It's amazing. Even with almost all the dem heavy hitters running interference for

[cali]

her, all the big time MSM endorsements, the biggest political machine in the country, Hillary is still having trouble convincing a large chunk of dems to support her.

She should have blown Bernie out of the water in Iowa. Period. She's "whiter" than he, a Brooklyn born Jew, is. And she's a native of neighboring state.

If she's having this much trouble now, imagine the general election. No candidate for president with upside down unfavorable ratings has ever prevailed. There are more independents than democrats, and they don't like her. She will inspire record republican turnout.

It's insanity.

[Dustlawyer]

1. You left out the worst one. With all of the Big Money donations, she owes a yuuuuge quid pro quo

to big business. We will get shafted royally if she is elected!

[cali]

4. I left out a lot.

[Hortensis]

17. Hillary's standing is the wet dream of all other candidates.

No one else comes close to her in name recognition, strong popularity within their party, widespread support among political groups, organization, funding, and endorsements.

Why do you guys post and flame over things everyone knows are untrue? Expression of anxiety? I think I understand our cat's behavior better than that of some here.

[George II]

24. Yes, there is a reason why this has happened:

http://time.com/4162124/gallup-most-admired-poll/

"President Obama and Hillary Clinton Named Most Admired Man, Woman in the World"

"President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are the most admired man and woman in the world in 2015, according to a new Gallup survey that shows Pope Francis and Donald Trump tied for second place.

Obama and Clinton top the poll this year by wide margins, with the Democratic presidential front-runner being named the most-admired woman for the 20th time with 13 percent, according to poll results released Monday. Obama earned 17 percent and has made the list now eight times."

[Hortensis]

28. Didn't realize Hillary was "Most Admired Woman" 20 times.

Details of her work in many nations around the planet, as well as the U.S., aren't always well known here, but I guess some are noticing.

And, yes, I guess one could expect that to up the anxiety quotient. It has to be very hard to be so emotionally invested in taking down an admirable woman. The hits just keep coming.

[frylock]

57. Most Well Known Woman in the World is closer to the truth.

[ErisDiscordia]

66. There's not much competition, if we are going to be honest

Most powerful woman--calling down death and destruction on Libya, Syria, Ukraine...etc.

I cannot admire her, for that reason alone.

[tecelote]

145. Agree 100%

How can this be overlooked?

[VulgarPoet]

153. Because American blood isn't meant to be shed for defense, but

for the enrichment of our corporate overlords, don'tcha know? So it has been, so it shall be, as above, so below quid pro ipso fact Hillary is walking scum.

[Marty McGraw]

112. More apt

'Notorious'

[rhett o rick]

132. As Sec of State (on our dime) she was lobbying the governments of other countries on behalf of

Chevron to increase FRACKING, while the common people were protesting in the streets to save their drinking water. Corp profits are more important to her than clean drinking water for the common people.

[stellanoir]

148. this is scarcely cited &

is a potential would-be deal breaker for many.

[zalinda]

31. How many other women are as well known?

She should be blowing this poll out of the water, after all people have known of her for 25 years. She has been on the world stage for 25 freaking years, not stuck in the bowels of government, basically unnoticed. She should have more than 13%, she should be out performing Obama, if she is even half of what her supporters say she is.

Z

[Hortensis]

44. Our nation alone has many admirable progressive women

working to solve problems, Zalinda, and there are many, many more around the planet.

[zalinda]

59. True, but they have not been known for 25 years and wrote a book. eom

[bkkyosemite]

89. Hillary is not one of them I'm 69...she is not a progressive!

[Hortensis]

97. That's not a matter of "opinion" or "faith,"

Bkkyosemite. Hillary Clinton is a progressive. She is not a far-left liberal or anti-liberal.

[bkkyosemite]

101. That's your opinion but not mine. She told the truth of who she was

in Sept 2015...a Moderate.....

[Hortensis]

105. No, it is not my opinion. It is the knowledgeable

evaluation of literally every political analyst out there. Hillary Clinton is a moderate liberal AND she is a progressive because she believes in actively working to advance our nation through government and private means, not to just let it evolve as "nature" and "God" decide. Thus she belongs to the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, which is most of us, and includes people all the way from from conservative Dems to left of Bernie. That word does not just mean people who support Bernie.

Confusing the picture are:
1. That conservative propagandists managed to smear the word "liberal" so badly in the 1980s and 1990s that many Democrats and liberals, and the Democratic Party itself, switched to using the label "progressive."
2. Left-wing Democrats lacked a good label for themselves so grabbed "progressive," and it has taken to some degree. But shrinking a name that applies to a majority of Americans to apply to just a little faction on the far left is a losing maneuver!

The fact is, many liberals are progressive, conservatives can be progressive, moderates can be progressive, and we really do need to recognize that and gather together ALL those who support progressive solutions. Right now, GOP and most Big Money leaders are currently strongly anti-progressivism. For obvious reasons.

THIS IS IMPORTANT!! Because the only way progressives ever make big change happen is to join together to form a large enough majority that it can overpower the hard right social and religious conservatives and wealth/big business interests.

BTW, what additional label would fit you, in addition to "progressive"? Are you a Democrat?

