You did do one thing though and you illustrated my point perfectly.
Hillary supporters put party over people.
Bernie supporters put people over party.

[Mbrow]

156. Sorry to burst your bubble

When my wife and i were in CA we voted DSA or green, moving to Idaho DEM's were the closest to our valves but so many of so called dems in ID are just re-thug light. We bounced out for B.O. and will for Bernie, But Pinebox is right the DNC has been so far to the right since Reagan that they have always been the lessor of two evils for us and a lot of our friends.

[Hortensis]

213. I'm not sure what you're responding to,

but of course the DemParty moved right when the entire nation moved right, though far less than the conservatives. That's just the way it was. Would you have "representative" government that completely ignored the will of the people?

As for you, I've always been strongly liberal, which is farther left of a large majority of Americans. When the nation shifted right, I didn't shift at all. You're notably farther left from me and even farther from the will of the majority than I was as a strong liberal.

Which is to say, of course the DNC didn't represent your views during the Reagan and subsequent conservative eras. You shouldn't have expected it to. The DNC is supposed to work to fulfill the wishes of its membership -- if it is to survive and not hemorrhage members it will, and that membership was largely not just moderate liberal but moderate liberal reacting to a conservative era.

As for still the DNC still being so far right, IMO you severely lack perspective. In fact, the party has been moving left again -- with America -- since well before Obama. How on earth do you think that liberal black man got elected?

[pinebox]

164. Wrong. What's this please?

And where are the Republicans for Hillary? *crickets*
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-lifelong-conservatives-who-love-bernie-sanders/417441/

[Hortensis]

223. Pew has a nice article about the ideological

breakdown this era. It identifies a couple conservative groups and some others who largely vote Democratic.

And I've been musing about what kind of conservatives are drawn to Bernie since he first entered the race. Strong ideologues and those with extremist traits are not going to be drawn to a moderate. Period. If you visualize a simplified ideological spectrum as more like a U or O, which I do, then the shortest distance for conservatives on the hard right, such as disaffected tea-partiers, to the nearest candidate sufficiently out of the liberal mainstream for them would be across the top to Bernie.

Hillary's fairly obvious -- she's moderate liberal so, for moderate conservatives who support liberal economic programs, a shift around the bottom to her would seem to be the most comfortable destination for them.

In this scenario Martin's located in the middle and thus suffered from not being the closest candidate for ideological buses arriving from either direction.

[creatives4innovation]

201. Slowing the bleed

The only thing keeping me in the Democratic party at this point is Bernie. Period.

[Hortensis]

224. Okay. Note both of you ARE in the Democratic Party.

[cannabis_flower]

216. So I guess you could say..

that Hillary isn't either, right?

[Hortensis]

225. Agree. Hillary is not either. Both of them will draw

the left-leaning independent votes, and hopefully some right-leaners, but that is not growing the party. We'll have to see what the next president accomplishes.

[hifiguy]

234. So true.

[GummyBearz]

112. The DNC and Hillary supports know what Jon Snow knows. nt

[Ferd Berfel]

214. Yuo mean that the money people will bring you back to life

if they think they can make MORE money off of you?

[HassleCat]

3. Sticking with the strategy

For 35 years, our party has followed a strategy that sometimes gain us the presidency, but loses at all other levels. We are afraid to depart from this course because the presidency is all we have left, and we are worried we could lose that if Sanders defeats Clinton. We are afraid. We are cowering. We are timid.

[pinebox]

7. Dems have taken massive losses

and there is a reason for that because many have conservative leanings. The party has left a lot of people. Look at the rhetoric lately and the breakdown of what has become "NO WE CAN'T!" Sorry but we can, we will and once Bernie is elected, WE ARE.

Bernie has effectively motivated the progressive left. It's been a long time coming and this is evident for the down ticket with now the rise of "Bernie Progressives" who are sick of the system and sick of our politicians who are beholden to money. People are fed up.

I heard the comment the other day on here that went along the lines of "Great, Dems now have their own Tea Party." and it was said with a lot of disgust. What do you expect to have happen when you have a candidate out there who is basically preaching a very conservative strategy & running for the Dem nomination?

[jwirr]

147. The party has left us. The quote in the OP says that Bernie

came in because he needed us to win. But I think that ignores how disillusioned many of us have become in that 35 years of DLC policy. And the loses we have faced in Senate, House and local races reflects that.

He came in because in all those exploratory events prior to his announcement he saw those of us in the Democratic Party who have become so disillusioned and/or just dropped out because we were pushed to the fringe by a group of leaders who were Democratic Light and nothing like our past leaders.

So Hillary people quit whining - he did not break down the doors - we invited him. Yes, we, the Democrats who honor our traditions - the traditions of FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ and even Jimmy Carter. True Democrats.

[CrispyQ]

24. Dems went timid when Reagan poked fun at the word liberal.

They should have stood proud & said, "Hell yes we're liberal & here's why," & then listed every great liberal thing in the country that sprung from liberal values, like the highway system, free education K-12, Social Security/Medicare, the FDA, EPA & other agencies, etc. But no, they cowered, like you said, & hopped on the same corporate gravy train the repubs are on. The dems throw a few more crumbs to the People, but they are still on the train & it isn't changing direction.

The people, on both sides, are tired of politics as usual.

[Populist_Prole]

38. Pithy toon!

Utterly accurate portrayal of the actual dynamic in play.

[CrispyQ]

52. Wuerker's one of our best!

Although, when it first came out I didn't think Trump would last this long. I'm still surprised.

[mythology]

88. Poll evidence suggest that isn't an accurate portrayal

Clinton is head both nationally and in a majority of states. Trump is head nationally and in at least a majority of states. Sanders is ahead in New Hampshire but behind nationally. It's really hard to make an accurate argument that ignores evidence.

[Populist_Prole]

108. Polls ignore huge swaths of voters n/t

"Establishment sees few broken windows in cars" of parked cars on hot days with the windows rolled down.

[whereisjustice]

71. "Dems went timid when Reagan poked fun at the word liberal..."

Not me - I've been in the face of the appeasers in both parties. Seriously, we need to shut this bullshit down. Liberals have every right to be proud of what we've done. Our record speaks for itself. Wall Street convinced the Democratic Party that an MBA and corporate mindset would bring discipline and authority into a system that thrived on diversity and bold ideas.

In the process cowardly conservatives have turned "moderate" and "pragmatic" into something foul. We really need to start getting in the face of the establishment Dems. Jesus, some of them are making David Brooks look liberal.

[freebrew]

285. Let's not forget the end of Equal Media time...

which is what led to the 'liberal' media claims. There was no one willing to refute that.

There was Jerry Falwell on the TV outright accusing a sitting president of murder.
No one objected.

When the media went for profit, the people lost the nation.
There is no longer a fifth estate. There is corporate sponsored propaganda.

[Jenny_92808]

123. The southern strategy is what you are talking about.

It is about evil racism. White southerners picturing blacks being helped and they don't want that because of their bone-deep hate.

[bvar22]

229. That is certainly a broad brush.

There are millions and millions of Liberal Democrats living in today's South.
WE are the change.


BTW: Bone Deep Racial Hatred exists in every state, but the worst I have experienced is in NorthWestern states.

[jwirr]

131. And THAT is how we lose.

[beam me up scottie]

4. Well said! I'm a Vermonter, we always vote for the person, not the party.

[Roy Ellefson]

100. policies not the person

I support Bernie Sanders but I vote the policies they support and champion not the individual. A good person who supports crappy policy will not get my vote. Voting for the person makes the election an individual popularity contest...which is superficial. i will vote for Bernie because he supports the policies that I find most important.

[beam me up scottie]

103. Always wise, Roy Ellefson.

I trust Bernie even though I don't always agree with him.

[Marty McGraw]

187. But it is ever so more

wonderful when you get both. and Bernie is a testament to that fact!

( *o*)

[Bjornsdotter]

5. Yep, agreed

...it's the person not the party for me and for Mr Bjornsdotter.

[TIME TO PANIC]

6. Excellent post!!!

[lostnfound]

8. Well said. And I wish we had ways to get progressives on the coattails in November.

Last edited Mon Feb 1, 2016, 09:22 PM - Edit history (1)

Because we need to not only elect Bernie but get some progressive D's to take some seats in congress. Because of citizens United, we lost some. Come November, what elections could be winnable if Bernie takes the primary and has coat tails in November?

[MisterP]

152. posts on primaries get alerted

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511097097

[SoLeftIAmRight]

9. That list is long

but you hit some highlights

[DCBob]

10. The question is can Bernie attract more than he scares away.

[pinebox]

11. Scaring away?

This is scaring people away?



You know what scares people away? Someone who is for unending wars. Embroiled in more controversies than there are questions on Jeopardy. Someone who can't even support Dem foundation principles. THAT scares people away. There's a reason why the Dem party has lost so many people and have people have switched to Indy.
Think about it.

[DCBob]

12. In the sense that many might not think he is fit to be President.

[pinebox]

13. And the same can be said for Hillary

Sorry but we're not nominating a candidate who is under an FBI investigation. That would be a complete disaster.

[DCBob]

15. Not comparable.

That's a bogus faux scandal that has run its course. If there was something there it would have been found by now.

Bernie on the other hand has actual real liabilities..

-- lack of foreign policy experience and knowledge
-- extreme approach to certain issues (banking reforms, taxes, wealth distribution, military)
-- his age and appearance (I know that is shallow but it will have an impact)
-- his oddball past (the GOP will no doubt did up all sorts juicy stories from his past and exaggerate them to no end)

That will "scare" off alot of moderate voters who might have voted for Hillary.

[pinebox]

21. A bogus scandal? Nice ageism bullshit reply too.

Since when did Obama's administration release bogus scandals? Hmmm? I guess you missed the announcement on Friday didn't you?

