If Hillary is the Democratic pick we will have very poor voter turnout and we will lose the election

[Fearless]

She inspires no one but her hangers-on. She gives no policy advantages over Bernie. She isn't a good speaker. She can't evidently draw crowds. She is trying everything she can to avoid actually debating Bernie, because she would have to debate issues. If she wins, independents will stay home. The democratic base will not be inspired to get out and vote, like they were for the more populist (at the time) candidate Obama. She is boring and not in the best interest of the 99%.

If she has to (pray to whatever you believe in that she doesn't) compete against anyone with a populist message, she will lose. She is in that way similar to Gore. Boring. Perhaps well intentioned, but not inspiring. If she wins the primary, we lose the White House. Voters will stay home, and we may as well lose ground in the House and Senate as well. If we get below a 40 in the Senate, you'll see filibuster and cloture rules mean nothing. We will see bills to repeal the ACA, funding for Planned Parenthood, a new upper class tax break, on and on.

Flame away.

[RKP5637]

1. IMO Trump will be the republican nominee. IMO it's hard to tell what is going to happen, because

millions and millions are fed up with the SOS. To me, Bush and HRC represent the SOS. AND, I do not mean that as a dig against HRC. They both just really seem old school. This is likely the most interesting election I've lived through because both the old time political machines are dealing with Trump and Bernie. I will vote democratic no matter who the democratic nominee is. Sitting home IMO is pretty lame. Pissing ones pants and none notice. No president is perfect, ever.

[Fearless]

3. I can only hope it's Carson and the racist vote stays home.

[RKP5637]

9. Trump would turn the US into a nasty place for millions and millions! n/t

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

251. You got that right. However, t-Rump, if the Rethug nominee, will get Berned!

[jeff47]

22. As long as you have a penis and the altitude of your house is >200 feet. (nt)

[840high]

40. It will not be Carson.

[brooklynite]

13. Trump is already on a downward trajectory.

[Cal33]

75. And we've still got 13 months till Nov. 2016.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

262. Either Melba or rye, but either way,

Trump is toast.

[razorman]

35. I don't think Trump will make it. In fact, I don't think he really wants it.

If he becomes President, Vice-president, or even gets a cabinet position, he will have to turn his personal business dealings over to a blind trust. I simply cannot see 'The Donald' handing his fortune to someone else to manage, without his input. He is too much of a control freak. That being said, anything can happen. It appears to me that this time around, on both sides, this election promises to be hilarious.

[randys1]

142. Has no intention of actually becoming President. First off he couldnt

handle it for one day, it is actual work, something he knows nothing about.

This is all a scam.

[dionysus]

180. oh, i'm sure he works plenty hard (at shady real estate deals often using other ppls money)

he'll flame out one way or the other, if not intentionally...

[randys1]

189. Nah, he delegates and uses thugs. He made his fortune off of a fortune by

using thugs to chase people out of their homes so he could turn them into condos.

Some rich people are workaholics, for sure.

Who work regardless of income, and while I cant prove it, I dont think Trump is one of those.

Regardless of all that, Trump could not do the work of President.

[bvf]

63. Trump will not be the Republican nominee. n/t

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

115. You can say that again!

[fredamae]

2. Given the trend w/in the Dem Party

leadership over the past 3 decades---I'm not so sure it isn't the plan.

[Snap the Turtle]

4. And none of her supporters are willing to discuss issues

rather than being overly obsessed on polling (which continues to show Clinton's decline) and moving goalposts.

I'm done with both Clinton and her supporters. They have failed to attract me as a supporter because they would not discuss issues at all with anyone, rather focusing on personality than principles.

[840high]

41. I encountered same thing.

[SCantiGOP]

143. Everyone entitled to their opinion

Opinion of the OP just happens to be dead wrong and not very well presented.

[Live and Learn]

242. So you still don't care to discuss issues? nt

[liberal N proud]

5. Fearmonger much?

[Fearless]

6. We could discuss issues if you'd like. I don't respond to ad hominem attacks.

[Snap the Turtle]

25. and proving my point...

[Fearless]

140. How exactly?!

I'm going to point to words in the dictionary at random for my next response. FYI.

[merrily]

146. The ad hom proved the Poster's Reply 4.

FWIW, I thought Snap the Turtle's post was well done.

[Fearless]

206. Parsimonious. n/t

[merrily]

249. I believe Snap the Turtle was trying to tell you that the post

of liberal N proud proved the point Snap the Turtle had made in Reply 4.

I could be wrong, but that was my impression. However, since I could be wrong, I will bow out now.

[COLGATE4]

7. Your concern is duly noted. nt

[BlueWaveDem]

86. Hillary will garner huge voter turnout.

She has the union endorsements and the war chest.

[kracer20]

106. Ding Ding...We Have a Winner!!!

Unfortunately, that huge turnout will be the R's coming out to vote against her.

[A Simple Game]

196. Yup, the R's will come out in droves, independents and Democrats not so much. n/t

[frylock]

110. Yes, republicans who have been waiting 20+ years to vote against her..

will turn out in record numbers, while millennials stay home.

[merrily]

151. LOL!

And anyway, any Democratic Presidential nominee would have union endorsements in the general.

[COLGATE4]

173. She's also got the Super Delegates for the nomination.

[Fearless]

207. Superdelegates vote at the convention.

[Live and Learn]

243. As a union member, I can assure our very large union has not endorced her and members

wouldn't support her if it did. You can have the few union leaders that have but you won't get their members.

[DhhD]

258. I believe the same thing about the teacher unions, in that their base will be for the Bern.

Firefighters and police also have a pension that Wall Street wants. In no way would I support a candidate who is cozy with Wall Street.

[Vinca]

8. I think you're wrong.

I'm not a fan of Hillary, but I'll hold my nose and vote for her if she's the nominee. I vote with my heart in the primary and my head in the general. A Republican from the bunch of losers on that side being POTUS is unthinkable.

[Dawgs]

10. You are not the problem. She will get plenty of votes from the reliable Democratic voters.

It's those (young, indys, etc.) that don't usually vote that will stay home.

[TM99]

16. As of last week, only 27% of registered voters

are Democratic Party members. She will not get all of them, and even if she miraculously did, that is not enough to win. She must have the youth vote, the independent vote, and the disenfranchised vote. And right now that vote is strongly in favor of Sanders.

[zeemike]

111. And on the GOP side Hillary will inspire them

And they will turn out to vote against her as well as some of the independents and the disenfranchised...that spells trouble for her and the party.

But the illusion of her invincibility will continue until it is over and then it will be our fault.

[ibegurpard]

17. So will I

And so will, I suspect, the majority of the people on this board. But we're not talking about politically-plugged-in people.

[jeff47]

18. You aren't the only voter.

We will need mops and buckets at every polling place to clean up after the Republicans who orgasm as they vote against Clinton.

If Clinton is the nominee, every single Republican and Republican-leaning independent will vote. In order to vote against her. Doesn't matter if the Republican candidate is literally a not-very-intelligent Golden Retriever promising to torture their families. They will vote for that just to vote against Clinton.

Yet she gets a "meh" from many Democrats and most Democratic-leaning independents.

The "swing" states are rural-urban divide states. To win them, we need enough Democratic turnout to overwhelm Republican turnout. And Clinton gives us the opposite.

The electoral map is stacked in our favor in 2016, but Clinton makes it the closest race because of all the Republicans she will inspire. They've been fed 40 years of "I didn't vote for Clinton...or her husband!" hatred and are incredibly excited to unleash it.