Liberal is a personality type with very strong characteristics before it is a political label; would liberal fit you? Are you open to change? Are you accepting of people and ways very different from your own. Is the principle of equality of all peoples bone-deep; is an insistance that our systems should all give the same shake to everyone regardless of wealth and position, race, etc., something that comes from within you? Do you process information through your analytical brain first before sending it over for emotional reaction? (Conservative brains tend to process through the emotional center first, then decide if they got it right -- sometimes, if they feel like it. )

[Ron Green]

102. I think "neoliberal" is the more accurate term.

[Hortensis]

106. Ron, probably 80% of the nation no longer

understands what liberal and progressive are, including liberals and all those whom progressive fits. Are you sure you want to head for a word that, when used at all, is usually used as a slur instead of in thoughtful discussion?

[Ron Green]

108. I use it in its post-1980 sense, and if not a slur it's certainly

not a positive term.

If strong communities and neighborhoods are going to flourish in the United States, Bernie's brand of socialism, as I understand it, will provide the framework of services and infrastructure for local economies to work, as opposed to the Clintonian environment of corporate hegemony.

[Hortensis]

111. Clintonian corporate hegemony, with due respect only...

is totally asinine, and incredibly irresponsible and dangerous.

Why not can the fancy words and just refer to Hillary Clinton's puppets

Oil billionaires Charles and David Koch
Media billionaire Rupert Murdoch
E-bay billionaire Meg Whitman
Southern cliche billionaire Harold Simmons
Media billionaire Jerry Perenchio
Oil billionaire Robert Rowling
Oil billionaire Travis Rees-Jones

And at least a dozen others.

It's easy for Clinton to give them their orders since most are part of the "Koch" network, so she keeps them pretty well organized. They're only pretending to organize and fund Clinton's and the rest of the Democratic Party's defeat; it's all a plot to name her Dictator for Life of the Libertarian-Fascist States of America.

[Ron Green]

113. You said all that, not I.

The entire model is in need of replacement. I simply believe our neighborhoods and communities can withstand socialism better than they can the system supported by almost all current politicians, including Secy. Clinton.

[Hortensis]

126. You simply believe you can run with the giant Koch network

to defeat the Democratic Party's candidates in 2016 and in the end it'll magically come out right? Go ahead, tell me now you think Bernie will thank you for helping destroy liberal progressivism for a generation, or more, long after he is dead and gone.

This isn't some stupid game!

[rhett o rick]

133. Name some issues she is progressive on. Not foreign policy (supports wars), not keeping Wall Street

under control, not keeping the Secret Security State under control, not related to Prisons For Profit, not for educating our college students, not on reduction of the growing wealth gap, not on same-sex marriage, not on job killing trade agreements, not on health care, not on helping SS or Medicare, not on environment (fracking and pipelines), not on demilitarizing our local police, not on medical marijuana, ............... I can go on but maybe you want to refute some of these. In my book you have to be progressive on all of the above.

[Hortensis]

136. Rhett, there are DOZENS on her site.

[DaveT]

120. named the most-admired woman for the 20th time with 13 percent

So the OP cites the FACT that Hillary has right now really bad unfavorable numbers, and you respond with 13 Percent think she is the bees knees. It is nice to "win" this utterly useless exercise of "most-admired" -- not so nice to have only 13 percent thinking so.

Good luck with that apple against the OP orange.

Here is the latest average of polls from Real Clear Politics: Net unfavorable 9.2%; every listed poll has her with net unfavorable.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/favorable_unfavorable.html

[George II]

121. Did you see what I responded to?

However, as "useless" as that most-admired poll is, it's no less useless than so-called favorability polls. I've been voting for 47 years and have never seen a candidate's favorability on the ballot.

[DaveT]

129. You have a point there about

favorability polls, in my personal opinion.

There are a lot of politics junkies from all over the political map who contend that favorability is the most useful of all polls. I don't agree and I take a dim view of polling altogether. Arguing about predictions strikes me as a waste of energy from everybody on all sides, but it seems to be a popular exercise around the internet.

Thanks for responding with reason and civility.

[polly7]

157. Who voted?? nt.

[Fuddnik]

27. What happens when the name recognition is negative?

And it causes a lot of Independents to

Not to mention a majority of Progressives in her own party.

[Punkingal]

35. Bingo!

[Duval]

69. Exactly!

[Locrian]

147. yep - double edged sword

Name recognition is what she has. And it will be a lightning rod for the GOP in the general elections.

[daleanime]

39. That's kind of the point....

Last edited Thu Feb 4, 2016, 12:47 PM - Edit history (1)

this primary was handed to her on a silver plate, but once again she's having more then a little trouble 'sealing the deal'.

[Fast Walker 52]

79. but but but she's the first woman to win in Iowa!

"win" that is

[Plucketeer]

45. "Why do you guys post and flame over things everyone knows are untrue? Expression of anxiety?"

Name recognition: There's NO WAY that I or my young'uns can tender Clinton's name for a bag of groceries.

Popularity within their party: Not any party I've been to.

Widespread support among political groups: You mean the crony clatches wherein it's accepted behavior to take special interests cash?

Organization: Ala Brown Shirts Debbie.

Funding: LOL..... Yup, BIG funding! Funding she's gonna be expected to "deliver" for. What a plus!

Endorsements: (See: "Organization&quot

I would be totally without anxiety - if I were a Republican!

[newfie11]

6. You got that right

[KingCharlemagne]

10. But not as badly shafted as with a Trump or Cruz manning the helm. Adults must

often vote AGAINST the greater evil. This is how I'm thinking, anyway.