---Lack of foreign policy experience you say? Did you say the same thing about Obama in 2008? Hillary's foreign policy experience is so awesome that she voted for Iraq, sold weapons for money to Saudi Arabia and hand a had in the Honduras Coup. We can throw in Yemen, Syria and Libta too! Ya, that's pretty awesome right there. Shall we bring up her comments about nuking Iran, too?

--Extreme approach? You're position is actually considered extreme when the majority of American's agree with Bernie http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/more-and-more-americans-agree-bernie-sanders-and-not-just-those-who-identify-left

--His age and appearance? Are you fucking kidding me? Seriously? When you have no flippin' argument, pull the ageism card? And THAT is one reason why so many can't stand Hillary. What utter bullshit. That is just flat out sad. When you have to attack a candidates age and appearance, you lost the argument.

--Oddballs past? As compared to someone who's been embroiled in so many controversies that she has more baggage than Samsonite? Meanwhile, Republicans (yes THOSE people) helped in electing him in his home state and guess what? This! https://twitter.com/gopforsanders

Crossover support;
[X] Bernie--checkmark
[ ] Hillary.

/end of discussion.

[DCBob]

32. The Obama admin has to address it due to the FOIA request.

The bogus scandal is the media, the RWingers and Bernie supporters making such a big deal out of it. In reality its much ado about nothing.

[pinebox]

34. If you can't secure you emails you probably shouldn't be POTUS.

Period.

[DCBob]

42. Most voters are sick of hearing about her damn emails!

[pinebox]

57. #1 news story Friday. No they aren't.

[DCBob]

61. Of course it makes great headlines and attracts clicks.

People are gullible that way. Its still bogus and will disappear again in few days.

[pinebox]

139. You can ignore it all you want but we have a candidate under an FBI investigation. Think about that.

[Duval]

148. What if she were the nominee and then embroiled in a scandal? It's best we

support Bernie as much as we can. From polls I've seen, Bernie can beat Trump, but not Hillary. I predict her numbers will go down as this investigation unfolds.

[DCBob]

197. Actually she is not.

From the NY Times..

Law enforcement officials have said that Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, is not a target of the investigation, and she has said there is no evidence that her account was hacked. There has also been no evidence that she broke the law, and many specialists believe the occasional appearance of classified information in her account was probably of marginal consequence.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?_r=0

[40RatRod]

181. I wonder where the outrage was when...

...Colin Powell and Condi Rice used their own private email servers while defense secretary. I see this as she took the repubs and possibly a few Bernie supporters to the woodshed over Benghazi so this is their last straw and they won't turn it loose.

[Art_from_Ark]

258. Neither Rice nor Powell served as Secretary of Defense

Nice try, though.

[40RatRod]

276. My bad. I meant Secretary of State...

But you knew that. Now, tell me where was/is the outrage.

[Art_from_Ark]

277. There was plenty of outrage here against both Rice and Powell

But you knew that.
Or maybe you didn't.

I doubt that many people at the time were aware that they were using unsecured e-mail servers.
I certainly didn't.

But I knew that Powell was lying his ass off at the UN when he was shaking that vial full of pretend-anthrax to shill for Bush's war.

And Condi was probably the least qualified Secretary of State ever. A "Russian scholar" who didn't even know the language. A national security advisor who claimed that no one could have foretold the 911 attacks, even though warnings had been issued in a security briefing more than a month beforehand.

If it had been known at the time that they were using unsecured e-mail servers, there would have been plenty of outrage here.

[TheJames]

119. Why has nobody pointed out

that the fact of using other than provided, secured government servers for
government E-mails is itself illegal. It matters not whether the E-mails are classiffied. My understanding is that the government servers are mandated!
Could it be that Cheney, Rumsfeld, et. al. did this extensively? And in the previous administration, so recently that they can't credibly deny it.

[Jarqui]

90. Kind of but kind of not

Is she going to jail? I sincerely doubt it.

Will they charge people? I think it's inevitable now.

Way too much stuff got exposed.

She was exchanging emails with the president of the United States on an unsecure server sporadically for four years and didn't tell anyone. How does one defend that conduct? Tack on all the other stuff. But that example alone is pretty simple for most folks to grasp.

They cannot very well let her/them get away with it and turn around and discipline the rest of the folks working in government expected to maintain classified information. They have to make some sort of an example of them.

I think folks will get charged and it will be probably handled like Petraeus: haggled down to misdemeanors.

That was pretty devastating to his career. If it happens while she's running for the White House, it ain't going to boost her poll numbers.

[DCBob]

94. Doubt any charges will be made.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511096135

[pinebox]

102. One name--Scooter Libby.

[Jarqui]

142. Contrary to that article, she signed at least one non disclosure agreement

Nondisclosure agreement

So beyond the general laws on handling classified material, they have some specific laws she agreed to abide by. Clearly, based on what has come out, it looks like she didn't.

Some of this was ok as long as there was no classified information on the unsecured server. Now we know they have about 1500 pieces of classified information, some of it highly classified, on that server and emails with the president that probably contain a data pipe road map back towards the White House. So without trying to prosecute this in a forum, she has real trouble there.

As well, the judge in the FOIA case got pretty darn excited when they started looking that the Clinton staff started furiously deleting stuff. That apparently has since been recovered. There are FOIAs for that material. If they find any sinister/classified stuff there, (they were scurrying to delete 30,000 emails and didn't make a mistake?) that's obstruction of justice.

The most difficult emails are the ones they're trying to process now - that seem to require inter department review for security classification. That's lurking.

The Clinton Foundation did not comply with their memo of understanding and it cites some laws. They may have trouble there when they start to peel back the layers on what was happening with the State Department, Clinton Foundation donors and corporations or countries.

She is a long way from getting out of the woods on this stuff. Politically, it is the Clintons who are amazing at wiggling out of things but I think they've got her in that they can damage her candidacy badly with innuendo even if she's innocent.

[pinebox]

145. I was JUST reaading that now

She's screwed

[DCBob]

189. Im sure everyone with high level access to sensitive information is required to sign an NDA

That's not news.

The issue is whether she deliberately allowed classified material to be accessed by non authorized individuals. So far nothing like that has emerged after months and months and tens of thousands of emails. If they have not found it by now they aren't going to.

The fact that some emails have been retroactively classified top secret or that some information might have been forwarded to her that might have been considered classified seems to not be a bid deal as the article discusses.

I know the Republicans and Bernie supporters would love this to be Hillary's downfall but I just don't see it.

[Jarqui]

203. "he issue is whether she deliberately allowed classified material"

Nope. Not a chance.

Read what she signed, She agreed to protect the material, etc - much, much more in the agreement.

The classified material did not have to be marked classified.

Clinton only used one email address that did not go to state.gov. It went to her personal server.

The federal government considers information that comes from foreign officials to be “born classified." - automatically & immediately - not retroactively - every single piece of information. With only one email address, how did Hillary work at the State Department as Secretary of State for four years and never received any emails related to foreign officials? Now, it's getting really hard to comprehend just how stupid (& guilty) she was.

She also had email exchanges with the President on there - those have to be automatically classified as confidential because the transmission data helps to identify where he is or the White House server is.

On and on.

They've found 1,500+ mails with classified information on them, some very sensitive material. And she's the one who negligently left the barn door open - contrary to a variety of laws/regulations.

[DCBob]

204. Are you part of the FBI investigation?

If not please provide proof of all these wild claims you are making.

[Jarqui]

210. There's the message with links underneath. I'm not writing a book on it

Nope. Not a chance.

Read what she signed, She agreed to protect the material, etc - much, much more in the agreement.
Non Disclosure Agreemment

The classified material did not have to be marked classified.
Non Disclosure Agreement

Clinton only used one email address that did not go to state.gov. It went to her personal server.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/07/13/email-facts/

The federal government considers information that comes from foreign officials to be “born classified." - automatically & immediately - not retroactively - every single piece of information.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821
With only one email address, how did Hillary work at the State Department as Secretary of State for four years and never received any emails related to foreign officials? Now, it's getting really hard to comprehend just how stupid (& guilty) she was.

She also had email exchanges with the President on there - those have to be automatically classified as confidential because the transmission data helps to identify where he is or the White House server is.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2016/01/251855.htm

http://www.emailaddressmanager.com/tips/header.html

On and on.

They've found 1,500+ mails with classified information on them, some very sensitive material. And she's the one who negligently left the barn door open - contrary to a variety of laws/regulations.

[DCBob]

211. see this..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1104298

[DCBob]

209. Here is a good legal discussion of the NDA issue..

Thus, in sorting out Hillary Clinton's actions, there are at least two critical questions: First, to what extent was using a private email server an "unauthorized" handling of classified information. Second, did Clinton ever knowingly mishandle classified information or act in a grossly negligent manner that led to information being lost, destroyed or stolen?

Politics aside, it is difficult to find prior cases where the unwise handling of classified information led to a federal indictment. For the last 20 years, the federal statutes have been used when there were intentional unauthorized disclosures. The Department of Justice appears to have gone after "leakers," but not bunglers. Twenty years ago, John Deutsch found himself in hot water and the target of a DOJ investigation for transferring classified materials to his government-owned computer at home — a computer that he used to access a wide range of Internet searches. He was never charged; President Bill Clinton pardoned Deutsch on his last day as president. It remains to be seen what will happen in Hillary Clinton's case.

http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202737626175/Clintons-Email-Unwise-But-Likely-Not-Criminal?slreturn=20160031153752

Bottom line its very unlikely any legal action will be taken.

[Jarqui]

220. That article said:

http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202737626175/Clintons-Email-Unwise-But-Likely-Not-Criminal#ixzz3yrDwQxM4

Thus, in sorting out Hillary Clinton's actions, there are at least two critical questions: First, to what extent was using a private email server an "unauthorized" handling of classified information.

We've learned since September when that article was written that there was a fair amount of classified information on her unsecure server transmitted via emails. There's zero doubt about that now. Given the "born immediately classified" for foreign information, it's not a big step to strongly suspect that classified material got sent or received to the Secretary of State's unsecure computer when it was known or reasonably should have been known to be classified (because they were receiving information from foreign gov'ts). Tack on communications with the President. I think the FBI are in a pretty good position to establish #1.