[brooklynite]

21. Here's a hint: a lot of people don't hate Hillary as much as you apparently do.

[jeff47]

24. Here's a hint: Those aren't the only people voting in 2016. (nt)

[brooklynite]

27. Absolutely true. Plenty of moderate Republicans and Independents...

...will be voting and aren't frothing at the opportunity to vote against Clinton. They may however be willing to vote against a scary Republican candidate who's dragged too far to the right.

Don't buy into the stereotype that everyone who's not a Democrat is a racist Tea-Party bible thumper. Most votes are still in the middle of the political spectrum.

[jeff47]

32. Sure! That's why she's already losing head-to-head matchups with Republicans.

Don't buy into the stereotype that everyone who's not a Democrat is a racist Tea-Party bible thumper.

And don't post moronic strawmen arguments.

Most votes are still in the middle of the political spectrum.

Wrong.

That was the case before the Southern realignment had completed. It has completed. Since about 2000, the "left-right" distribution of voters has two "bumps" - Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents in one bump, and Republicans and Republican-leaning independents in the other bump.

The partisans always vote. And the partisans are about the same size. What decides the election are the Republican-leaning and Democratic-leaning independents. And despite the 1984-era conventional wisdom, they do not cross party lines. They either vote for their aligned party, or stay home.

"Aiming for the middle" loses us Democratic-leaning independents. They stay home instead of voting. It also does not gain us any Republican-leaning independents. They either vote Republican or stay home.

If "Aiming for the middle" was such a winning strategy, we would have done fantastic in 2010 and 2014. "Aiming for the middle" is precisely what we did. And we got crushed.

[brooklynite]

38. Funny how well aiming for the middle worked in 1992, 1996, 2008 and 2012, huh?

(also 2000, since most people here claim that Gore won).

As for Clinton losing head to head matchups, 1) she's still competitive with them (this is not going to be a 20 point blowout) and 2) Sanders is losing as well.

[roguevalley]

69. aiming for the middle won't work this time because the electorate is restive and

looking for someone who can actually see them. Her time has passed and the election will approve it. This is the time of forment and political revolution. I will never vote for her because I am worn out with her drama and the things that swirl up around her. She fought off the server slag for months and months making it worse and creating the impression of hiding something. That is on her. I can't go through Clintonian BS and tin ear politics again.

[jeff47]

124. 1992 is before 2000.

1996 had an incumbent with a booming economy. Easy win.

2008 and 2012 were not aiming for the middle. "Hope and Change" was not moderate, regardless of Obama's turn to the center while governing.

As for Clinton losing head to head matchups, 1) she's still competitive with them (this is not going to be a 20 point blowout) and 2) Sanders is losing as well.

1) The claim is Clinton will utterly destroy the Republicans. Not "she has a chance".

2) Those same polls reveal most respondents are not familiar with Sanders. They also reveal that the respondents are extremely familiar with Clinton.

[7962]

119. Got any reliable polls showing her losing to anyone from the GOP?

[jeff47]

127. Hi, welcome to DU. Believe it or not, there are threads besides this one

In fact, there's a whole bunch of them that include a variety of polls. You can even read them without my permission!

And if you don't want to deal with the horrific bother of actually following the site, your mouse does actually reach all the way up to the search box on the top-right of every fucking page.

Your "LALALALALA!! I DIDN'T SEE IT!!!" act is not exactly believable.

[7962]

154. Boy, you're sure full of yourself arent you. Or something.

I merely asked a question. Most people around here provide links to back up what they say.
But you can go ahead and piss & moan if you'd prefer.

[7962]

155. Oh, you referring to the poll showing Trump getting 25% of the black vote? Ha!

THATS reliable

[jeff47]

185. See, you can actually find posts!

Good job! Now, you can find more than one post on a single subject. Because there have been, in fact, multiple polls showing she's not exactly a Republican-crusher.

[7962]

191. Its hers to lose. Simple as that. She's shown that she CAN lose, so we'll see

But so far, the right offers nobody with high numbers that beat her.
I'm sure you can find a World Net Daily poll showing Hillary losing by double digits

[leveymg]

232. What the head to head polls don't capture is the degree of disaffected voters

If HRC is the Dem candidate the number of potential D and crossover I and R voters who will stay home in '16 will be huge and this will be the deciding factor that hands the election to any half baked populist Repugnant.

[7962]

235. But remember, the RW will do the same if they get a "RINO" candidate

As they did with Romney. Add in the evangelicals who just couldnt vote for a MORMON and it was a lot of votes. I've already seen comments by many saying "I'm only voting for a strict constitutionalist"

So if its jeb and hillary, it would still be close since the left and right will stay home!!

[leveymg]

236. The "cleanest" candidate with appeal to Independents will win

That isn't Hillary. Bernie would do better. Biden probably even better than that.

[840high]

45. Every time u use "hate" - u sound silly.

Disagreeing with HRC is not hate.

[Duppers]

58. Same here.

[merrily]

85. "But I thought you were a yellow dog who would vote for any Democrat at all."

"Not in the primary."

[MisterP]

94. EVERYONE who would've held their noses for 2010, '12, and '14 did and we didn't win those ones!

people not holding their noses never WAS the problem, it was the party aristocracy that tried to mask their unappealing candidates and empty policies by blaming "those danged voters"--after all, the people serve the politicos, not the other way around!

[jwirr]

113. And the more they play their games the more many of us

are thinking of quitting. I do not like the establishment ignoring us. Hillary is using the establishment method of delegate penning and using surrogates etc. Keep it up lady. We are not amused. This is not the 90s. And you are not Bill.

[merrily]

158. Bill has been jumping on board. I don't think he is going to have the positive effect they

hope for. I think a lot of people are over him and attributed the 2008 primary tactics to him.

[jwirr]

163. A lot of us have our eyes open now.

[merrily]

164. Exactly. And I don't know if appeals a lot to millennials.

I am sure he still polls well, but polls go very differently if you are actually running for office (as Hillary proves) and he is not. Whatever likeability he has, it does not rub off.

[mythology]

224. We didn't lose the election in 2012

Obama won reelection, we won some House seats and took a majority of the votes (redistricting means there are few seats we can realistically take without a wave election) and we won additional Senate seats.

So I'm not sure anybody should take your analysis as gospel on why the elections were "lost".

[Zorra]

269. Yeh. In 2010, many apathetic voters who had been excited by Obama's populist

rhetoric, and who voted in 2008, did not vote in 2010 because they were disgusted at Democrats who did not even try to pass populist legislation in the two years that there was a huge Democratic majority.

Consequently, Democrats totally squandered our mandate, leading to republican landlsides and a republican takeover of the House and Senate.

Hillary Clinton has absolutely no populist cred. So if she even tries to come off as a populist, no one is going to fall for it, especially after Obama preached populism, but then practiced corporatism after he was elected.

Those voters who were excited by Obama's populist rhetoric in 2008, and who were disappointed by his corporatist administration, and who did not vote in 2010, are definitely not going to vote for Hillary Clinton.

Greens will definitely not vote for Clinton. Most left Independents will not vote for Clinton. Even many lifetime Dem voters who are very familiar with Clinton's history are so fed up at being forced to vote for corporatist Democratic candidates that they will vote for Dems in Congressional races but will not vote for Clinton.

Clinton cannot win the GE. The solution? We must nominate someone other than Clinton if we want to win the 2016 presidential election.

[Dawgs]

11. Duh! n/t

[TM99]

12. I agree completely,

and I have predicted much the same.