[tex-wyo-dem]

13. I really am fucking tired of being forced to...

Vote the lesser of two evils. I've been doing it my entire voting life (at least for POTUS).

Done with it.

Bring on Bernie!

[KingCharlemagne]

14. I understand your frustration. But please stop and consider that a President Trump (who

would preside at the head of a Republican Congress) has seriously proposed deporting 11 million undocumented workers (mostly Latino) and has jauntily suggested a 'registry' for all American Muslims.

If the word 'evil' has any meaning, this surely is it. As wretched as Hillary may be, nothing she has proposed remotely approaches this in utter depravity.

This is why I say that adults must sometimes vote AGAINST the greater evil.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

53. Jimmy Carter went on TV and said he'd rather have Trump than Cruz.

Said Cruz actually was a RW nutjob, but that Trump just says anything and everything, that he's 'malleable' and wouldn't have any real convictions in office. (I paraphrase, but that was the gist.)

[KingCharlemagne]

65. All due respect -- MASSIVE RESPECT -- to President Carter, it's a bit

like asking you whether you prefer execution by lethal injection or by firing squad. You're going to end up dead either way.

[Ligyron]

67. I think Carter is on to something.

I've wondered for awhile if he is just running to destroy the GOP. He'll say anything, true, but I think he's a lot more liberal than he's letting on.

I'll never vote for him, he's ego driven with a bad temper at times. I think that whole "birther" crap he started couple years ago is the only thing that makes me believe otherwise. Still, I hope he's their nominee as he's surely go down in defeat to Hills or Bernie and maybe that was his plan all along.

It's win, win for him either way and so far he doesn't seem to have spent much money and has taken over the media and loves the attention.

Guy is a genius - an evil genius to be sure but I think he knows what he's doing.

[maddiemom]

78. Jimmy, being a true Christian (for what that's worth to many of us) should know

a RW nutjob and the scary kind of "Christian" when he sees one. He didn't "go there" about the religion, but Ted's evangelical ferver obviously didn't score any points with him.

[Beartracks]

144. Yer right: she may be status quo, but at least she's not going backwards.

And she's not insane, which is a plus.

At this point, I'm rooting for Bernie. But if Hillary's our nominee... well, she's still a far sight closer to my priorities and values than ANY passenger in the Republikan Klown Kar. And it's my job to vote for the candidate who MOST CLOSELY represents me in that manner.

Plus, if I didn't vote for the Dem nominee, I'd be leaving a Republican's vote un-cancelled in the ballot box!

==================

[randome]

25. Unless Sanders is the reincarnation of Jesus Christ, you will ALWAYS vote for the lesser of 2 evils.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[zalinda]

34. He is much closer to what Jesus preaches than she is. eom

[Plucketeer]

52. You bet!

And frankly, had the supposed "Evangelicals" - who were led around by the various pied pipers of the GOP - had compared Bernie's plans to what's written in the bible, it could've been a landslide for Sanders in Iowa. Sadly, like Trump, the evangelicals of Iowa need to go back and review their "Favorite tales of the Bible" reader. It's truly AMAZING - how many duly elected false prophets have faithful followings that cling to their lies!

[tex-wyo-dem]

61. Hm...not sure what you even mean by that...

I'm just tired of voting for Dems who only 30-40 years ago would have been considered conservatives.

Sorry, but Hillary is just the same old, same old status quo conserva-dem

I've always supported the most progressive/populist candidate in the primaries, but this is the first time where that candidate has a real chance of becoming the nominee.

Go Bernie!

[bkkyosemite]

92. Ever heard of the Golden Rule well Bernie has....not Hillary.

[mikehiggins]

63. Not the lesser of two evils. Meh vs evil.

I wouldn't blink twice at voting for HRC if the GOPukes nominate either Cruz or Trump.

HRC is simply "business (no pun) as usual" and, if we are persistant, presents the Sanders people with the opportunity to continue putting increasing pressure to the left. HRC brings to the table the underrated value of having no principles and no ambitions other than pure, personal aggrandizement.

Trump literally wants to take the last penny out of the hands of the poor and give it to his "buddies", most of whom detest his neuvous riche (sp?) affectations and desire to be seen as something more than a grifter out of NY's grubby real estate industry.

Cruz is the anti-life equation (look it up at DC Comics) made flesh. His ambition, besides advancing himself, is to bring this nation to a full, blown theocratic state, without women's rights, gay rights, workers' rights, civil rights and so on down the list. Everyone would know their place and that would be underneath the jackboot heel of "Christian oppression." The fact that Jesus, another wise ass Jewish troublemaker, wouldn't recognize what they do in his name never occurs to these slugs.

And on the other hand we have the voice of bland, boring, establishment HRC.

If the choice in November is between her and ANY republican, I'm going with HRC. This is like the choice between Carter and Reagan except this time we know, thanks to technology, what we're looking at.

With Sanders we have a chance to lead this nation, kicking and screaming, into a more just, more human society. If we lose this time around we should put all of this 50 state, grass roots movement behind electing and reelecting progressive candidates (they don't have to be perfect, no politicians are) but they have to know that they depend on us to stay in office. That is the key to politicians.

When the dust settled after the Perot campaign I had a very nice italian dinner with the campaign manager for a local politician (worked for a congressman). All he wanted to know was if the remnants of the Perot campaign in his CD was going to primary him. That was it.