Second, did Clinton ever knowingly mishandle classified information or act in a grossly negligent manner that led to information being lost, destroyed or stolen?

Given the circumstances of how #1 came about, there's a pretty good argument. The notion of what she did in setting up to work on that server and receive information from foreign governments or the president that was obviously confidential was either negligent or really stupid. Take your pick. Neither are going to play well during a campaign for the White House.

This was one of Clinton's guys who took classified info home
http://www.topsecretwriters.com/2014/02/mishandling-sensitive-data-the-john-deutch-cia-case/
He was about to get a misdemeanor when Clinton pardoned him.

The issue for Hillary is not so much whether she gets a misdemeanor or not. This issue is she's exposed to continued attacks by the GOP on this going down the stretch of the general election. Because
a) they have not got through all 55,000 pages
b) they have not got through the deleted emails that has a FOIA request on them
c) there's about 170 (? - some big number) of other FOIA requests they have to process on this so the information flow of this scandal is going past November.
Another release of info like last Friday leads to another set of attacks in the media from the GOP

The GOP will be howling no matter what but they'll be inconsolable if she walks away clean. Their screaming is what I think will result in a bone being tossed to them in the form of a fine and misdemeanor. That's how I see it.

[DCBob]

230. That how you see it... but that's not how I see it.

You actually care about consoling the GOP?? I could care less how much howling the GOP does. They are wrong and they will howl no matter what.

Hillary will be fine... this crap will pass and she will be an even stronger candidate. You can bank on that.

[Jarqui]

231. Can't stand them. Let 'em howl would be my attitude

But it's the media in conjunction with that and the gov't workers seeing a widely known breach go without punishment.

If she's guilty, slap her on the wrist after the election (and then Obama may pardon her on his way out the door).

But again, when her campaign has to answer to this, they're not getting their message out. People get sick of it.

[DCBob]

232. The media will get tired of it..

and government workers tend to be liberal so they will be on Hillary's side. As I said before dont fret it... she will be fine and in fact stronger once the investigation is over and nothing emerges.

[Lage Nom Ai]

137. Real?

Voted against the Iraq war. Will not challenge the Russians to invade air space. Is against regime change, because that never bites us in the ass.
Banking reform, taxes, wealth distribution, yep that FDDRaws Wingnut. Oh and when did Hillary serve?
He is probably healthier than Ms. Clinton. Remember the stroke scare when she was SOS?
Odd ball past? Marching with MLK? Going to jail for fighting segragation? Expand please.

[ErisDiscordia]

31. Agoraphobes for sure!

[pinebox]

37. yes they are

[ErisDiscordia]

43. No, I mean agoraphobes would avoid such venues

I really don't like crowds. Not public performances, marches, nothing.

[pinebox]

45. I'm an introvert myself

so it can drain me

[Mike__M]

179. Being surrounded by THOUSANDS of people in Portland who agree with me

was pretty invigorating, even if I didn't like them being so close.

[jeff47]

18. Cowardice scares more people away.

If you aren't brave enough to even talk about issues like single payer, you scare away far more people.

[DCBob]

19. I disagree.

Bernie has a rather long list of liabilities that will give many voters some concern.

[jeff47]

20. And that is why we've suffered massive losses

both electorally and on issues.

People such as yourself that are too terrified to actually do anything.

[DCBob]

23. Not "terrified".. just using good judgement on who our best candidate is.

Its Hillary by far.

[pinebox]

29. Best candidates aren't indirectly responsible for the deaths of 100s of 1000s

[DCBob]

35. Good lord.. still blaming Hillary for Bush's war in Iraq??

Nonsense.

[pinebox]

40. She voted yes. She owns it.

the worst American blunder in American history. She owns it. She'll NEVER get a pass on it. Many died.
You know who didn't vote for it?
Obama and Sanders.

[DCBob]

47. As did most Senate Democrats including John Kerry, Joe Biden and John Edwards.

BTW, Barack Obama wasn't in the Senate at the time of Iraq war vote.

[whopis01]

134. Just because others were wrong too

does not make her vote right.

[DCBob]

194. It helps me to realize there were strong compelling reasons to vote yes.

And not just simply she was stupid or a warmonger or getting paid off by the MIC. I just dont believe any of that crap.

[pinebox]

140. And? They were wrong as well. You're defending Hillary's Iraq vote? REALLY?

[DCBob]

191. The vote, yes. It was mistake but I ultimately only blame the Bush/Cheney admin for Iraq.

[1StrongBlackMan]

62. A war that HRC may have voted for; but, Bernie voted to fund ... repeatedly.

Some are willing to just ignore that little factoid.

[Lage Nom Ai]

120. Ive run in to this argument before

And it is still bunk. Voting to fund military action once it had started is what must be done otherwise troops go into battle without needed equipment to keep them alive. And please do not try to push the argument that no funds means they come home. That too is a lie, those in charge just put our troops in deeper shot. Such was the case with troops going out with crap body armor and humvees missing armor and ballistic glass. Something they did with my nephew when he was in Iraq. Voting for a war and voting to fund it are two different things.

[1StrongBlackMan]

127. I've run into this apologia before ...

I see principled positions are flexible.

[Lage Nom Ai]

150. Apparently so

You are for war but not paying for it. Nice move G.W. or are you more in line with Rumsfeld? You know "You go to war with what you have. Not with what you need " For the record I am anti-war, I'm not against those sent to serve. If you are I would suggest you reevaluate your own principals.

[1StrongBlackMan]

177. No. If I want(ed) to make my bones on opposing a war ...

that doesn't/wouldn't change because a majority of Congress supported that/those wars (i.e., taking a principled stance); especially when, as history has/had it, my individual opposing vote doesn't matter (i.e., taking a principled stance, while being pragmatic).

For the record, I am anti-some wars and never against those that serve.

But, I find the principled flexibility, interesting ... This I oppose, but will support it because "the troops!!!"; this other thing, I would support ... I really would, but can't/won't because its divisive ... never mind those being hurt.

[Lage Nom Ai]

246. The two are not the same

You are for occasionally sending men and women to war and then not funding it if it doesn't suite you. Odd way of supporting those who put it on the line. I can be against war and still want the very best for those fighting it. Not only am i principled and solid on my antiwar stance its morally right to fund those asked to do the work.
If you do not fund those asked to fight knowing they are the ones who have to do the job under equipped and thus putting them in more danger it is not supporting them. No matter how you try to spin it.

[Armstead]

130. That's a load of crap

One may not like a war, and fight like hell to prevent.

But once troops are sent over there in harms way, and the process has begun, it would be immoral to suddenly cut them off at the knees. Bad for the soldiers, bad for the people who live in the affected country, and bad for the geopolitical situation of the world.

If you want to discredit Sanders for acting along with the responsible majority, you've got to do better than that.

[pinebox]

143. Ask yourself WHY?

Ooops. Next to debunk please?
https://pplswar.wordpress.com/2015/07/09/why-did-bernie-sanders-vote-to-fund-the-iraq-war/

[1StrongBlackMan]

154. Why what? Why he voted repeated to fund a war he opposed? eom.

[Duval]

168. Great reply, pinebox. Facts speak!

[jeff47]

283. Yeah, it really sucks you can't attack him for starving the troops in a war zone. (nt)

[frylock]

111. Everyone knows that was Susan Sarandon's fault.

[jeff47]

53. You're confusing "judgement" with fear.

That's why you're selecting a candidate who promises to not fix anything. To desperately cling to the insufficient status quo. "Maybe we can get by just a little bit longer without too much more suffering."

And that is why we went from utterly dominating Congress for decades to being utterly dominated. And how an imploding party such as the Republicans has massive control over the states. You gave it to them. Because you were afraid to push for more.

[DCBob]

58. I do fear one thing in particular..

The GOP taking over this country if we don't have the strongest candidate possible as our nominee. Hillary is that candidate.

[jeff47]

64. Then stop giving the country to them.

Your strategy lost in 2014, 2010, 2004, 2002 and 2000.

Pushing for more won in 2012 (leftover tatters of hope and change), 2008 and 2006.

How about we go with the strategy that won instead of the strategy that loses over and over again?

[DCBob]

78. My "strategy" has nothing to do with the rise of the Republicans in this country.

I think the reason is RW media. They have thoroughly brainwashed a large percentage of this country. Fox News runs 7X24 in almost every barber shop, hair dresser, car repair shop, dentist office, etc, etc, etc. The radio stations are dominated by RW hacks like Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage. If we don't have some way to balance off their negative effects we are doomed.

[frylock]

113. Hey, guess where that RW media came from?

Telecommunications Act of 1996. Thanks, Ralph Nader.

[jeff47]

274. Sure it does. Your response to their gaining power

was to cower and happily follow the Overton window to the right.

They have thoroughly brainwashed a large percentage of this country.

Good thing they didn't face any opposition to that! Imagine if Democrats had actually challenged the narrative instead of agreeing that taxes are awful and the era of big government is over.

If we don't have some way to balance off their negative effects we are doomed.

You mean, exactly what I'm saying we need, and you are desperately avoiding doing? Well garsh, that totally means we should shut up and accept the Republican framing on everything.

[jomin41]

247. No, she's not.

She will energize Republican voters. She will make Trump look better than he deserves. She will blow it. Bernie will dismantle Trump while attracting all kinds of new Dems.

[frylock]

110. Good judgment and Hillary go together like water and oil.

[Jenny_92808]

128. For the people

is apparently wrong in your book. Racism much?

[pinebox]

25. Ya like his age and looks, right?

You said it. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1102791 You went there.
That's a huge liability isn't it? Next up, fat shaming in 10.

[DCBob]

51. His age and appearance is an issue.

Shock.. voters are affected but such things.