[Metric System]

14. If you say so.

[JI7]

15. if she is that bad it doesn't say much about those that works lose to her

In the primary.

[merrily]

90. After all the decks that have been stacked in her favor, it doesn't say diddly about anyone who

loses to her in the primary.

[PowerToThePeople]

133. This.

Exactly.

Hillary started this thing on third base.

Everyone else needs to hit a home run.

[merrily]

141. With the team manager trying to trip them at every step.

[brooklynite]

19. I wonder if you see the huge flaw in your argument...

If Hillary loses the nomination, you don't have to worry about this, so there's no point in making the argument.

If Hillary WINS the nomination, it means that close to 20 M people voted for her, despite the alternative choice of Bernie Sanders. A tad more than just "hangers on", wouldn't you say? And as for the General Election, you're claiming that a significant share of people who could bring themselves to vote for a black guy with a muslim sounding name wouldn't be ready to elect the first woman President.

With respect to your doom and gloom list of Republican policies, I agree. That's why I can't bring myself to support Bernie Sanders, as much as I support his policies. Which people who wouldn't vote for Clinton would turn around and vote for a self-proclaimed socialist?

[floriduck]

62. Cut the Socialist crap

Everything Bernie does benefits people. He's caucuses with the Dems forever. He just isn't tied to big business like many Dems are, including HRC. Either talk intelligently or go to the hangers-on site.

[roguevalley]

72. It shows how right wing our country has become using socialist like a slur

on a dem board. But then, some people only know the presidents since Reagan. Sad for them that they never really knew a real democratic president who slagged the opposition hard whether they won the fight or not. Sad, sad, sad.

[brooklynite]

84. Gallup: "In U.S., Socialist Presidential Candidates Least Appealing"

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- As the 2016 presidential election field takes shape, more than nine in 10 Americans say they would vote for a qualified presidential candidate who is Catholic, a woman, black, Hispanic or Jewish. Less than half of Americans would vote for a candidate who is a socialist.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/183713/socialist-presidential-candidates-least-appealing.aspx

This isn't a slam on Bernie; it's a slam on the average voter. In the eyes of many, he's a Socialist because he calls himself one. If you have to spend you time explaining the difference between a Socialist and and "Democratic Socialist" you've already lost half the battle.

[Marty McGraw]

125. 9 in 10 people

Who still bother to pick up on Land-Line Polling

[pinebox]

82. "Self proclaimed socialist"

Try social democrat, you know that party the rest of the world has but the United States, otherwise known as "liberals".

So please continue your fight for the defender of the 1% and ensuring the status quo is protected.

[redstateblues]

107. The Republican turnout will be huge

If there is a socialist on the ballot. When you have to explain the nuances between a socialist, a democratic socialist, and socialist democrat you've lost. The Republicans will have a field day with that. In spite of all the DUers who pooh pooh it, Socialism is not a winning platform in the GE.

[frylock]

112. The Republican turnout will be huge if there is a Clinton on the ballot.

[mopinko]

102. socialism is not the boogie man anymore.

nobody under 50 knows enough history to think that.

[LonePirate]

20. So if Clinton is the nominee, then Sanders' supporters will stay home and allow Repubs ...

To implement policies which are diametrically opposed to the policies Bernie supports? Am I interpreting the OP correctly?

Clinton and Sanders may have some different views and policies; but Sanders and the Repubs differ on everything. The choice of voting for a candidate with some differences over a candidate with nothing but differences is an easy choice for me.

I will gladly vote for the Dem nominee in the GE regardless of who it is because it is insane, if not unpatriotic, to sit home on Election Day and allow the Repubs to win the Presidency. They would burn this country to the ground in a matter of weeks, if not days.

[jeff47]

26. The people who are excited enough to be labeled "Sanders Supporters"

Will probably grudgingly vote for Clinton. Just like they grudgingly voted for Gore and Kerry.

Was that enough for those two to win? Nope.

To win, the Democratic candidate needs to inspire the people who stayed home in 2010 and 2014 (and 2004 and 2000). Clinton has not shown the ability to do that at all. "Hope and Change" got them out in 2008. Clinton is no "Hope and Change" candidate.

Meanwhile, we have to consider "the other side" of the ticket. Republicans in my swing state are frothing at the mouth to vote against her. If Clinton is the nominee, Republican and Republican-leaning turnout will be enormous, no matter who is on the Republican ballot.

It by no means dooms us in the GE - the 2016 electoral map favors Democrats. But that high-Republican, low-Democratic turnout is very dangerous.

[Blus4u]

233. You are right, Jeff47...

HRC is a lightening rod for hatred from the GOP base. The mention of her name leaves them foaming at the mouth. There is similar feeling for Pelosi, but not quite as virulent.

I predict little to no crossover votes from the moderate right (if there is such a thing) or libertarians for Hillary.

Bernie on the other hand stands to draw crossover support due to fact that many republican supporters are as fed up with status quo politics as Bernie supporters are.

Peace

[jeff47]

264. Crossover voting disappeared with the Southern realignment.

So while I agree Clinton can't get much crossover votes, I also don't think Sanders will get many crossover votes unless the Republican nominee is truly awful.

The main way Sanders would help is the "Hope and Change" voters actually turning out for him, and the lack of Republican visceral hatred holding their turnout down compared to Clinton. Unless it's Cruz or Trump.

[Android3.14]

37. This is why Clinton fails

Her supporters are lousy tacticians.

[INdemo]

78. True But they stayed home in midterms in 2014 Didn't They?

We have union Members that should support Democrats but love Trump..Explain that

[merrily]

92. Please see Reply 10

[jwirr]

120. I hope you understand that there are a great number of

young voters and voters who dropped out years ago and independents and others who are just coming back into the system. They are coming back because of Bernie and the fact that he is different.

If everyone posting here on this board votes it will not make up for the lose of those groups. So in truth it is up to Hillary to realize that she needs to somehow convince them that it is important to vote regardless who wins. But the way she is going they are not going to listen to her anyway.

Early this year my grandson came into my room and said "Grandma, what do you think of Bernie." He is one of those excited young voters. At the end of the discussion I told him that if we do not win we then have to vote for Hillary. He replied "We will see Gram." And then he proceeded to tell me why he did not like her. He did not vote in 2008 because he was sure that Obama was going to win. This is the kind of voters we are telling you will stay home.

[oasis]

23. Question: will you show up at the polls?

[jeff47]

28. You don't have to worry about the OP showing up at the polls

you have to worry about all the "marginally attached voters". They showed up for "Hope and Change". They didn't for "Status quo" in 2014 or 2010, or in the presidential years in 2004 and 2000.

[upaloopa]

39. I get what you are saying. Bernie like no other

President before him has a magic wand and he will not be affected by a repub congress or any opposition to his ideas.

[thesquanderer]

56. Whether he will be able to govern effectively...

...is a whole different conversation than whether he can be elected.

That said, I don't expect a republican congress to be cooperative with either one of them.

[jeff47]

60. I'm not the one claiming a magical president can get Republicans to pass things.

You are, when you claim Clinton would not face massive Republican opposition while Sanders would.

[upaloopa]

170. I never said that. My hope is that Hillary

has coat tails enough to win back the Senate

[jeff47]

184. Which passes bills how?

There's two houses of Congress.

[oasis]

49. Not worried about the op or you showing up. I'd just like

to know the Election Day intentions of those who preach to the DU community of how important the votes of others can be.

Not that big a deal if I don't get an answer from either of you.

[jeff47]

52. When it can't win the election, why does it matter what the intentions are?

When we only rely on partisans, we lose whether or not I (or the OP) show up.