That's how a grass-roots movement has to roll. We can't keep up the fundraising efforts if we lose this time but if we can stay organized we can use the people power to educate the pols as to what is in their personal best interest. The threat of a real primary fight is a powerful tool we can use until we can replace the sitting politicians. They have to be replaced with Democratic politicians with backbones. It won't be easy. Easier far to do that with a President who is also a leader and who really cares for the people. If we can't get that this time you kids'll have to keep on working hard. The chances of my seeing 2020 get more dubious with each birthday.

Just like with Climate Change, by the time things get really bad I'll most likely be dead. It'll be up to you guys to keep the Sanders Revolution going. Good luck.

[KingCharlemagne]

71. This is very sage analysis and advice and really deserves to be its own OP, in my opinion. - nt

[maddiemom]

85. Yes! I agree completely. This analysis needs to go viral.

[navarth]

118. good post. recommended.

[dae]

123. Great post! As much as I dislike HRC I will vote

for her before any GOP crazy if for no other reason than Supreme Court appointments. I just don't see her beating the GOP nominee.

[sulphurdunn]

150. No, none of that money affects her, and

her big contributors are actually out to get her because she's so progressive. She said so. Remember?

[morningfog]

2. Her support is all on the facade that she's the most electable.

This kind of campaign will not work in 2016. Social media is too prevalent and exposes the facade.

[JudyM]

7. Among young people.

[Betty Karlson]

43. Yes: our voices count too.

And we are fed up with being ignored and taken for granted. Every time we ask for something reasonable, it's called a pony and we are called retarded. Then when something unreasonable like the TPP is proposed, we are supposed to cheer it on. Then we mount a social media campaign against it, it grudgingly dies, but we still have to cheer on one of its main proponents or be called racists and sexists.

How stupid and manipulable do you guys think we are?

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

54. Don't ask questions you won't like the answers to... nt

[raindaddy]

55. We've disappeared down the black hole of an oligarchy !

and none of the establishment Democrats who are questioning Bernie's affiliation with the Democratic party has done a whole lot to pull us out..

Fed up is right and you stated it so well Betty! Thank you!

[azurnoir]

82. They simply don't give a sh#t in all truth

they count on our votes when/if Our Lady of Inevitability gets nomination because who else will there be to vote for?

[Betty Karlson]

86. That slogan brought out amazing results in 2014, did it not?

It was one of DINO-Debbie's greatest hits, if I remember well.

[azurnoir]

87. really amazing results maybe this time will different

[Betty Karlson]

88. There is a Dutch saying: "an ass doesn't stumble over the same stone twice" ...

But then: DINO-Debbie is not an ass: she is a one-trick pony.

[azurnoir]

91. seems like it

sadly I don't think this is leading anywhere good for the Democratic party

[JudyM]

107. And so my point: it's a problem that social is as demographically limited as it is.

The Hillary demographic is largely older, not tuned into social. So while there's more transparency on those platforms, that view, and your voices, aren't being heard. When you show up physically, when you write to broader mainstream media sources and your congressional representatives, and when you vote -- that's how you get more broadly heard.

[malokvale77]

128. I'm long past young...

and I agree 100% with what you said above.

[DanTex]

3. 43% of Iowa Dem caucusers self-identified as socialist. Insanity is thinking that the fact that

Sanders managed to lose even with that enormous demographic advantage somehow implies that he's better suited for the general election. In the nation as a whole, only 47% of voters would consider voting for a socialist, even if they otherwise thought that s/he was well-qualified.

[HenryWallace]

16. Always question these kind of statistics!

On the ground, here in Iowa, your statement is nonsense.

[pnwmom]

122. The 43% statistic comes from the poll commissioned by the Des Moines Register

and Bloomberg, and reported here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/17/this-number-proves-bernie-sanders-can-win-iowa/

A little-noticed data point in the new Selzer & Co. Iowa poll, in fact, shows that 43 percent of likely voters in the Feb. 1 caucuses say they would use the word "socialist" to describe themselves.

And to be very clear, this question was not whether they would vote for a socialist or sympathize with socialism; it's whether they consider themselves socialist.

The 43 percent of likely Iowa Democratic caucus-goers who self-identify as socialist is actually more than the number who identify themselves as capitalist — 38 percent.

[JimDandy]

130. His 49% of the vote likely captured all 43% of those polled who favor socialism. GO BERNIE! n/t

[pinebox]

5. People are sick and tired of Hillary & her bullshit

Period.
She is seen as a liar and completely fake. You can thank her flip flopping on every single issue the American public sees as being important. Her lying also doesn't help. Cue the sniper fire or her denial to admit she said she was a moderate.

Social security
Health care
A living wage
Gay rights
Immigration
on and on it goes......the internet doesn't forget!

[bkkyosemite]

95. Thank you. I've been trying to say this since last night.

[pinebox]

96. You're welcome

[Betty Karlson]

158. I'm sick and tired of all of Third Way - Hillary is just the current figurehead of the wider problem

n/t

[JaneyVee]

8. Check the Super Tuesday polls.

[apnu]

110. Yup.

Until then all this back slapping over Bernie's rise and Hillary's fall is premature ejaculation.

There's a long road yet to travel.

[MrMickeysMom]

146. Good idea...

I'll check back with you, too. Any predictions?

[Dawgs]

151. "Super Tuesday" doesn't matter.

If Hillary wins, we will have a Republican President for the next years.

How do you not see it?