[1StrongBlackMan]

82. But ... We aren't suppose to acknowledge the reality of what is ...

it's the only way to have some corners of DU, make any sense.

Spoiler Alert: People make electoral decisions on all sorts of "impure" motivations ... some consider such ugly things as race, gender, color, religion, sexual orientation, age, perceived intelligence (or, regular guy/gal appeal) ... all sorts of shallow, non-policy related things for supporting/not supporting a candidate.

ETA: But to acknowledge this is bad.

[DCBob]

91. Yeah, ridiculous isnt it?

This is supposed to be political discussion board... not a Sanders campaign site.

[Matt_in_STL]

109. Imagine the shoe on the other foot

Imagine the uproar if someone on this progressive board discussed Hillary's age or her looks or if they had insisted we nominate Hillary in 2008 because people wouldn't vote for the black man. There is nothing progressive about that at all.

[mhatrw]

170. One strong black man was able to overcome those biases in 2008 and 2012.

The reality is that independent voters distrust Clinton and view her highly negatively. And Republican voters hate her with a passion that burns.

Democrats literally could not choose a worse candidate in terms of firing up the Republican base to vote against her while leaving the Democratic base stone cold.

[frylock]

116. You REALLY want to bring age and appearance into this?

[grasswire]

132. oh my

Is that for real?

[frylock]

135. As far as I know...

[Mike__M]

184. "As far as I know"

Cut it out!

[1StrongBlackMan]

48. I have argued that this is, exactly, the theory of his campaign ...

and has been from Day One.

[rhett o rick]

196. More Democrats will vote for him in the General than HRC. More Republicans will vote for him

in the General. The only people Sanders scares is the Oligarchy and their worshipers.

[DCBob]

199. I disagree.

Sanders has yet to make a strong connection with African American voters. If they don't show up in November we lose.

Furthermore if Sanders somehow miraculously wins the Dem nomination the RW dirt machine will kick into high gear with Bernie as its target and shift away from Hillary. They will no doubt dig up all sorts of questionable/controversial stuff much like they did with candidate Obama back in 2008. If Bernie has anything in his past that might used against him politically they will find it and exploit it to no end. Obama was able to withstand it.. Bernie not so sure.

[rhett o rick]

218. I think the AA voterss will support Sanders and as least vote against Trump. Also, I think

the Republicons hate H. Clinton more than they hate Sanders.

[DCBob]

228. Perhaps, but I know they will come out to vote for Hillary.

Also, Republicans will learn to hate any Democrat who challenges them.

[Lorien]

202. Of course

Bernie gets 24% of the GOP vote, most of the independent vote and all of the Dem vote in his home State. He has the highest approval rating in the Senate. Hillary has DNC voters, and that's about it. She's a very divisive figure and always has been.

[DCBob]

205. Vermont is not representative of America.

[retrowire]

14. I too, only became Democrat because of Bernie. nt

[pinebox]

27. Likewise XD

[TryLogic]

96. I am remaining a Democrat because of Bernie.

[Broward]

16. If Hillary wins the nomination, it may well end up being a Pyrrhic victory.

I think a lot of voters on the Left will stay home in November, which could throw the election to the Repubs. Hillary is part of the problem, not the solution.

[pinebox]

26. You are correct

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

105. Any Dem Center, Right or Left who stays home and allows a Repub to win is a complete fucking idiot

Full stop.

[whopis01]

136. You are correct - but

that doesn't mean they won't stay at home.

[Broward]

190. Call these prospective non-voters whatever you want.

It still doesn't change the fact that for many Hillary is a terrible, uninspiring candidate that doesn't share their values. Plenty will stay home.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

253. Anyone claiming to be a Dem and stays home is allowing their values to be usurped....

by Trump, Cruz, Rubio, etc....

And that goes for both anti-Hill and anti-Bernie people. I will call them fucking idiots, even if it makes you uncomfortable.

[Broward]

268. No, calling people fucking idiots doesn't make me uncomfortable.

I think there are fucking idiots everywhere.

[Duval]

159. I agree.

[ejbr]

17. I was a Democrat

left because of the weak sauce approach to dealing with Republican bullshit; realizing that it may not be weak, but planned indifference. Nonetheless, I am back as a Democrat to vote for Bernie. And my vote for Bernie is actually NOT a vote for Bernie, but a vote for those of us left disenfranchised by the status quo.

[CrispyQ]

46. "...realizing that it may not be weak, but planned indifference..."

Green who went back to Dem to caucus for Sanders.

[highprincipleswork]

22. Testify!

[libdem4life]

30. Isn't this the guy who is said not to have an enemy in Washington? Why?

Perhaps it is because he does not owe allegiance, influence, donor expectations et al ...which define both parties. He can truly vote his conscience, help bring other together, etc. I believe he has already proved himself with his well-defined record.

Our two-party system does not want people like Bernie. They like to fight it out. Seated in opposing sections of Congress. I guess Bernie sits with the Democrats. The other candidate fights as well or better than the rest...which may be why she lasted so long...I don't know.

The infighting, which is clearly just a ruse to keep their "constituents" fighting or loyal, as well, is what has turned people off...put them all in the same basket...lowest ratings are our Congress. That is a shame, but I think this is why. Thus, Bernie's coattails have already begun.

[pnwmom]

50. It's the opposite -- he's said not to have a friend in Washington, which is why

no one's endorsing him. They don't appreciate being scolded by him.

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_28818555/harrop-intolerance-bernie-sanders

Sanders has much mellowed since then, but he still inhabits a self-righteous cocoon that has made him an ineffective and marginal figure in the Senate.

Even Democrats express frustration at working with Sanders, an independent who caucuses with them. Moderates bristle at his moralizing and refusal to make compromises required to pass needed legislation. The undeniably liberal Barney Frank, former rep from Massachusetts, complained of Sanders' "holier-than-thou attitude."

[libdem4life]

59. Yeah, OK. Guess it kind of depends whether he's on your side or not.

We've begun to see the feisty side of Sanders and, frankly, I like it. I'm sure it turns off those who like the slick, prepared, emotionless babble we've come to expect from candidates.

Also goes to show there are, especially in politics, two or more sides (and quotes) to everything.

[pnwmom]

68. Don't you like Barney Frank? His reaction should tell you something.

And he has made frequent statements like this -- it wasn't just a one-off.

[grasswire]

133. Barney Frank is flawed.

And NOT because of his sexual orientation, just in case someone wants to interpret my remark as that to score points.

[pinebox]

86. Denver Post is a RW leaning pub so you know

I live here.
Just a FYI.

[pnwmom]

89. Just google Barney Frank and Bernie Sanders and you can find any number

of quotes of Barney explaining why no one likes Bernie,

[pinebox]

93. You know why they don't? Because he tells the damn truth.

That's why and that is why we love him. No bullshit. No pandering. He shoots straight and he doesn't give a damn.
This is what you guys don't understand. If Dems do something wrong, he calls them out.

Bernie supports = People > Party
Hillary supporters = Party > People.

It's THAT simple.

[pnwmom]

95. Because he's a cranky scold who's absolutely convinced in his own righteousness

and almost nobody else's.

[pinebox]

98. LOL ad hominem attacks, eh?

Let's talk....POLICY!

Let's start with Hillary missing her vote on both Brownbeck amendments.
We can continue with how Hillary voted FOR a border fence.
After that we can have tea and crumpets and discuss how Hillary voted for more off shore drilling!

It will be awesome! I promise!

[frylock]

118. Banker Barney?

Can't imagine why that blustery twit wouldn't get along with Bernie.

[zazen]

252. plenty of people don't like Barney either--he's abrasive out of habit, not principle

Sanders drives some people crazy out of stubborn, repetitive principle. There's a difference.

Frank's comments aren't relevant.

[mhatrw]

174. And who are Hillary's best friends in Washington?

Oh yeah, billionaires and millionaire lobbyists.

[pnwmom]

33. Hillary has much stronger support among African American voters than Bernie.

It won't help if Bernie "grows" the party on one end while dropping support on the other.

[reformist2]

39. Bernie is liked by African American voters - where do you get the notion that he isn't?

[pnwmom]

56. From the polls in South Carolina and Texas, with large numbers of black voters.

And the national polls, too.

Where did get your idea?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/22/why-african-american-voters-may-doom-bernie-sanders-candidacy/

While Sanders would argue that he has a strong case to make to those voters about why they should support him, Clinton has ties to them that go back decades. And as a whole (and keep in mind that what I’m talking about doesn’t necessarily apply to any one individual even if it holds true for the group at large), African-Americans have a pragmatic view of politics. They had to fight — and some people even died — to secure the right to vote that whites always took for granted. They have to keep fighting to maintain that right in the face of a GOP that would put every impediment to the ballot it can find in front of them.

Ask anyone involved in Democratic politics about winning black votes in primaries, and they’ll tell you that it isn’t about hopes and dreams, though those are nice too. It’s about the nuts and bolts: the social networks, the key endorsers and officials, the neighborhood institutions, the systems that have been built up in the most trying circumstances to get people to the polls. Those kinds of factors are matter among every voting bloc, but they’re particularly important among African-Americans. You can’t blow into town a week before election day with a bunch of eager white 20-something volunteers from somewhere else and win their votes.

[pinebox]

44. That is about to change

[pnwmom]

63. She's a good person. But millions made up their minds for Hillary long ago. n/t

[pinebox]

72. Yes they sure did make their minds long ago about Hillary

and it looks like this;

[pnwmom]

79. African American ratings aren't shown on your graph. They aren't the same. n/t

[pinebox]

151. LOL What!?

Right because apparently they intentionally skipped African American's when they asked in all the different polls how Hillary is seen.

[pnwmom]

153. African American voters are far more likely to approve of and support Hillary

than Bernie. A graph covering all Americans without regard to race buries that difference.

[pinebox]

172. And as I said that is changing

We can start here http://www.democraticunderground.com/128093655

[hughee99]

70. Do you honestly believe African Americans will

Vote republican or stay home in significant numbers if Sanders wins the nomination?