In my particular case, I don't see how Clinton can win my state (NC). It's very much a rural-urban divide state. The heavily Republican rural areas always have high turnout. The Democratic-leaning urban areas have much more variable turnout. (And that isn't a coded racial statement. Majority-white urban counties are where the majority of Democratic voters live.)

Obama won here in 2008 because he inspired a lot of urban turnout. He lost here in 2012 because he couldn't inspire enough urban turnout.

I can't see how Clinton can get 2008-level turnout. She's not inspiring. She can't tap into the same feelings that created the "Moral Mondays" events. And most damning, she doesn't need NC to get 270 votes in the electoral college. So I don't see her campaigning in NC enough to change that. The effort and money would be better spent elsewhere.

So I'm expecting to have "the luxury" of a meaningless vote in the 2016 general election if Clinton is the nominee. I'll look at the situation again when it's much closer to election day.

Can Sanders or O'Malley win NC? It still would not be easy, and there are still easier states to win 270 votes. So neither of them will probably campaign much in NC either. If the Republican is very uninspiring, and thus gets low urban Republican turnout, they have a slim chance.

[oasis]

88. I'll agree Obama's message of Hope and Change had a lot

to do with the 2008 turnout, but that was on the heels of a dismal Bush presidency. No way that can be duplicated, no matter who the Dem candidate is.

Just as there was no way to predict Obama's national popularity a year and a half before the 2008 elections, there is no way to predict how the public will receive Hillary.

We do know this, she'll have a ton of money to work with, Bernie won't. Hillary will have a slew of women supporting her because they want a woman in the White House. Don't forget the situation with Iran, ISIS and the Middle East. Voters will have to consider who do they trust to keep a strong military. Hill's SOS experience and her perceived "hawkishness" will be a plus against any GOP candidate.

Supreme Court appointments will matter more in 2016 than any time in history.

There's a lot more for voters to get excited about in the 2016 elections than the OP stated.

[jwirr]

131. A ton of money to work with. From the nice little guys over

on Wall Street. That is what so many democrats are furious about. That can just as well hurt her as help her.

And you should be aware that by telling me that a slew if women want a woman in the WH is really insulting. Our nation is in a world of hurt and you think that the only thing we women think about is the gender of who is in the WH? Most of us are thinking about a lot more than that.

Some of us remember that she helped get us into the ME mess and still favors war. We can have a strong America without continual war.

I agree that SCOTUS appointments are important but not just for women. We need a court that protects us from corporate power as well. I do not think we will get that with Hillary.

[oasis]

149. If "so many Democrats are furious" about Hillary's donors

How can you explain her abundance of congressional endorsements? As for you being "insulted"by women wanting a woman in the White House. It's just as valid an observation as AA's wanting Obama in the White House. It's reality.

[jwirr]

159. Are you telling me that those abundance of congressional

endorsers are not getting money from the corporations? LOL.

And I disagree with it being as valid as AA wanting Obama in the WH. There was no one else who could be the first black president but he brought with him hope and change that resonated with a lot of other people as well. It was not all about him being AA - it was about his positions.

I am perfectly willing to have a woman in the WH but I want one that has positions that I agree with. I do not want a corporate follower just because she is a woman. And I am not alone. It's reality.

[oasis]

165. True, you are not alone.

You do not represent the majority of Democratic women voters is also true.

[jwirr]

169. Sure about that? Most of us have family we are worried

about. And that is where Bernie comes in.

[oasis]

183. All you and I have to go on is polling.

Instincts, intuition and opinion are less reliable.

[merrily]

186. Hillary's trend is the polls has been downward for a while.

Moreover, few, if any, polls have been done in a way that reflects the electoral vote.

[oasis]

192. We are living in the now. <nt>

[merrily]

253. No one is voting in the now though. At least one purpose of polls is to say something about what

will happen in the future. For that matter, if it's all about now, we shouldn't be talking polls at all. At this stage, they are notoriously unreliable.

During 2012--and we are not at that point yet in this cycle, Obama was shown losing to every Republican in the field, including Mr. Generic Republican.

So, if the polls are about now, they are not meaningful. And, if they are about winning the primary, the trend for Hillary is down.

[jwirr]

202. LOL Want to call a truce?

[oasis]

225. Sorry, I had to run an errand. Truce okay.

Btw, I have respected and admired Bernie for years, still do. I have never spoken or written a negative word about him. I was pleased when he got into the race and I am more than pleased that he is doing so well in getting his message out.

Peace to you.

[Fearless]

199. The question is will the average American

I have my prediction above. She does not inspire like Bernie does.

[Android3.14]

29. That's why I think of her as the Tapioca Queen

Uninspired, imperious, and works better as a thickening agent.

[Turbineguy]

30. Invest in

funeral businesses. The republicans want to create a boom in that business.

[Lil Missy]

31. And your source(s) for this proclamation is .... ?

and, keyboard warrior is not a qualification

[jeff47]

47. Believe it or not, people are allowed to have their own opinions.

Even without an authority figure supporting them!

Now, if you'd like to counter the OP's opinion, post your own, and the reasoning that backs it up.

[Lil Missy]

182. Your outrage is duly noted. n/t

[Doctor_J]

33. I hope not, but I think the party needs to decide what it is

I think Mrs Clinton's campaign is a disaster. Every time you hear Sanders speak, you know exactly why he wants to be president, and what he will try to do when he's elected. Hillary's constant change in her persona tells me that she has no clue about either.

So frustrating to see the party I've been in for forty years disintegrating.

[jeff47]

43. The only "why" she wants that I've been able to figure out

is she wants inauguration day. She very much wants to have the title of President.

But I have no idea what she really wants to do the remaining 1,460 days of her term. She either says things with absolutely zero passion, or contradicts her previous positions. She's got bland, vaguely-worded "position papers", but those aren't the "fire-in-the-belly" that makes her want the office.

I can see why O'Malley wants the job. I can see why Sanders wants the job. I have no idea why Clinton, Webb or Chafee want the job.

[roguevalley]

74. even her donors are getting worried. She is a disaster who wants her turn in the history

books. In some ways, I personally believe, she has the same problem as George Bush had. He wanted to show up his dad and she wants to show up her husband. Given he not only humiliated her in front of the world but was a slagger from the get go, I don't blame her. But it won't get my vote. A woman needs to be president but not just any woman and decidely not her. She has no political instincts besides its my turn.

[RufusTFirefly]

61. You're probably just bitter because you didn't receive a gift box of household products. n/t

[upaloopa]

34. She has a favorabity rating of 73% among Dems

You don't make any sense.

[jeff47]

36. Dems are 27% of voters. Need a bit more than 27% to win. (nt)

[upaloopa]

48. Bernie has a 37% favorabilty among Dems

so per your post he is toast!

[jeff47]

57. He also has an extremely high "don't know him enough".

But winning that 27% doesn't get you the white house. You need Democratic-leaning independents to show up. And Clinton's favorability among those is abysmal.

[roguevalley]

76. don't worry about it. Hillary will fuck it up. She has already. She should be flying

through the roof instead of falling consistently. Keep ragging on Bernie though. When people do, he gets more money.

[upaloopa]

80. No you are just wrong

My guess is you have no facts to support Sanders winning the nomination. Only opinion pieces therefore the need to invent negative ideas about Hillary.
Anyway you get your kicks is ok by me.