[KingCharlemagne]

9. She's Adlai Stevenson, v 2.0 (minus the liberalism and without the sense of humor) - nt

[MineralMan]

19. I actually remember Adlai Stevenson. Not well, since

I was pretty young for his runs. His opponent was very different from those Republicans running in 2016. He lost to Ike. We are not in a similar situation this year, by any means.

My parents were Stevenson supporters. I was too young to form my own opinion.

[KingCharlemagne]

23. Yeah, I know my analogy is only telling half the story (or less). My folks were big

egghead Stevenson supporters when I was but a mere glimmer in their eye

I doubt even JFK could have defeated Ike (who was unsuccessfully recruited by Dems before running as a Republican).

Stevenson was beloved of the Dem Party faithful and machine but didn't stand a chance against Ike. What surprises me, though, is that the Dems renominated Stevenson in '56. Was he merely a sacrificial lamb the second time round?

ETA: Funny, your post has triggered a memory. My Dad told me he voted for Ike in '52 when my Dad was still green behind the ears at the ripe old age of 22. "That's the last time I made that mistake," he said. He has voted Dem or Socialist in every election since. And the apple hasn't fallen far from the tree, as I've never once considered voting for a Republican scumbag, going back to 1976!

[MineralMan]

32. As a much-respected General in WWII, Ike was a natural

shoe-in for two terms as President. In 1956, as in the previous election, the best the Democrats could offer was someone like Stevenson, who was a very likable man, but the die was cast for Eisenhower from the beginning. Nixon did not enjoy Ike's popularity in any way, which created a clear opening for JFK in 1960.

World War II colored the election deeply. I can't imagine that it wouldn't have.

[KingCharlemagne]

37. Why do you think Stevenson sought the nomination again in 1956? Granted, Ike's first term

has witnessed a terrible recession and Joseph McCarthy's bullshit colored Ike's first term indelibly. But even so, Stevenson had to know he was going to take a dive in the 1956 GE. I was still a mere glimmer in my folks' eyes (born in 1959), but I'll have to ask my Dad what he remembers about 1956.

[MineralMan]

42. I was 11 years old for the 1956 election, and was already

reading the daily paper cover to cover by then. I don't think it was so much that Stevenson sought the nomination as that he was willing to be the losing candidate again. I remember watching the TV coverage of the Democratic convention that year. It was my first exposure to politics at that level, and I have to say that I enjoyed seeing the convention process in action.

These days, I am a delegate to a couple of conventions, and the spirit of that one in 1956 still lives on, at least at the state level. I treasure the ability to be able to buttonhole candidates in the hallways and engage in conversations with them at those conventions. It's all a remnant of those old days, of course, but things actually do happen at those conventions.

In 2012, I was part of the process that withheld an endorsement from our incumbent state Senator, who was forced to withdraw from the race for the lack of the endorsement. That opened the door for a Hmong immigrant man who I supported to go on to win that seat. He has done an excellent job in office, and will be reelected this year, I'm sure.

In Minnesota, we hold a straw vote for President at our precinct level caucuses. The proportions of that vote determine how delegates are elected later in the convention process. I get exactly one vote in that straw vote. If I end up being a delegate to the state convention, then I'll be able to caucus for the candidate I prefer. Probably that's not going to happen. Usually, I can't afford the two days off work to go to the state convention and don't try to become a delegate.

[KingCharlemagne]

64. Thanks so much for these reminiscences - they help bridge the past to the future. - nt

[LibDemAlways]

93. My mom went door to door for Stevenson in the

Republican suburbs north of NYC. She was the daughter of immigrants and knew which party had her back. Today she's 93 and has never cast a vote for a Republican. She'd be impoverished if not for Medicare and Social Security and cannot fathom why anyone would support a candidate who'd tamper with those lifelines.

Her younger sister (age 90) unfortunately fell prey to Reagan's racist rhetoric about "welfare queens" and surrendered her common sense 30 years ago. Today she listens to reichwing radio all day and is completely unhinged. I suspect there are many out there like her.

[MineralMan]

94. Good for your Mom!

[rhett o rick]

134. Adlai was against the use of nuclear weapons. Didn't Clinton say that she would bomb Iran

to cinders?

[TheBlackAdder]

11. Reminds me of this...

.





.

[UglyGreed]

12. It's like they

already made the choice for us....who cares what the people think.

[AzDar]

15. K & R

[andrewv1]

18. More than likely Hillary will not be the next President if she is the nominee....

Especially when you use flawed logic by her & her supporters that the person she will be running against will be worst.

And you think the Republicans aren't ready for this?

If anything, you are giving them more justification to vote Republican because there is no clear choice.

It's actually stupidity.

[lame54]

20. don't agree...

I'm for Bernie but if Hillary wins she will still take down whomever their repug is

we have 2 great candidates

[andrewv1]

26. Well, "Dream On"

You can't have 59% of the American Public that has already made up their minds unfavorably about her, win in a GE.

It's never been done & if it ever happens, she's not going to be it.

[lame54]

29. this is the season of never-been-dones

[Gore1FL]

139. I am one who views her negatively

I would vote for her if she is the nominee over any possible Republican. I don't vote third party. I vote.

I think Bernie will be less a victim of voter apathy. I hope he gets the nomination. I feel he is the best choice out there.

[George II]

21. And yet in every state that has been polled other than Sanders' home state and its neighbor.....

.....she has very large leads against him.