[pnwmom]

75. They stayed home in 2014 and 2010 when Obama wasn't on the ballot --

and that's why we lost control of Congress. We cannot take their votes for granted.

[hughee99]

81. Do you find it odd that you brought up the midterms

When the discussion is about a presidential run? Sure, Sanders doesn't have the automatic appeal to AA voters that Kerry or Gore had ( ) but I don't see any evidence that they won't show up for the old white Dem presidential candidate because it want the one they preferred most in the primary.

[pnwmom]

92. Obama wasn't at the top of the ticket during the midterms. Did you know

that the majority of white people, men and women, voted for Mitt Romney? If it weren't for Obama's strong support among African Americans, he wouldn't have been elected.

Without that same strong support, no Dem has a good chance of being elected.

[hughee99]

117. So you do believe that if black voters can't vote for Clinton

They won't vote at all in a presidential election.

[mhatrw]

178. Show the number of black people with an unfavorable opinion of Sanders.

Are his unfavorables well over 50% as they are for Clinton among independent voters?

Link those polls up for us, please. I want to see them.

[Arazi]

36. Kicked and recced!! eom

[PatrynXX]

41. They can try to pin it on a Republican controlled congress

however for the 2 years they did have it. people clearly saw the conservadems for what they were so people have been trying to purge Conservadems from the party for ages. Not sure if it'll work but we keep trying. I still have my Independent leanings though. They'll never leave me. Growing up in a mixed household Dads Republican mom's a Democrat , does that from time to time.. So you don't look at it as R vs D but C VS L and Bernie is doing great things getting people to understand CHANGE starts at the local races first.

[Tarc]

49. "...is that people followed Bernie"

That is exactly the problem that many Clinton supporters have; we follow a candidate because of her policy positions, while you follow a candidate because of the cult of personality.

[pinebox]

60. Read again

Bernie supporters pick him because he's a LIBERAL, period. Unlike Hillary who is a Democrat. There's the difference. See, as I said Bernie supporters are voting for HIM. They switched affiliations only because of HIM not the party.
When it comes down to the issues, America sides with Bernie.

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/03/polls-americans-socialists-bernie-sanders.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/06/12/bernie-sanders-says-americans-back-his-agenda-and-hes-mostly-right/

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/more-and-more-americans-agree-bernie-sanders-and-not-just-those-who-identify-left

[Leith]

83. That Is Exactly What the OP Is Saying

That many who support Clinton over Sanders make ridiculous claims about those who prefer Sanders. We are not Trump supporters who can't come up with a reason other than "being angry" and "liking what he says." Here are a couple clues:



Please don't repeat the crap that comes from Republican spinmeisters.

[WIProgressive88]

259. Nonsense. I support Sanders because of policy, as do others. There is a definite cult of personality

vibe among Clinton supporters, on the other hand.

[zappaman]

54. Ok. n/t

[FreakinDJ]

55. The Majority Party in this country is Independent or Unaffiliated at 43% of the electorate

[libdem4life]

67. Really? Shocking, actually, but it makes sense what with horrendous voter turnout

and our lawmaker's group ratings in the 20s or 30s...one can see why.

[pinebox]

76. Indys are the largest voting block

and millennial voters are biggest age group. Guess who this bodes well. Bernie.

[libdem4life]

80. I've heard this and see its veracity, now if they will just come out and vote.

This is what most of the pundits are saying...it the turnout is low, it favors HRC. If it is high, it favors Bernie.

[TryLogic]

101. Think about it. Why does low turnout favor Hillary?

[treestar]

65. Enough

We are all Democrats and quit with the purer than thou, especially over Bernie who just joined and has often put us down.

Bernie is not going to win or take over the world.

[renegade000]

278. I think he has a shot of winning the whole thing...

And in that case I look forward to defending him from the disillusioned crowd that will cry "sellout" and "betrayal" when he inevitably cannot deliver on one of his promises because of intransigent Republican opposition or decides to make a compromise to eek at some progress.

You know that will be coming...

[californiabernin]

66. I hear stories of republicans, greens, libertarians, independents switching to Bernie all the time

Thanks for sharing your direct experience.

[libdem4life]

73. Same here...hope it is meaningful and translates to votes on election day.

[cascadiance]

163. Just last week I had a short talk with a young woman Republican at a Dutch Bros. coffee stand

... while I was listening in my car to SiriusXM Progressive where the topic was H-1B visas for a change and what was happening to Disney workers. Mentioned that to her and it really resonated with her and her family's experience with that crap too. She said she was looking at supporting Bernie!!! I told her before leaving to make sure she registered as a Democrat so that she could vote for Bernie in the primaries!

There are many voters out there that are looking for a politician they can TRUST who are really warm to Bernie no matter what party they are in! Talk to the people you meet on the streets and in stores like I just did then! It's happened a few other times for me too.

[Mike__M]

198. Another former Independent here

Switched to Democratic in '02, Justice in '12, Followed Bernie back to Democratic in '15. Will gladly stay as long as the party represents me.
FWIW Rocky Anderson, who has endorsed Sanders, would be a great running mate--bringing an apostate back into the fold--2016 zeitgeist might support such a radical idea.

[99th_Monkey]

69. Very well-said Pinebox. Bernie is much more than a serious candidate for the Presidency

His campaign is also a living breathing refreshing demonstration project, that has exposed how
corporate-control has corrupted the Democratic Party to its core, AND it's giving the Party an
opportunity to shake-off that control, reconnect with the Party's historic roots as the "party of
the people' in the tradition of FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, et .al.

Bernie's candidacy is a golden opportunity for the Party to restore its own legitimacy, and
distinguish itself clearly from the GOP. Yet those in power, mesmerized by money and exclusive
privilege -- yes I'm talking about the DNC -- will have none of it. Not only are they spurning this
opportunity, they are trashing the very voters making-up this new infusion of renewed hope and
enthusiasm.

It's a sad sight to behold, as it tragically undercuts any chance the Party has to reclaim its role as
being a party of the people, of workers, of middle/lower-income folks, of 'the little people'.

[mhatrw]

182. Exactly. Democratic leaders want to keep their party exclusive.

They don't want any wedding crashers to their marriage to our corporate elite.

[workinclasszero]

74. BS but nice try.

Bernie wants to destroy the democratic party just like the teabaggers want to destroy the rethuglican party.

Bernie has, as a historical fact, always hated the democratic party. Need proof? No problem:

Can Bernie Sanders Win the Love of a Party He Scorns?
The long, troubled history of Bernie Sanders and the 'ideologically bankrupt' party whose White House nod he now seeks.
By MICHAEL KRUSE and MANU RAJU 8/10/2015

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181

I rest my case. The Bernie bros that are coming into the democratic party are libertarians/greens/socialists that seek to take it over and destroy it.

You all talk about conspiracies! What a joke! Why don't Bernie people talk about the real motives behind their leader who has always hated liberal democrats until a few months ago?

[cantbeserious]

77. Your Opinion Only - Others See The World Differently

eom

[workinclasszero]

106. “I am not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal Democrat,” Bernie Sanders

Fact, not opinion.

[cantbeserious]

107. Then Why Is Bernie Defeating HRC In The Prmaries

eom

[workinclasszero]

114. Well for one he's not

For two, hes running a shell game and promising all things to all peoples, for free.

Bernie is the ultimate Sugar Daddy.

Elect Bernie and within a year we will all be making 15 bucks an hour or better, absolutely free cradle to grave health care, a months paid vacation off a year and free collage!

And his plan for getting republicans to pass all this earth shaking legislation is.....revolution!? Really Bernie? Really really?

This is what Bernie is selling and lots of rubes are takin him up on it.

I'm just glad his fantasy sparkle rainbow pony campaign will be over soon.

[cantbeserious]

115. Your Opinion Only - Others See The World Differently

eom

[chervilant]

173. I'm reminded of the type of person

who throws dirt on their target, then complains that they are filthy...

Calling supporters of Senator Sanders "rubes" says a lot more about you than it does about us.

[cascadiance]

176. Better than being the Sugar Daddy for the 1% and promising so many gifts to them...

... that this CORRUPTED party HAS been giving them with reduced capital gains tax rates, doing "deals" with Wall Street only getting them to pay small fines for their FRAUD and BRIBERY CRIMES instead of prosecuting those in charge for crimes the way even Reagan would have and DID during the Savings and Loan crisis of his day. Today the Jamie Dimons just smile and write off those fines and continue to break the laws and screw us while the statute of limitations run out on prosecuting them!

Your complaints about Bernie look like they were stolen from a Republican web site. Were they? Of course they both work for the same corporate bosses!

When we have some of the highest income inequality and levels that haven't been in place since right before the last depression, then YES, I and so many of us DO think APPROPRIATELY that this country should be run differently than the Corporate beholden two parties that are running it now are (in to the ground!).

You can be a paid apologist for them, but if you aren't, you'll realize along with the rest of us, that we're all being screwed by these people and it is way past time for this to end! It isn't any more of a fantasy than the revolution that FDR lead against the PTB of his day to get elected and reelected THREE TIMES MORE!

The fantasy is that this corporate serving BS government can last much longer than it has already. It is time to get rid of the "Sugar Daddies" for the likes of the Koch brothers. There time since they bought the Democratic Party and helped create the DLC cancer in it is now over. Perhaps they should go back to Putin to do business in the future like their father did with Stalin in the past, and take their brand of DICTATORIAL socialism with them.

[mhatrw]

186. He's fighting only for what most other liberal democracies already have.

Why can't Americans have what the rest of the first world has?

[frylock]

124. And neither have I..

whoop-de-fuckin-doo.

[workinclasszero]

129. Great so the Bernie fans need to stop the horseshit about how much they love the democratic party

Admit you want to take it over and dispossess all the Bernie non-believers.

But hey even your leader doesn't have the guts to admit it at this moment in time, the scam still has life.