[jeff47]

87. If I was, you'd post a link to a poll.

[merrily]

168. Boom.

[uponit7771]

227. ... you mean after he's been in congress for over 30 years?! tia

[jeff47]

229. He's well known in his state. He isn't outside his state.

Believe it or not, Meet the Press appearances do not make a Congressman good at his job.

[stonecutter357]

42. +1

[still_one]

44. Typical bullshit OP. Talk issues instead of trying to undermine Democratic

Voter turnout

Really reflects well on Bernie supporters

[merrily]

137. Electability in the general is THE biggest issue there is. It was why I chose Obama in 2008 and from

there, being human, I found reason after reason why I liked him independently of that.

Hillary's supporters never seem to have a problem saying people won't vote for Bernie, either in the primary or the general.

[still_one]

238. That is just garbage. Anyone who doesn't realize the stakes of not turning

out to vote because they aren't enthused I would say is an immature person. Voting is a privilege that a lot of people died for to afford us that opportunity

I won't deal with that type of infantile behavior. Adults will vote, and those that don't are irrelevant as far as the election is concerned anyway

I will vote for whoever is the Democratic nominee as will most people on DU, progressives, and Democrats, and those few that won't really won't matter

This is just typical lets piss off the other side politics, and it occurs on all sides

[merrily]

247. Yet, most people who are eligible to vote don't vote. Fearless did not create that..

63% of all who are eligible stay home. If you look only at young voters, it's 80%. You can get upset about it, but it's a reality.

[razorman]

46. I may not agree completely with your reasoning, but I think your conclusion is valid.

One thing that I believe will be important is the fact that President Obama OWNED the 18 - 24 demographic in his elections. Mrs. Clinton, and the Democratic party in general will have trouble hanging on to that bloc. The first-time voters in this election do not even remember the Clinton administration. I am afraid that they do not recall Bill Clinton as the charming rogue that ran circles around the Republicans with such ease. Now, they see an old couple who remind them of their grandparents; not necessarily a good thing. It may turn out to be something like, "I love my Nana, but I would not want her to be president." I guess we'll see.

[shenmue]

50. I thought this was GD:P, not your personal complaint board

[merrily]

160. I love your irony, but not your double standards.

[chillfactor]

51. gloom and doom....

gloom and doom...give it a break already....

[MineralMan]

53. On what basis do you draw this conclusion?

What's your background with regard to national elections?

Or are you simply applying your own personal feelings to everyone else? I take it that you wouldn't bother to go and vote for, say, Hillary, if she were the nominee. You'd rather have the Republicans win? I don't think that's how most Democrats will react if Hillary gets the nomination. Not at all.

[trueblue2007]

81. the poster simply is a hillary hater

[NealK]

194. Please see post 45.

[SheilaT]

54. If Hillary is the nominee,

you, we, will all be amazed at how many will crawl out of the woodwork to vote against her. All of the religious and social conservatives who honestly think a woman has no place in public office at all, let alone as President. All of the Fox news watchers who honestly believe the genuine crap put out about her.

If, perhaps, it is Carson against her (which I doubt), it will be almost fun to watch people struggle between their racism and their hatred of Hillary.

But Carson won't be the nominee, nor will Trump, although I'm not at this point willing to make a prediction as to who will be the Republican nominee. If by some bizarre twist of fate it's Fiorina against Hillary, that will likewise be fun to watch.

For the record, I am not at all a Hillary supporter.

[Cobalt Violet]

55. I don't think so and I hope not.

That being said I hope we will never find out. I support Bernie 100% but I will not stay home and let the republicans win if he isn't our nominee.

[JoePhilly]

59. Dogs and Cats, living together ... MASS HYSTERIA!!!!

[captainarizona]

64. democrats and independents will vote for mrs. clinton

we will be voting against the republicans. fear of what they will do will bring out democrat voters also the minority vote increases every day as 100,000 minority kids turn voting age every month and this is mrs. clinton's base. blue states like california are starting universal registration and no republican will ever be able to win the popular vote again.

[merrily]

162. Many Democrats. Not all. Few indies.

[leftofcool]

65. Oh Good Gawd!

These anti-Hillary pieces are so old. Here is a tip: Vote for a fucking repuke if you don't like Hilary.

[Keep-Left]

66. Please & speak for yourself

You don't think the first women President would inspire women? seriously ?

right now most people don't pay attention to politics or the nominations. She will win the women vote by a landslide - she will win Spanish vote in a landslide - Black vote in a landslide

with nothing but negative press she is still beating all the Republicans.

Hillary has a easier road to victory

[Snap the Turtle]

147. Women in NH are disagreeing with you.

They favor Bernie by a small margin.

[Keep-Left]

260. oh boy

one small state

[abakan]

67. I for one will not stay home.

If Mrs. Clinton is nominated I will do as I have done in the past. I will hold my nose and vote for the Democrat candidate.
I only hope the thought of the republicans in charge of the House, Senate, White House, and the Supreme Court, would persuade many to do the same. I don't like her, I don't trust her but if she is the only choice I will vote for her.

[FlatBaroque]

68. She cannot win under any circumstances

"It's my turn", or having female parts simply does not qualify as a mandate to lead the free world.

[Zorra]

70. Sad, but true. nt

[hifiguy]

71. Not only that, no one would motivate the knuckle-dragging

cave orc base of the Repukes to show up and vote more than HRH. Her as the nominee would add 1-2 million votes to the national Repig total while depressing the Democratic turnout.

She's a disaster waiting to happen, and in every way.

[trueblue2007]

73. THIS IS ONLY YOUR SILLY OPINION. Where are the fact to back up this stuff???

[retrowire]

99. there are no facts in this but

Bernie said it pretty well in his address to the DNC.

People need to be enthused. And I gotta say, Hillary doesn't enthuse a good number of people. that's not to say that the democrats will lose if Hillary wins the nomination...

but I myself agree that there will be a lower voter turnout if she wins as opposed to Bernie. The rallies, the social media activity and sheer passion speak to that.

[merrily]

145. An opinion about a candidate's electability on a political message board.

[WheelWalker]

77. If Sanders is the Democratic pick we will see very heavy Republican turnout and Trump elected

[MisterP]

96. notwithstanding his appeal to non-loony Republican voters?

the ones who'll be turned off by the "socialist" label would be turned off when they use that label on Clinton, or on Reagan

[WheelWalker]

108. That's just it... I don't think he has much appeal to non-loony Republicans. I suspect

they'll see Sanders as a loony, just like all the clowns on their bus but of an opposite persuasion. Hillary is everyone's to hate, in a manner of speaking... but Biden can bridge the gap and draw the non-loony Republicans. I know, I know, that's what a lot of Sanders supporters reject about Joe and Hillary... their willingness to make sausage. Bernie's not a sausage maker, and I can respect him for that... except here, in governing America, we make sausage and everyone's got to eat it.

[thesquanderer]

103. I think Hillary will motivate at least as many Republicans as Bernie would

I don't think anyone can motivate Republican GOTV more than HRC. She's built up decades of their hate.

And actually, there's even a stripe of Republican who agree with Bernie on some things (patriot act, iraq war)... and if the republicans nominate a mainstream candidate, Bernie he may appeal to some of the "anti-establishment" type who is now leaning toward Trump/Carson/Fioroina, a group of people who simply want something that isn't Bush or Clinton or any reasonable facsimile thereof. In a way, even to a Republican, Sanders can represent a "protest vote" against someone like Bush.

At any rate, most of the states are solidly enough red or blue that the opposing candidate has no chance. No Republican is going to take NY away from either Hillary or Bernie. And some states are just as red as NY is blue. It's going to come down to a bunch of swing states... and personally, I like our odds regardless of whether its BS or HRC.