I don't know what that "large chunk of dems" are that you're talking about.

As for her being a native of a neighboring state? She hasn't lived in Illinois for more than 40 years.

[andrewv1]

30. Apparently you are not looking @ the GE Polling....

Sanders defeats every Republican by a large margin.

Clinton does not.

[George II]

58. Sanders needs to defeat Clinton first

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

125. I'm not saying they are, but if the polls saying Sanders will beat the Republican

and Hillary will not are correct, then shouldn't every Democrat be making sure he does defeat her?

[SheenaR]

62. Yeah I love some

Of the polls from last summer that say she is leading.

[MineralMan]

22. What do you consider "a large chunk?"

I think you will see the results of that "chunk's" voting preferences as the primary season continues. That "chunk" will produce the first female nominee for President later this year, I'm pretty sure.

[treestar]

33. I guess Bernie should be winning

but he's not.

What is wrong with Democratic people having an opinion they support Hillary? The usual reverse snobbery, that the successful must be in the wrong?

Bernie is supposed to be the winner because he is the loser?

If Bernie would do so great in the GE, why can't he convince a majority of Democrats? And how does he plan to convince Democrats with "I will get other voters other than you Democrats?"

[liberalnarb]

38. Well considering Hillary won and only by so little

by a coin toss, I'd call it a tie with no actual winner.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

149. Actually, I would bet Bernie won the popular vote in Iowa.

But perhaps we'll never know.

[andrewv1]

40. "Clinton Fatigue" is like "Bush Fatigue"

The voters in a GE would be sick of it....

And then you go into her past baggage or the current FBI investigation?


So if you wouldn't go with Sanders, keep that pic of Biden up there....

It might come in handy.

[treestar]

48. How do you plan on proving the voters of the GE don't like Hillary merely because

Bill was president before?

How do you think that's going to get Democrats to make Bernie their nominee?

[cali]

49. Yes.

[Dawgs]

152. Uh, only one state has voted and so far it was a tie.

He's not losing anything.

[serbbral]

36. I must say......

that I agree whole heartily with what you are saying. She should have blown Bernie out of the water or at least had a wider margin. At this point, to tell you the truth, I do not know if either Democratic candidate can win. I hope I am wrong.

[KPN]

41. Which is why ...

Joe Biden's name keeps coming up.

[andrewv1]

47. I have no doubts Bernie can win the GE....

but that's not what the Democratic Elite & Donors want.

When you give someone $675,000 in speaking fees, you expect something in return & he's not going to be the one to "Deliver" for them.

[Motown_Johnny]

46. And the Money, and the ~ 60% lead blown

Terrible candidate.


Why anyone thinks she can win n the GE is beyond me.

[WillyT]

50. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

51. Yes, it's odd that Illinois Hillary didn't get the 'neighbour boost' in Iowa that everyone says is

why Bernie is polling so well in New Hampshire.

[TwilightGardener]

56. She's a straight-up midwesterner from Illinois, born and bred.

I can't figure out why it counts for Bernie in NH but didn't matter for Hillary in IA.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

60. Thanks, fixed my post.

I typed Arkansas in a mind slip, probably thinking about the time she spent there with Bill.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

74. She was on the board of Wal-Mart when she was First Lady of Arkansas.

And you know how anti-union they are and refuse to pay a living wage, and therefore the taxpayers have to make up the difference to the workers, and how they have destroyed thousands of small businesses and small towns.

Stuff people on DU should already know.

[andrewv1]

68. And a former Republican, which btw, she still is one...

As a Bernie supporter I would like to think he is the most extraordinary person running for President in my lifetime & in some ways, he is.

But, although you can give him and his supporters a lot of credit....That's not the whole story.

Much of it is Hillary....She's comes across not much as a likable person, even more so than her history.

On top of this, she's just a terrible campaigner despite a great organization & support.

No way to win a GE.

[leftcoastmountains]

70. I hope your reasoning holds up.

[Duval]

72. K&R! nt

[PatrynXX]

73. I've noticed Huffpo is batting for her

smh worse yet I'm getting malware warnings on the site. I gotta remind myself Huffpo was bought out by AOL long ago etc. part of the reason I don't go to Huffpo anymore is it's conservative slant. the argument there is that she tends to negotiate up not go in then ask questions later. wtf? No she jumps right in like the Iran thing less than a month ago. John KERRY Negotiates up. Wow what a guy. If we had him in 2009 things might have been different. Think Obama's biggest mistake was giving her a job. Not quite as bad as Trump maybe giving Palin a job maybe, but seriously. They are calling her a centrist. Hey the Clintons have always been called and have called themselves centrists before I knew what the word meant. Now suddenly no no no she's PROGRESSIVE , wait, your still thinking LIBERAL is a dirty word.. fine your Progressive but Bernie is a Liberal. Had some nut actually state that Bernie can't get a thing passed with a Conservative Congress. X_X !!!!!! Well I see their loyalty chances of getting back Congress suck too. Even her supporters are openly Conservative Think Huffpo is gonna get deleted off websites to go to Might be sleeping with Faux.

[NurseJackie]

75. The population and ratios on this web site do not mirror the outside world... sorry.

Bernie will not be the nominee. He can try, but he will fail.

Go, Hillary!