As soon as its clear that Hillary will be our candidate for President I fully expect Bernie to start a third party run with the urging of 90% of the "democrats" that are backing him now.

[cascadiance]

180. And WHY do you "Love the Democratic Party" which you claim Bernie and his followers can't...

Dp you love what it is now, or do you love the DIFFERENT party it was during FDR's time which it NO LONGER IS NOW, since the corporate Democrats and the Koch Brothers corrupted it with the DLC!

There needs to be a REASON why people alove and are loyal to a party. If you don't have a reason, then all it is is a label. And often time labels are used (as they are in this case) to mislead people about their true motivations in pushing organizations with a label.

[mhatrw]

188. So what do you "true blue" Democrats believe in?

Why can't us progressives crash your little corporate party?

Aren't you also interested in making things better for the 99%?

[hootinholler]

122. WOW

First, what exactly did the DLC do in the mid '90s?

Hmmm, he's destroying the party by calling for it to return to the values and positions which made it great?



BTW, Bernie never hated liberal democrats, he just so rarely encountered them. We talk about the real motives all the time here. It's apparent that you are not paying attention if you think otherwise.

[workinclasszero]

125. Oh sure Bernie has always loved liberal democrats :eyeroll:

Can Bernie Sanders Win the Love of a Party He Scorns?
The long, troubled history of Bernie Sanders and the 'ideologically bankrupt' party whose White House nod he now seeks.
By MICHAEL KRUSE and MANU RAJU 8/10/2015

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181

[hootinholler]

149. Is there an echo in here?

Oh :eyeroll: works better here in the body of the post, oh wait I think you wanted:

So does

[mhatrw]

183. So it "destroys" the Democratic party to have progressives in it?

Is that you, DWS?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

288. I see the problem. You believe that op-eds constitute "proof". (hint: it does not) nt

[I hate liars]

84. My America Democratic Party – Love it or Leave it!

Where have we heard this before?

[SheilaT]

87. There's another side to this that the Hillary supporters really do not understand.

And that's how deeply disliked she outside of a relatively small core of Democrats, including the DNC. The do not realize that if she is nominated, people who haven't voted in years, or never voted before, will crawl out of the wood work to vote against her in the general election. Part of that is pure sexism, people who believe no woman belongs in public life, let alone in the White House as President. But more of it will be people who for various reasons, not all of them entirely rational, simply dislike her and don't want to see her there. That last includes a great many Democrats who see clearly what a terrible choice she would be as our nominee, for so very many reasons.

Back last year when it looked like Hillary and Jeb would each coast to their party's nomination, I said that if the choice came down to the two of the we'd probably see the lowest voter turnout in a very long time, because neither one of them was well liked even within their own party. Plus, the very last thing the electorate as a whole really wants is a choice between two quasi-dynastic families, intent on sharing the White House. It looks as if the current Bush is totally out of the running, and we have to wait a while to see if the current Clinton goes the same way.

And honestly, I expect a huge resurgence of the PUMAs this year. Hope I'm wrong.

[retrowire]

97. This post is absolutely true. nt

[PatrickforO]

104. Well, nobody in the establishment is going to be cool with this post, but I'm supporting Bernie

BECAUSE of his message. And I'm supporting Bernie, NOT the Democratic party per se. Because I think the Third Way SUCKS, both literally and figuratively. Literally, because we've watched more and more of the wealth we should share being SUCKED into the pockets of a greedy few while we lose purchasing power every day and struggle every day.

Bernie speaks directly to me, to the things I think we need to be spending OUR tax money on. We don't need another fucking forever war. We had TRILLIONS of fucking dollars to waste on wars but then 25 million Americans go HUNGRY every month????

Bull shit.

THAT is why I'm for Bernie. He gets it.

[grasswire]

138. well said nt

[Duval]

167. My reasons also!

[dana_b]

292. "And I'm supporting Bernie, NOT the Democratic party per se." Yep!

I'll vote for him and any other candidates (regardless of party) that I like. Also issues - I will always vote on issues.

[monicaangela]

126. Bernie has often said he could have run as an

independent, but did not want to break up the democratic vote, he felt that might guarantee a republican win in the general. I guess he did not want to endure what Ralph Nader endured when he decided to run as an independent. And, Bernie's views are more in line with democratic values more so than those of the republicans. It only stands to reason that he would therefore run as a democrat. We have to remember, this country is dominated by a two party system and anyone with any intelligence should realize that in order to be effective you have to run under the banner of one of the two parties. Bernie could never run as a republican.

[Politicub]

144. I understand, by my opinion of who will win in the general differs from yours

That's all.

You wrote:

I think one of the biggest things that Hillary supporters fail to understand is that people followed Bernie.

I get that. Hillary supporters understand more than you might expect we do. Bernie's message is one of hope. He has the uncommon ability to rally people around a cause or issue. But is that enough? I'm not convinced that it is.

His proposals are pretty shallow, for the most part. Medicare for all. Yes, that would be peachy keen. But I think building on the ACA is a better approach than starting fresh, in a new direction. You and I probably differ in that regard, and that's okay. I'm disappointed that he decided to forgo his foreign policy speech. I wanted to hear it.

One thing you wrote, that Bernie is growing the interest in the democratic party, is something that I hadn't considered. I do appreciate that about him. My hope is, no matter what happens during the primary, that the person who doesn't prevail throws his or her support behind the eventual nominee. But I have no control over that at all, so there's no need for me to get wound around the axel about it.

[pinebox]

161. I'll be honest with you

The ACA saved my life BUT millions will die under the ACA because of red states who won't expand medicaid. It's the truth. Not only that but the ACA is having big problems. Proof of that is here;

UnitedHealth Group says it is scaling back efforts in ACA exchanges
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/unitedhealthcare-says-it-is-scaling-back-efforts-in-aca-exchanges/2015/11/19/5c45d9e0-8ee2-11e5-baf4-bdf37355da0c_story.html


A system that leaves over 20 million is not a better approach and I can't for the life of me figure out how you and other Hillary supporters have come to that conclusion. 20 flippin' million. That isn't just scary, it's down right Republican. Think about that. 20 million people! These are people like you and I!

Honestly, you wouldn't like my opinion on your last paragraph because I know what will happen if Hillary is the nominee. People will stay home. It's the truth. They'll feel even more disenfranchised.

[Politicub]

166. The Medicaid expansion is problematic - we can thank the poor language in the policy

and the Supreme court to blame for that.

I do think about 20 million people. There will be more uninsured than that if ACA gets taken away from us.

I say fix the ACA so the 20 million people are not left out. But don't gamble with the most important piece of legislation passed in my lifetime.

[avaistheone1]

146. My first "Amen" for the day.

[mhatrw]

155. Democratic party leaders don't seem to want any party crashers.

They seems to prefer a private club that we peons ain't in.

[Tom Rinaldo]

157. I am the Chair of our local Democratic Committee

That means I am as officially a Democrat as it gets pretty much. We worked hard and swept our local elections last November in a mixed allegiance rural area. Sounds good, right? As far as it goes it is, but we almost didn't have a Democratic Committee that could even pull together a caucus let alone a winning campaign. We are under strength and pleaded with people to join. I stay active mostly out of guilt - we live in a small town and I don't want to hand it over to Republicans by default.

Very few people I know around here actively think of themselves as Democrats, not to the point where they will work to sustain, let alone build our Party. Virtually no one below 50 for starters. And almost to a person all the exceptions to those "rules" who I know are supporting Bernie for President. The only enthusiasm I'm running into for the Democratic Party is because of Bernie Sanders running for the Democratic nomination.

[EdwardBernays]

158. It's ALL ABOUT priorities

Hillary supporters prioritize the party over people.

Bernie supporters prioritize people over the party.

[zentrum]

160. Wow. So

Really important statement and insight. Absolutely true. Bernie is growing the party and making Democrats more trustable.

[Bleacher Creature]

169. Thank you for telling me what I don't understand.

Good thing I have random people on the Internet to tell me how ignorant I am!!!

P.S. Patronizing people probably isn't the best way to make your point.

[pinebox]

175. Actually

if you botheerd to read what I wrote you see my post is a RESPONSE to a post.

[mhatrw]

192. You are an evil Berniebro. You must therefore have been patronizing and rude.

That is the meme for the season.

[bbmykel]

185. Bernie is bringing me back to the Democrats

I identified as a Democrat for most of my life until "pragmatism" changed the party into one that seems to support endless war, torture, drones, spying, etc. etc.. This definitely seem to have started under President Clinton. These are not my values so I now identify as a "liberal" and will support the Democrats as long as they are advancing liberal policies. I should say that I am in California and that in national elections my vote is literally worthless. (BTW, both my state Reps are Dems, my Congressman is Dem, my two Senators are Dems (Feinstein notwithstanding), my Governor is a Dem so I am still pretty Dem when it comes down to it! Hopefully we will send Kamala Harris to the Senate in the fall as well.

I understand that the political calculation of the Democratic Party was to move right to pick up the moderate Republicans being left behind by their own party's migration into crazy-town, but at some point the party has to stand for something other than "we're not as bad as them". Bernie has given the Dems a brand again if they are bold enough to take it. The following Paul Wellstone quote says it all for me: "If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for we have to recognize we don't really stand for them." (PS I invite everyone go read some more quotes by Wellstone here: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/p/paul_wellstone.html He is what I remember Democrats being like).

[raindaddy]

195. So very well stated!! Thanks for posting this..

An honest view outside the Dem party bubble we're not going hear in the main stream media.. Sander's is the spark that has ignited a flame uniting a population that is angry and frustrated with established party politics..

We're through hoping for change, we need to come together and be the force that creates change...