It will be interesting to watch the polls as we see more state-by-state matchups.

[WheelWalker]

109. Actually, maybe even more than Sanders. Better than either would Biden do, imo.

I'm a Biden Bot, through and through.

[merrily]

134. 25% of Vermont's Republicans vote for Bernie.

[WheelWalker]

210. In Vermont, they vote for a Sanders labeled an Independent, don't they?

In a general presidential election, they'll be voting for a Sanders labeled a Democrat. Vermont political labels might not translate to the US electorate as a whole. Not saying Sanders might not do alright nationally among moderate Republicans disaffected with the lunatic fringe of their own party, but extrapolating Vermont support nationally would be a mistake in my opinion. No one doubts he has some cross party support there, but will it translate to Ohio? Pennsylvania? Florida? the swing states?

[merrily]

248. I don't think the label makes a whit of difference. I think they hear his message and they saw

what he did for Burlington. All the label tells them is that Democratic donors don't own him. The way he is raising money in this campaign tells them the same thing.

Not very long ago, DUers were telling me that people outside Vermont would hate Bernie. Reality is, people are people. If they really believe you will improve life for them and their kids on in a very palpable way, they'll vote for you. That is why FDR got elected four times.

Hillary has a believablity/weathervane issue, a big business issue, plus a lot of baggage. If I had to choose whether Republicans and right leaning indies would be more likely to vote for Hillary than Bernie, my money would be on Bernie.

[GitRDun]

79. Welcome to Bernie Underground

An anti democratic post getting rec after rec from the fans.

What a proud day...

[retrowire]

98. whats anti democratic

about someone voicing an opinion?

[GitRDun]

121. If you have to ask you're part of the problem...

[retrowire]

123. lmao thanks for your time. n/t

[NealK]

190. What a childish and clueless post.

[GitRDun]

217. lol

Oh yeah, it's childless and clueless to suggest that on a Democratic site, we shouldn't post "Vote for my guy or we'll lose the general election!".

If you want to see childish and clueless look in the mirror. You and others who just can't bear witness to your own bad behavior have turned the site into Bernie Underground.

It's great to like Bernie, I do too...but for real reasons.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251605502

Do some research. Post something real, not "childish and clueless" blather.

[NealK]

220. "Oh yeah, it's childless and clueless"

I never said anything about anyone being childless. What I said is that your post was childish. Here, have a lollipop.

[GitRDun]

222. Hahahahahaha intelligent response Neal

Take a typo and make an issue over it.

I guess more words won't help. Enjoy your outrage....

[NealK]

230. Well I couldn't resist believing that such a lovely typo was cute.

And thank you for the nice compliment about my response, it means a lot to me.

[Fearless]

197. Hillary is not the end all and be all of the Democratic Party

You can be a Democrat and certainly a democrat without wanting her as President.

[hifiguy]

203. Not according to some.

But fortunately many of them have decamped to their private sewer.

[Fearless]

205. Tensions bring it the best and worst in people

Most will return during the general election, some may not, others will flame out. We should be nice to them as we'll need their votes in the general as well.

[GitRDun]

216. There's a difference between not wanting her as President and

saying we'll lose with her.

[Fearless]

246. Just the same as there's a difference between apples and oranges.

Neither have anything to do with each other. Yet both can be true.

[GitRDun]

266. lol ok

[L. Coyote]

83. Don't be soooo fearful. Or sooo negative. Or sooooo defeatist.

Or soooo Republican talking point.

[lobodons]

89. In other words: Bernie Supporters do not support the Democratic party

A True Democrat supports whoever the Party nominates.

If Bernie wins, I will vote for Bernie. If Webb wins, I will hold my nose and will vote for Webb. And if Hillary wins I will vote for her. Otherwise, the Teabilly party will win and will control the next 2-3 picks for SCOTUS giving Scalia, Alito and Thomas a 6-3 and even 7-2 majority for next 30 years. NO THANK YOU!!!!

All DEMS need to GOTV in 2016 regardless of nominee and vote the D ticket!!!!

[BlueWaveDem]

91. Hillary will garner huge voter turnout.

Between union endorsements, an Obama endorsement, and a first woman president. Combined with the crazy candidate Repubs will put up. HUGE.

[world wide wally]

93. I got kicked out of the Hillary Group for saying this, but with all the negative bullshit in here

directed at both Hillary and Bernie, it is no wonder that our voter turnout will be down.
You are idiots to think Republicans don't love this bickering back and forth in a place like DU
Get a fucking grip!

[merrily]

97. Most people don't know DU exists, let alone what gets posted here.

[world wide wally]

114. You're right, but they are aware of the infighting going on among Dems in general

It only makes us weaker when we make these all out assaults on each other.
Talk policy all you want, but when it is made a question of personal character, it can only be destructive.

[merrily]

126. If they are aware, it's not because of what gets posted here anyway. On that, we agree.

Please remind which aspect of personal character the OP dealt with.

[world wide wally]

152. I actually was not referring to this OP

I have been trying to avoid all OPs that attack Hilary or Bernie, but that seems almost impossible these days. However, when reading that Hilary's candidacy will lower turnout, it doesn't take a brain surgeon (God! Did I just reference Ben Carson?) to figure out what at least part of the problem is.
I will promise you one thing though. If a Republican gets elected because of low voter turnout, I am done with the Democratic Party and American politics

[merrily]

156. The OP spells out why exactly he or she thinks voter turnout will be low with Hillary.

If a Republican gets elected because of low voter turnout, I am done with the Democratic Party and American politics

63% of all those eligible to vote don't vote. If you look only at young people, it's 80%. Why? Not because of what gets posted at DU, I promise you that.

[Agnosticsherbet]

95. If people don't vote they get the government they deserve.

I will turn out in November and vote the best candidate on the ballot.

It won't be a Republican.

Sadly, If people don't vote, my family and I will suffer what the non voters deserve.

[merrily]

130. Maybe people deserve better choices at the ballot box than they typically get, too.

Enough blaming victims.

[Agnosticsherbet]

200. Those who vote are the victims, of those who don't vote.

I don't blame the victims.

People who go to the polls and make the dificult decision about which candidates to vote for are heros, in my opinion.

In fact, instead thanking veterans for their service we should thank voters for their service to the nation. Voting is how we defend our rights and freedoms, not by going to war.

Want to be a hero, go to the polls in November 2016 and choose the best candidate of those available. That is citizenship in action.

[merrily]

250. Sorry, we disagree. IMO, those who don't vote because their choices are poor are also victims.

Same as those who vote pinching their noses.

[Agnosticsherbet]

275. Those who don't vote do no care enough to make tough decisions.

So, yes, we disagree.

I don't get the whole pinching your nose thing. I always choose the best person on the ballot. There will always be a candidate marginally better. There is no need to pinch my nose.

In my opinon, talking about pinching our nose to vote is an insidious form of voter supression. When we tell people all choices are bad, we are using a passive agressive argument against voting.

People should go to the primary and vote for who they think are the best candidates of those available. In the general, look at the available candidates and choose the best candidates.

Finally, those who choose not to vote screw us for more than just the President. Republicans control the house and Senate so they control the legislative agenda. We could elect the best possible Presidential candidate, and that candidate will do nothing to help us because a President can not make laws or raise funds.

[merrily]

276. 63% of those eligible to vote do not vote. Looking at young people, it's 80%

If you don't think those figures represent a failure on the part of anyone but those who do not vote, I think you are kidding yourself.

Alll the "shoulding" in the world doesn't change that.