[Fast Walker 52]

77. we will see... but negative sentiment ratings for her do not bode well

[bkkyosemite]

99. Nurse Jackie Good Morning. I wonder if you and your fellow supporters of

Hillary really understand how the Bernie supporters want real change. Obama, many of them voted for. I was jumping up and down when he was elected. I canvassed and volunteered my tables and I was an Obama Mama. He has tried to have change. It is obvious he has tried. But unfortunately he has made deals with the Insurance Industry and Corporations. That is not the change he spoke when running for office. It is not the change promised that we believed.

The change Bernie Sanders is for is what many of us who support him wanted from Obama but did not get. You constantly put Bernie down and say the same thing over and over. He is not going to be the nominee. How do you know that? You act as if he is a no body like many of your HRC friends.

Bernie supporters want an end to corruption in government. No more lobbyists running around Congress putting wording into our laws by bribing and blackmailing. We want the middle class to be whole again.

Nurse Jackie do you think that if Bernie is not the nominee that his supporters want what Hillary wants. I have watched her all of my life. I have seen the things she has done and not done for the middle class. I hope you are not right. Have a good day.

We shall see if you are right Nurse Jackie. Now I'm going to take my blood pressure.

[Fast Walker 52]

76. and she does have more money overall, doesn't she?

Funny how little that is mentioned.

[Paulie]

155. She has 10 mil more cash on hand

Her burn rate is like a buck fifty to his buck. 3 out of 5 of her donors are maxed out for hard money donations where his is like single digits maxed out. Of course she has a super pac so those maxed out can donate there but it's not the same (can't make candididate approved messages for TV)

He keeps bringing in those small donations over and over and over. February looks like it will be an amazing month for his fundraising.

Clinton
https://secure.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/39658

Sanders
https://secure.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/39795

[SoapBox]

80. [phone]

Exactly why, if she and the Entrenched Elite Turd Way Establishment some how were to weasel her into the GE...she'll lose and lose big.

[democrank]

81. No matter how many endorsements Hillary Clinton gets

or how much help she gets from "Big Dog" , the establishment media or the party`s machine, I`ll be so proud to vote for Bernie Sanders. No nose-holding, no settling, no nothing. Just a straightforward vote for a person who has held the same beliefs....my beliefs....for decades.

The cherry on top is knowing I`m voting for someone who was bravely, and with good judgement, against the Iraq War.

[raouldukelives]

83. Wall St cannot be allowed to lose.

When the free gravy train is threatened, even a republican is preferable to them than a true progressive.

[bkkyosemite]

84. The way she jumped up to 6 in the polls and Bernie is -

how is the vote taken in NH..because if it is machines ...as she said she will do anything to win and corporate America will help her. It is so disgusting what the media is doing even more so the last couple of days towards Bernie by coronation of Clinton. I will be watching a lot of HGTV from now on. Too upsetting to see the corrupt corporations pander.

[andrewv1]

90. Obama brought in Independents in the 2008 GE

How many is Clinton going to bring in?

[LibDemAlways]

98. I have a Facebook "friend" I finally had

to block because he did nothing but sit around and post anti-Bernie articles all day every day. His meme, repeated frequently, is "Bernie won't win a single primary or caucus." He is absolutely convinced that America loves Hillary and she will "coast" to victory in November. Anyone who expresses any sort of contrary view is immediately dismissed with a curt "bye bye." No dissension allowed on his sacred wall.

I didn't unblock him after Iowa because I'm sure the crowing at her massive victory (insert sarcasm) was unbearable. I will unblock him Tuesday, though, just for the enjoyment of watching him eat a little crow.

[bkkyosemite]

100. I blocked one (not really a friend) on FB who put up a disgusting

commie video..appauling..and untrue.

[workinclasszero]

103. Wrong but nice try.

Bernie was the one that needed a blowout in a state he should have had no problems winning big.

But he lost.

Which proves that Bernie Sanders would be a horrible national candidate.

Sorry if that goes against the Bernie Undergrounds narrative.

[bkkyosemite]

104. It doesn't prove anything. It's one state and it's IA

It's a caucus state. Many are working. Waitresses, night shift so many could not attend the 7 pm caucus time. And most of them have two jobs to even put food on the table. One state does not say anything about whether he will win or not!

[Akamai]

109. Yes! But if she prevails in the primary, we will all enthusiastically vote for her! Meanwhile,

Go Bernie!!! Go Bernie!!! Go Bernie!!! Go Bernie!!!

[malokvale77]

131. I'm not sure who the "we" is you are talking about.

Maybe inside the DU bubble. I don't think "enthusiastically" describes how the vast majority of Bernie supporters would feel about voting for Hillary. Many never will, even grudgingly.

[mother earth]

115. Precisely, because we are at a "dangerous moment" as Goldman Sachs reminds us, the stakes at

getting MORE of the same for a complete takeover by oligarchy are far too high. It behooves all of us to fight like hell for a Bernie win, to demand transparency and truth in all going forward. Sovereignty of our nation and our own is too terrible a sacrifice for a first in the White House, who will gladly give it all away to big money, starting with TPP, and with no chance of single payer health care, no chance of reinstating Glass-Steagall, just for starters.

If that isn't a complete kick in the face to all members of this Democratic Party, I don't know what is. That she could possibly insist we call her a progressive? Well, that's a lie in the face of her very telling actions and deliberate manipulations and disinfo. Sorry, done with all the Hillary apologists, she's not at all what this party stands for, and neither is anyone who would support that.

There's good reason for the anger and the outrage of all people in this country. We voted for hope and change twice to keep Obama in office, and what did we get? OLIGARCHY.