[Lorien]

200. As I keep saying; it's just a f*cking sports game to some people

OUR LIVES and the FUTURE OF THE PLANET is at stake here, and some oh-so-comfortable "Democrats" only care about their team beating another team. It doesn't matter that they BOTH want more war and corporate corruption, all that matters is the team win. They may have lots of stock tied up with the Kochs, Walmart, Monsanto, Exxon-Mobile, the Military Industrial complex and for profit prison industry, so they don't give two fucks about climate change or millions in debt slavery. This isn't a "attack", these are the facts; if you support the DLC candidate, you support *exactly* the same policies that the GOP does, save for (perhaps) differences on women's reproductive rights, nutball gun policies and gay marriage. Now, those three issues are important, and important to Bernie as well, but if you don't think that our planet and the Nation's workers are in very serious trouble, then you're not paying attention. This is not the time for "incremental change" and a multi-trillion dollar war with Iran. Bernie has the highest approval rating in the Senate. He's helped to pass 13 bills while in the Senate. Hillary's total? ZERO. Republicans respect Bernie even if they don't agree with him. His honesty is a huge asset when it comes to negotiating with the other side. He UNITES people, and we need such a leader now more than ever before. Hillary is divisive; look at how she's divided DU, both now and in 2008, when just as much vitriol was being flung around. Historically no candidate with negative ratings as high as hers are has ever won the Presidency. Yes, she's survived plenty of GOP attacks, because the people she serves-the oligarchy-protects her. Partisanship is great for them; they don't want the people to unite for common causes; they want to keep the whole Blue vs. Red dynamic intact. They want gridlock in the house and Senate on anything that would benefit the rest of us, and Hillary offers them that. Why play into their hands? Aren't we all tired of this game? Isn't it time for a new direction, or is the current one really working for all of you?

[Enthusiast]

206. K&R! This post deserves hundreds of recommendations!

[Hekate]

207. What Bernie supporters don't understand is that we understand this very well....

A lot of us have been involved in politics -- Democratic politics -- since before a lot of you were aware of politics or in some cases even born. That does not make us senile or out of touch -- it makes us experienced and we have long memories.

You -- the collective you -- are not helping your cause by denigrating the entire world of people who do not agree with you, orby attributing vile characteristics to the other front-runner in the Democratic race.

You -- the collective you -- would be far better served by learning to listen and discuss. Shouting is good for rallies. Not so much for convincing people of the rightness of your cause and candidate.

[40RatRod]

215. Excellent response.

[Bleacher Creature]

242. +1

[pinebox]

261. "The Collective"

I wasn't aware we were Borg but whatever.

It's interesting how you assume so many Bernie supporters are all kids who attend some Katie Perry concert, oh wait....lol You know what I mean though.

You don't get it. Did you read anything I wrote? Did you? People are suffering and they are fed up and feel like they've been thrown to the wolves. You tell me I'm yelling but you fail to realize that my post was a RESPONSE to a post that a Hillary supporter made to begin with who trashed Bernie supporters.

That being said, I hate to tell you but if Hillary wins the nomination she will lose the general. Mark my word right now. The enthusiasm gap is 100% real and I can prove it to you if you'd like me to PM you and illustrate it to you.

[JDPriestly]

221. K&R.

[SoapBox]

222. K & R with enthusiasm!

[loyalsister]

227. Bernie's best arguemnt

for the general election is that he knows some hopes were crushed because they have not felt the economic recovery and don't feel the ACA has benefitted them as much as promised. But, they shouldn't lose it altogether because he is promoting real and robust changes. $15 minimmum wage, single payer, affordable childcare, and other things that will really help families.

Hillary doesn't get that people still want to hope and they desperately want change. NEVER EVER, and "no we can't" are not messages that disillusioned Obama supporters (who were largely responsible for his win) want to hear.

[beemer27]

233. This is so true.

In my area I have seen what you are talking about. Many people who would never consider voting Democrat are thinking about it for the first time. Some of them will vote differently this year than they have voted their entire life. Bernie does not represent the "modern" values that the "modern" Democrats have been supporting. He represents, and will work for, the old values that the Democratic Party one time stood for. He wants to see the middle class restored, and the little guy get a fair break for a change. The current crop of Democratic politicians have been nothing but Democrats in name only. Bernie will change that. He will help some of them find that backbone that they once had. He will remind them that the Democratic Party at one time supported the working man. Now all politicians support whoever can supply the most money to get reelected.
I am a registered Independent, and this year will be the first time in decades that I have voted for a Democrat in the primaries. The Democratic Party in my state, Oklahoma, has opened up the primaries to the Independents this year, and I will be voting for Bernie. He represents the values that the Democrats used to support, the values that I was raised with. A year ago I thought that our country was permanently locked into a hopeless partisan system. Bernie is our only viable chance to change that. I will vote for him, and I will continue to send money to him.

[farleftlib]

235. Another enthusiastic K&R

[Paka]

239. K&R

Great post. All Bernie supporters know those who have re-registered to either caucus or vote for him. The groundswell is huge.

It's not about him...but about US.

[ronnykmarshall]

248. Oh thank you so much for your post

I printed out and I tore right through it.

[pinebox]

251. Are you upset

that 20 million + will be uninsured under Hillary? You should be

[BeanMusical]

249. Kick and R

[Walk away]

250. I think we know exactly who you are.

We have known for quite a while now.

[pinebox]

260. Oh? Who I am?

Do tell! Who am I? You want to know who I am?

I'm a photographer.
The ACA saved my life.
I live in Colorado where pot is legalized (something your candidate is against mind you)
I am drowning in over $100k student loan debt.
I'm permanently disabled as ruled by SS.
I'm a progressive.
I'm fed up.
I'm fired up.
I'm sick of the American people being screwed.
I lived in Germany as I was married to a German for over a decade as non military in the general population.
I know that many Republicans these days are out of their mind fascist scum.
I know that Bernie is a once in a lifetime candidate.
I know Hillary isn't Elizabeth Warren.

That's who I am.

Any questions?

I'm not hard to find either. https://twitter.com/GeeOhPees2

[Walk away]

279. I see there are some real differences between us...

I worked my way through college and took a job that I was not enthusiastic about in order to qualify for subsidized graduate school. It took some time but I graduated debt free.

My health also made it impossible to continue with my career. I opened a small successful business, paid off my mortgage and built a retirement portfolio. I never bothered to discover whether or not I would qualify for Social Security. I'm glad that I didn't.

Most Democrats have no interest in electing a Socialist to office. Most of us pay our debts or don't spend money that we don't have. Most of us have savings and stock as part of our retirement and we do not hate Wall Street. We understand that we need someone who understands how to reign in the excesses of the Banks and other financial institutions. We are confident in Hillary Clinton. We have no interest in destroying our own future security that we worked so hard to create.

I do understand that socialism seems attractive to people who are in large amounts of debt or are not working in a job that pays them enough to pay off those debts. I believe classes in financial responsibility should be required in order to graduate high school.

[pinebox]

291. Good

You were fortunate enough to where you were able to pay off your student loans. I will never have that or ever be able to because I got sick early on after graduation and so here I sit. Caught in political limbo. There was a time when people could discharge their student loans in bankruptcy but people like Hillary voted for W's bankruptcy bill which changed that. Were you aware of that? Most aren't actually and they find that shocking http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2015/04/16/student_loans_in_bankruptcy_how_the_bush_administration_pointlessly_screwed.html

Myself and millions of others are suffering and we're trapped and finally we have a voice with someone who is the voice of the voiceless--Bernie. Think of this for a second, Millennials are the first generation that will make less than their parents. A lot of that is directly attributed to the student loan crisis. We'll never own homes and we're enslaved the rest of our lives because of debt. Wall Street got a bailout, where's ours?

Bernie is a Democratic Socialist and I really wish Hillary supporters would stop using Trump and Paul Ryan talking point when saying that because it is 100% red baiting. You know this. We know this. Y'all know that Canada is NOT the former USSR. The truth is, socialism is entrenched in American lifestyle. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/3/29/1078852/-75-Ways-Socialism-Has-Improved-America

See, you don't see the other side of the coin and you preach literal Libertarian talking points about fiscal responsibility but the truth is, the Government shouldn't be in the game of making money off those who are just trying to get a damn education! get this--my kiddo is in college in Germany. He goes to school FREE. He will never know a damn thing about student loan debt and guess what, many other countries in Europe do the same. They come out ahead then college students here who are graduating because they can go out and buy the things in life that people who graduated 30 years ago could.

Here, many can't do that. To them, the American Dream is dead.
That's reality. That is why we need Bernie!

[Walk away]

293. Please, I've live through cancer four times, lost everything I owned twice but...

I still paid off my debt. In fact, my debt was so large after my first bout of cancer, paying it off resulted in fantastic credit ratings. That enabled me to get a great mortgage at a low interest. I wasn't "lucky". I was responsible. There is nothing Libertarian about that. It's simple finance, sacrifice and hard work.

I get that you believe that everyone here should be paying European tax rates so that your son can go to college for free. I'm sure that is a common dream of people with enormous debt who are bitter about not getting their college education for free. I am guessing that you pay very little in federal income tax if you are disabled and collecting Social Security. I get that you are voting for Bernie because you like his "tax the Middle Class and free college" shiny object. It's lucky for your son that he can get the Middle Class tax payers in Germany to give him a free ride!

Just because people honor their commitments and pay their debts and expect others to do the same, doesn't make them Libertarians. And just because Bernie finally got around to adding "democratic" to his Socialist label, does not make his brand of pandering to people who dream of not paying while others work, palatable to the Majority of registered Democrats.

[pinebox]

294. Good pt 2

I have Alpha 1. It will never go away. Ever. I will never pay off my debt and right here you basically show what you're about and that's repeating the Libertarian talking point of "Fuck you I got mine". It is what it is. In fact you just literally showed us all by illustrating the Ayn Rand talking point of "personal responsibility".

What you fail to understand is this----


People are subsidizing the poor in this country. Isn't it true that the best way to get out of being poor is to be educated? Yet we are enslaving those to student loan debt who are doing just that. This is a massive drag on the economy. Again, people will never own houses who could have IF the Gov't wasn't in the business of making money off the backs off students.