[Agnosticsherbet]

277. I think individuals are responsible for their choices and actions.

They choose not to vote, so they are responsible for that choice and everything that comes from it.

I feel the same way about we who do vote.

It is dificult to be an informed voter. Sometimes it is a fucking thankless task. Sometimes we lose. Those people who put in the time and vote have chosen to be responsible.

[merrily]

278. No clue why you just keep repeating yourself.

[underpants]

100. I think our turnout will be fine

Whomever the nominee is will benefit greatly from an overwhelming ground force and that includes GOTV.

[CapnSteve]

101. You don't seem very Fearless to me...

I am a loyal Democrat. It means I have voted Democratic in every primary and every general election since I was 18 (a looong time ago!

Be of good cheer, Fearless! Once the silly season of politics (also known as the primaries) is over, the liberal majority will turn out in the general to vote in a Democrat to the White House.

I am a loyal Democrat, which also means I am an irritating optimist!

Cap'n Steve

[JoePhilly]

104. If you are right, then Democrats are too stupid to be allowed to govern anyway.

I'm serious.

We let that dick Bush win. He was probably the worst President in US history.

Meanwhile, we Democrats might let the Republicans win their favorite candidate does not win the primary.

BOO-FUCKING-HOO!!!!!

If the members of our party are THAT stupid ... we should not be surprised when a Republican wins, the economy collapses, and we're in a full scale war in the Middle East.

Bush failed to finish the job of destroying the US, but maybe we can let the next GOP Prez complete the job.

[merrily]

132. And now, people who helped Bush sell that war in the Middle East are running for President.

Funny how that works.

[ibegurpard]

267. you can blame your third way friends

For not giving dispirited and dejected non political people something to vote for.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

105. Politics-as-usual is going to stir up a lot of meh.

I always vote. More out of habit than anything else. If it's Hillary vs a Republican in the GE....I'll look elsewhere.

[Frances]

116. If she chooses a well qualified Hispanic

voter turnout among minorities will skyrocket

[geardaddy]

117. I will vote for whoever the dem nominee is. n/t

[7962]

118. i dont like Hillary but I dont see her losing to any on the right. nt

[merrily]

161. Over a year out from the general, did you see any Democrat losing to Dimson?

2000 or 2004?

[7962]

171. if youre talking about W, yes. And lots of polls showed it

[merrily]

172. Really? Over a year before the general, before the primaries occurred, polls showed Dimson beating

every Democrat in the field in 2000 and 2004?

[7962]

187. At times, yes. But that would only matter if he was running again. These are different people.

In 2000 the early polls had bush further out front than the later polls according to wikipedia, starting in april. They dont go back further than that
2004 was a back and forth affair thru the whole timeframe.

Hillary has been in the lead since 2012. Sure, she can still screw it up, thats why she wants few debates and few interviews. She is her own worst enemy. But its hers to lose. The other side will pick someone the independents wont vote for and thats that. I see Kasich as the only one who could win, but the GOP is too stupid to pick him. He's a liberal, ya know.

[merrily]

252. I don't remember that at all. Hillary may have been in the lead until 2012, but, as far as we knew

in 2012, no one else was running. It's hard to be in second place in a field of one. Indeed, from at least 2012, all the Democratic pundits and strategists were all over my TV claiming that no one would even bother to run against Hillary. "If she runs, she'll clear the field." Never saw or heard anything like that in my life. They had not even made that pitch four years out about Obama--and he was the President Elect in 2008. It was then I know they were trying their best to make her the nominee in a very ugly and undemocratic way.

[november3rd]

122. There's a crack

in your crystal ball.

[kenfrequed]

128. Well...

I think the Democrats will still win, though if Hillary is the candidate it will actually be a much harder campaign for a far less progressive candidate. Hillary actually fires up the base of the Republican party to show up and vote against her.



With Bernie you get a better, more progressive, candidate who will win by a wider margin.

[orpupilofnature57]

129. True, there is one alternative to oligarchy, Bernie, simple fact .

[Proud Liberal Dem]

135. Disagree

She will be considered "the sane person" by a majority of the electorate- compared to whomever the Republicans put up.

[The Traveler]

136. As an unabashed Sanders support I disagree with your post ... kind of

I think Ms Clinton wins the general election ... but it might turn out to be a very long and nerve wracking election night.

What I do NOT believe Ms. Clinton can do is rally the party and in particular millenials in sufficient strength to overcome the effects of gerrymandering and voter suppression. We need a good solid turnout to win the presidential election, and she can definitely summon that. We need a massive turnout to gain congressional seats ... and she will NOT be able to summon that. Skillful Clintonian triangulation ... a necessity in the 90s ... turns off a huge segment of the millenial crowd. They want clear speech, and clear commitments. Who can blame them?

Which leaves the country pretty much in the same dysfunctional state we have observed over the past several years. (Obama will go down in history as a master executive who succeeded despite an insanely dysfunctional executive branch. But, let's face it, it has been no picnic and we could have been a lot more effective as a nation with a more rational legislative body in place.)

There will 90 million Americans aged 18-30 who will be eligible to vote in 2016. When I look at the polls and their samples, this enormous group of voters seems way under represented. (The recent CNN/ORC poll sampled 0 voters under age 50 on the subject of Democratic nominee preference, for example.) I believe that pollsters are doing this because there is a baked in assumption that turnout in this age group will be small, precisely because status quo candidates like Ms. Clinton cannot appeal to them, and further a baked in assumption that she will win the nomination. This is either very astute or very foolish of them ... time will tell.

Anyway, that's my sense. If Ms. Clinton wins the nomination she wins the general election and congress stays much the same. if Sanders takes the nomination, I think it is a whole different ball game. I think we win the general, and make significant gains in the House. It all depends upon who can summon the millenials in addition to the other constituencies of the Democratic Party.

Just my opinion

Trav

[randys1]

138. Nonsense.

[Logical]

139. So true! nt

[LannyDeVaney]

144. You need to change your username ...

very misleading.

[Sunlei]

148. Really dumb to give up your one vote, over your life you don't get to vote that many times .

The only Democracy we have in America is our one vote.

[merrily]

167. Your second sentence is correct and that is a problem.

[Sunlei]

175. Sorry, it's my opinion. It is a bad decision, stupidity to 'sit out a vote', to not vote at all.

Do you think if Bernie Sanders loses he will tell his people not to vote?

[merrily]

177. You know I said "correct," right?

Let's just agree to agree?

[Sunlei]

181. ohkay

[ibegurpard]

268. of course it's a bad decision!

But the vast majority of the people reading.this are NOT going to sit out the election! We are talking about non poltical people who are coming out of the woodwork (including MANY millenials)because they are responding to a message that resonates with them. Hillary will not motivate these people. She just can't.

[bunnies]

153. I cant even tell you how many people I know who feel exactly that way.

I think you've expressed it perfectly.

[Persondem]

157. Actually, I don' think you know much about real politics in this country.

I was a democratic county chairman in a rural county in North Carolina from 2003 - 2009. In 2008 HRC did rather well in our county. The older, slightly conservative, female voters liked her. Other demographics flocked to her as well. We had a huge turnout in the 2008 primary, and those voters will turn out for her again. HRC may be more moderate than some folks on DU would like, but that moderation plays well in a huge number of precincts all across the country. The USA is NOT a solidly left leaning country; it's a middle of the road country that leans one way or the other depended on the particulars of an individual election. If you think those older ladies are going to vote for a conscientious objecting (i.e. draft dodging), tax raising, socialist then you have no idea how things actually work where votes are cast.