Insanity would be going along with it all for the final nails in the coffin.

[PATRICK]

116. Grinding of teeth

Besides the soft voter support there has been an undercurrent in the establishment scared stiff of Hillary's weaknesses as a candidate. Of course these perhaps are mainly centrist Dems by now who consider Sanders anathema to their whole raison d'etre or actually believe they are caught between a Dukakis and a McGovern. They took the cowardly route in propping up a coronation so much so that one has to wonder about the spine of any Democratic party leader who vanished in into the woodwork in an open field election to someone who lost the last primary season and has not made much of a dent in her negatives. You would have to be incredibly gifted to overcome the type of onslaught directed against ANY Dem who raises their head toward and there are too many in denial about this situation. Not having a wider field of candidates has turned out to be the sum of all fears for the status quo the same as paradoxically afflicts the cloud of clowns betraying the moral poverty of the GOP.

Failing to create inevitability out of an air of inevitability against Sanders there must be real fear this will happen in the fall as well. I wouldn't be surprised if this "in the bag" mentality continues despite 'surprising' losses to angry rich men's puppets in the too recent past. The reason for the new debates seems very much to be the stubborn negativity factor among the voters, the loss of mandate, the peeling away of "inevitable victory". Frontrunner woes that do not seem to effect the challenger.

People who desire power are not often those who should have it or could act in the common interests to fulfill their duty to serve. Only voters get a few bewildering chances to stop them, thinking instead they actually have a smorgasbord of the best of the best.
To me, obviously not to everyone, Sanders uniquely represents the best and as I look back on all past contests such a thing has been all too rare in itself and perhaps a stand alone in his passionate bid for service above all personal ambition.

But beyond power plays or personalities is the chilling spectre of planetary crisis and mad fascism as the only energetic power to meet it. Equally alarming is the silencing, by the supposed party leadership of any attempt of the people to dare to set the highest priorities as a priority in itself.

[Jack Rabbit]

117. That's because many, many Democrats have woken up, smelled the coffee and realized that . . .

The same corporate criminals who own Hillary Clinton also own most of the big time politicians endorsing her.

No one should act shocked at this. After Citizens United, it seems to be the only game in town. Except it isn't.

Only a very special politician like Bernie Sanders can play the other game successfully. He refuses corporate money and runs his campaign on small donations. His opponents accuse him of telling voters what they want to hear. He's the only candidate free to do that and has a lifetime record to back up that he believes what he says.

Consider that Bernie is the first candidate to run for federal office since the McCarthy Era to call himself a socialist and wins election after election. That's no ordinary politician.

America today is corrupt from the top down. Banking deregulation allow Legs Dimon and Pretty Boy Lloyd to expropriate your savings account and go on gambling spree with it, with their own banks serving as casinos. If they lose, you don't get your money back. Your money is less safe in a newly-deregulated bank today than it was before Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, ending the era common sense banking regulations that began in the New Deal. Only nine years after Gramm-Leach-Bliley became law, a major banking crises occurred and crashed the world economy. Major economists agree that would not have happened if New Deal regulations had remained in place.

Yet it would be difficult to restore the New Deal regulations. The big banks and their crooked executives own enough members of Congress to keep that from happening. It is an unsustainable system. Dodd-Frank is not strong enough to prevent another crisis, and since its passage has been quietly weakened through amendments to appropriations bills.

Hillary Clinton has received generous campaign contributions, generous gifts to the Clinton Foundation and ridiculously exorbitant speaking fees from the banking industry. She opposes reinstating the New Deal regulations that kept American banks strong and safe for decades. Senator Sanders refuses to take money from the banking industry. He actively proposes reinstating New Deal regulations.

There is only one candidate for President not bound to the same industries that have ruined America over the last three and a half decades. That is Bernie Sanders. He is the only candidate who truly deserves your vote and support.

[TIME TO PANIC]

119. Hillary may squeak by in the general election, but we'll definitely be toast down ticket.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

124. a greatpoint and to be said loud and often

many thanks

[Metric System]

127. You're making a lot of assumptions solely based on Iowa and NH.

[OhZone]

135. Oh, well, not so much -

[Iggy Knorr]

137. superdelegates mean nothing right now

but that wasnt your point was it?

[OhZone]

138. She's way ahead in superdelegates AND predictwise still has her as the odds on favorite

to win. Also for a Dem to win.

After NH, Bernie's about done.

[Iggy Knorr]

140. gosh when you put it that way debbie downer

because its her turn, god fucking damnit.

[OhZone]

159. Naw, cause Bernie would be destroyed in the General.

Oh well.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

141. Camp weathervain is flailing right now.

The latest is that Hillarity did nothing different, regarding emails, than Colin or Condi: two BushCo hacks....so that makes it all right.

[OrwellwasRight]

142. Because people are tired of the system.

The endorsements are perhaps counter productive.

[ucrdem]

143. What's amazing is that she still won Iowa. Look at Jebster: barely hanging on.

Hill would be in the same boat if she wasn't running a dynamite campagin. The public mood favors "outsiders" at the moment. I'm guessing that will change as the election draws night but Hill is ready to win either way.

[Dawgs]

156. Uh, she was up 40 points in Iowa just 4 months ago.

Not sure "running a dynamite campaign" is the description I would use.

[Enthusiast]

154. K&R! This post has hundreds of recommendations but it should have more!