Read it.

http://www.businessinsider.com/3-charts-explain-the-effect-of-student-loans-on-the-economy-2015-5
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshfreedman/2014/02/11/student-loans-are-a-big-drag-on-the-economy-and-society/#1593cea25504
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshfreedman/2014/02/11/student-loans-are-a-big-drag-on-the-economy-and-society/#1593cea25504
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/25/business/the-ripple-effects-of-rising-student-debt.html

You fail to realize that many can NOT honor their commitments and when you preach a story line of "get a job! I got mine! FU!"you might be Rand Paul. It is what it is and you ARE spewing Libertarian talking points.

[Walk away]

295. Encouraging people to spend wisely and pay their bills is not being a Libertarian.

It's being a responsible citizen. It's actually unbelievable that your are so happy that you can just give up, collect a check and not pay back the $$$ that you borrowed.

My Brother and Sister in Law both have graduate degrees from Cornell. Neither had a penny except what they saved in the summers. We all worked our way through school and it was incredibly difficult. We all paid back every penny in jobs we did not enjoy and waited to pursue the careers that we wanted. Now they are retired, their daughters college was paid for by their hard work and I run a small retirement business. I would be mortified not to do everything in my power to pay my debts and I'm proud of paying my way through school.

So, I do know who you are and I understand why you feel that you have somehow been cheated. It is amazing because you have apparently managed to get away with $100,000 in higher education that you have not paid back. My tax dollars are paying that debt. I would rather my taxes went to feeding and healthcare for children, assistance for the elderly, infrastructure, education for children who really need the help.

You apparently, have never read Ayn Rand or you would not call people who pay their bills and pay taxes "Libertarians". Who do you think pays money into the system you have been borrowing and collecting from?

[stevenleser]

282. Yep. You beat me to it. nt

[uponit7771]

255. Sanders can do all of that and not proffer Pixy Dust Politics (tm). My issue right now is the

... NON explanations of how he's going to get any of his agenda past a historically gerrymandered gop congress.

and before the weak retort of "what about hillary" is began to be typed Hillary isn't claiming the mantel of revolution Sanders is, that's his cross to bear.

Clinton wants to build on whats there and move unilaterally where she can, that's not a bad tactic at all... I don't hate Hillary Clinton, so the rest of the villinizing responses don't work like they haven't worked so far.

Revolution (with asterisks) isn't revolution, its the same pragmatism we've seen just on different issues... so on that point I don't see Sanders being a 180 degree from what's already there.

Sanders polls lower with poor people than Clinton... Sanders has had 7 months so far to dent that number.. we'll see the next 7 months if this can be done

[pinebox]

263. You want to know?

What if I told you that Republicans like Sanders?
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-lifelong-conservatives-who-love-bernie-sanders/417441/

What if I told you that idiots like Tom Cotton have endorsed him?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/05/politics/tom-cotton-supports-bernie-sanders/

What if I told you that Sen. Richard Burr said he would vote for him over Ted Cruz?
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/01/21/republican-senator-support-bernie-sanders-ted-cruz-wins-gop-nomination.html

What if I told you that Ike Republicans are back and they support Bernie with a vengeance?
https://www.facebook.com/republicansforbernie/
@GOPforSanders

What if I told you that it's a fact that Bernie got more done in the Senate than Hillary?
https://pplswar.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/fact-bernie-sanders-got-more-done-in-the-senate-than-hillary-clinton/

What if I told you Bernie is known as "The Amendment King"?
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-gets-it-done-sanders-record-pushing-through-major-reforms-will-surprise-you

See, Bernie brings a coalition of voters, Hillary brings Democrats. Therein lies the difference and why Bernie polls better than Hillary against a Republican opponent (She loses to Cruz by the way, Bernie beats them all)
So if Dems want the White House it's important that you pick the strongest candidate.

[uponit7771]

264. Not really, not any more ... not after that weak SP plan that doesn't outline how he's going to MAKE

... MAKE doctors, hospital corps and pharma charge about half of what they should be charging and keep ACA along side of it.


No...


I don't believe I'll be seeing too much different than what I've seen so far

[pinebox]

265. So you think having 20 million+ uninsured is better?

Since when is having people die from not having insurance a GOOD strategy?

[uponit7771]

266. I believe revolution with asterisks aren't revolutions, just good marketing... I've never responded

... well to overt hyperbole ... no one like anyone dying.

Sanders comes out with a practical plan to get those groups to lower there prices so we'll have a real HC system in the US then he's got my attention.

Hating on just 1 out of 4 of the bad actors is revolution with an askterisk

[pinebox]

275. Good marketing?

You don't think anybody will die? Seriously? The ACA saved my life and I ONLY lived because I was one of the very first in the country to be allowed into the high risk exchanges.

In 2009, Harvard came out with a report saying that every year 45,000 die because they didn't have health insurance http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/ but people don't die do they?

You say *revolution with asterisks* and I'll say "Democrat with asterisks" when it comes to Hillary.
TPP
DOMA
DADT
NAFTA
KXL
Voted for a border fence
Iraq
Syria
Libya
Yemen
Weapons deals
Emails

You go ahead and vote for the conservative candidate who changes her position as often as the SW wind in a tornado.

[Walk away]

284. So Bernie is some kind of Socialist/Republican.

Sounds dangerous. I prefer not to have a president who owes his election to republicans. I would feel very sorry for POC, undocumented Americans and women if a creature like that ever managed to get elected.

[YOHABLO]

256. Bernie just doesn't have anything to hide. Plain and simple.

[Betty Karlson]

257. Why care for the minimum wage, when you can care about maximum bonuses?

This is why the DNC works against Sanders.

[Uncle Joe]

262. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, pinebox.

[Amimnoch]

267. Irony = "there are now more people on foodstamps than ever"

It's ironic because it is condemning the expansion of the food stamp programs to allow more people to get onto the enrollment ipso facto.

This actually makes the Reagan era of cutting and restricting the eligibility for getting on food stamps a success?? Really? Is that the message? Yes, Reagan had the lowest number of people on Food stamps, but he didn't have the lowest number of people who really needed access to the program.

Thanks to the Mickey Leland act of 1993, and the (Clinton initiative) Welfare reform act of 1996, the numbers who were eligible to enroll and get some desperately needed relief was provided. It wasn't expanded again until 2009 (when it got the next big jump in number of recipients.) under President Obama.

So, you can take the fact that more people enrolled throughout the 90's through to today as a bad thing. It only reinforces my belief that I am behind the right candidate. One that will help expand social programs to those needing it the most.

[pinebox]

270. Ironic? Not when real unemployment is 10% & wages are incredibly low

You seem to forget that.

Are you aware that Walmart costs US taxpayers $6.2 Billion every year because their wages are so low? http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/#8359617cd845 In fact a Dem House study found that there's a store in WI that could very well cost tax payers $900,000. And that is just ONE store. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/31/walmart-taxpayers-house-report_n_3365814.html

While the amount of uninsured has gone down, wages and poverty remain stagnant http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/09/16/poverty-wages-remain-stagnant-despite-economic-recovery The economy has turned around but the people haven't. Wall Street is just fine but Main Street is suffering quite bad.

So when you cite your figures you ignore this http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/08/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate.html

It only reinforces my belief that I am behind the right candidate. One that will help expand social programs to those needing it the most.

So ya, you're candidate would actually have people making less who work at minimum wage, $12/hr vs $15/hr. Your candidate would have people making $120 LESS a week than Bernie. That equates to $480/month. That is a LOT of money to people who don't have a whole lot to begin with and that is more than what food stamps even provide, twice over and then some generally.

Not only that but Hillary's plan also leaves over 20 million+ uninsured.

It's ironic that you cite the cite the 90s too but ignore the fact that Bill Clinton gutted welfare. http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/12/how-bill-clintons-welfare-reform-created-a-system-rife-with-racial-biases/ and http://www.thenation.com/article/clinton-touts-welfare-reform-heres-how-it-failed/

You like THAT in a candidate?
Are you sure?

[marble falls]

269. Good stuff! I'm a former Republican now Green voting Democrat ...

who's been voting a 90%+ straight Democratic ticket since Bill Clinton's election. Bernie's stands are 99% my own and I have read Bernie's positions to Teabillies and Republicans here in central Texas without letting them know who said it and it is amazing how many agree with most of Bernie's policies.

If Hillary gets the nod, I will vote for her. But its Bernie until the Convention at least. If we can't have the candidate maybe we can get to install some important planks:

A living wage now.
Single Payer.
Everyone paying a fair share of taxes.
Free education.
Killing the F-35 with investigation as to why billions and decades have given us this useless boondoggle and who in Congress got paid off.
GUTTING defense spending.
Ending of gerrymandering.
End of voter suppression through "voting laws".
End of capital Punishment.

[pinebox]

272. Good stuff!

You nailed it right here;

A living wage now.
Single Payer.
Everyone paying a fair share of taxes.
Free education.
Killing the F-35 with investigation as to why billions and decades have given us this useless boondoggle and who in Congress got paid off.
GUTTING defense spending.
Ending of gerrymandering.
End of voter suppression through "voting laws".
End of capital Punishment.

[stevenleser]

281. We understand all the things you think and all the assumptions you have made. You are wrong. nt

[pinebox]

289. Sorry Steve but I'm not

and care to back up your assertions or do I have to come on twitter and find you? XD

Case in point, tell us why Hillary voted for building a border fence? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006

Another? Her flip flop on guns.

Another?

her disparaging remarks about immigrants.

I can do this all day. The baggage runs deep into the Samsonite factory XD

[nichomachus]

286. I just switched my registration from independent so I could vote for Bernie. nt

[vkkv]

287. I had NO IDEA that women were SO SEXIST !!

Just read the Hillary Group.. Too many women will vote for " HRC-> " only because they want a WOMAN to win.

Be either Dem, GOP'ster or Inde.. that is the definition of sexism.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

290. A very fine post.

K&R