[applegrove]

166. Agitating to create apathy much?

[Bill USA]

174. Hillary Clinton's Image Improves Among Democrats 73%:20% Favorable - Gallup

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251632942


Do you think the GOP's McCarthyist campaign of innuendo and implied accusations of malevolent intent will make idiots of Democrats and a reasonable number of Independents? IF people actually think for themselves and realize no evidence of wrong-doing, or even out of the ordinary doing (Colin Powell had a personal email account - he says he did no official business on it. YOu expect Democrats to trust the guy who told us that Hussein had WMD?) has been produced do you think people will wander to the polls chanting "Hillary BAD, GOP good" ... forgetting what the GOP is all about?

I know the GOP is working perfervidly on this McCarthyist campaign but I still think it's a long shot.

[randys1]

176. no

hopefully i already commented here with telling you this is NONSENSE

[dionysus]

178. i think you're right, but i fear our dumbass electorate might pass on bernie, too. we're a nation

where approximately half the people are idiots.

i'd rather give it a try with Bernie than Hillary, though.

I see Hillary getting close to winning, but dooming us with a low turnout and losing too much of the liberal vote. she won't get blown out of the water, but I have a sinking feeling she won't be able to win, either.

if Bernie gets the nod we need to fund him, since he isn't going to take big money. however it's gonna take big money to compete with CU... the dilemma...

[Sunlei]

179. hey "Fearful", do you think if Bernie Sanders loses he will tell people not to vote?

He will back the winner and tell everyone to vote.

[NanceGreggs]

188. Hillary is the front-runner ...

... and has the majority of Dems behind her.

There must be an awful lot of uninspired, totally bored hangers-on out there.

[Scootaloo]

211. Your first lines provide proof for the second.

[NanceGreggs]

214. If that's the case ...

... Hillary still wins, doesn't she?

And I'm sure that when she does, DU will be rife with posts about how BS was the better choice, and the Democrats who chose HRC as their nominee, and subsequently elected her POTUS, will be castigated for bring dumb enough to get another Democrat into the White House.

[Scootaloo]

215. If the election were today, sure. But it's not today. Nor is it close

Your main argument for Clinton appears to be "well, other people are supporting her" - and how many of them have the same argument?

How long does that sort of support hold up? What happens when these "whatever, Clinton I guess" supporters get good exposure to other names in the race? Right now the media still talks about Sanders solely in relation to Clinton, and doesn't talk about the other democrats at all. if that changes - and with so many months to go, it WILL change - what will happen with Clinton's numbers?

[NanceGreggs]

219. If you think that's my "main argument" ...

... you are apparently fabricating things in your own head.

I am simply pointing out the FACTS. Hillary is the front-runner. Despite DU posts about how "it's now apparent that Bernie will be our nominee" (and there have been quite a few), the FACT remains that he is a distant second behind the front-runner.

The FACT remains that HRC has the vast majority of Democratic voters supporting HER, not BS.

Reading DU over the past few months, I realize that BS supporters simply choose to ignore the FACTS. They dismiss every poll showing HRC as the front-runner as being inaccurate, or too early to be reflective of the attitude of the voting populace, or too - whatever.

The FACTS continue to be the FACTS; the numbers continue to be the numbers.

The assumption that Clinton supporters are "whatever, Clinton I guess" is, for the BSers, a simple-minded way of dismissing the FACT that the vast majority of Democratic voters are behind HRC 100%, and has little to do with "whatever, I guess".

How will HRC's numbers fare as time goes on? Well, time will tell. But pretending that Democratic voters will, en masse, suddenly have an epiphany and realize that Bernie is the Lord & Saviour they've all been waiting for is extremely unlikely.

But, hey, keep telling yourself that things are going to turn around any day now. Don't let the FACT that Bernie's numbers have stalled for the past month dissuade you from the idea that the Party's voters are just minutes away from realizing that the guy who can't even get within a mile of HRC in the polls will suddenly be acknowledged as the Democrats' best bet to beat the GOP in 2016.

Because that makes so much sense, ya know?

[Scootaloo]

223. It's the argument you presented

Yup, Clinton is currently in the lead. We're not arguing this. However, you seem to have this thing going on where Clinton is in the lead because Clinton is in the lead. That's just not sustainable.

Nobody's saying Sanders is the "lord and savior" (say what?) However, the reality is that at least some amount of Clinton's numbers is simply a factor of presence and familiarity. Now, this may grow into substantive support, but we'll only know after the other people running get airtime and become known to more people.

Remember, clinton's got something like 93% name recognition. Sanders started with something like 16%. O'Malley and hte others aren't even on the scale. You can't pretend that this isn't a factor.

[NealK]

226. +1

[NanceGreggs]

234. The argument I presented ...

... is that Clinton is in the lead for a reason. And if you want to believe that reason is all about name recognition, by all means do so.

Exactly when is the "people don't know Bernie" meme going to expire? And when are you going to recognize that a lot of people who "get to know Bernie" aren't buying what he's selling?

[Live and Learn]

245. Welcome back to the light. I hope you enjoy your stay. nt

[NealK]

193. K&R

[Jester Messiah]

195. Plus she's repub-lite, so what's the point? [nt]

[Walk away]

198. Good work! I have decided that I will only vote for an actual Democrat for president.

My State is traditionally Blue but I don't believe Bernie will carry it against a moderate republican like Jeb. Therefore, since my vote won't count anyway, I will only vote for Democrats.

[HERVEPA]

201. Really dumb post. (and I am a Bernie guy)

You truly are highly knowledgeable about politics.

[Thinkingabout]

204. If voters wants a republican president and thinks a republican president is going to push

programs important to Democrats, better think again. By posting like this is straight from the RW side, yes, I could see where a RWer would think these same thoughts. I vote every time, there isn't any election down to tax or proposals which are too small. Why not go and try to get the republicans to stay home and not vote, see how that works.

[Scootaloo]

208. Lower turnout than Bernie, but still enough to trounce a Republican.

Don't start trying to sell this "If you vote against MY candidate you're voting for Republicans!" garbage. It's stupid when clinton supporters do it and it's no smarter when we do it.

[doc03]

209. I guess we may as well through in the towel

heard a poll a couple hours ago that said 50% of Americans wouldn't consider voting for a socialist.

[Loki]

212. No we won't.

If it's Hillary or Bernie or Joe or Martin, we will win because of the insanity on the right. I like all of our candidates and I'm not going to participate in bashing any one of them.

[book_worm]

213. Actually I think there will be millions of women especially younger women

who will be proud to vote for the first female president.

Now I'm not for Clinton--haven't decided yet who to support--maybe Biden--but I don't buy that voter turnout will be dampened with the prospect of the first woman president.

[in_cog_ni_to]

218. Millennials don't give two hoots about the boogie man"socialist" label and are smart enough to know

the difference between that and a Democratic Socialist - and they don't care that Bernie is a Democratic Socialist! Do you honestly believe they don't know who the man is and what he represents?

And it just so happens, Millennials are a larger voting block than Baby Boomers. I highly doubt they will vote for Hillary. They'll stay home, knowing the system is completely rigged against them and the Democratic Party will be changed forever. Progressives will leave it in droves.

K&R!

[Scruffy1]

221. I'll turn out ,anyway.

But i probably won't vote for Hillary. It will be the first time in 12 presidential elections I won't vote Dem.

[IVoteDFL]

228. I think you are right

I also think it is a huge mistake to believe that Millennials will just show up for the Dem. Unenthused people don't vote, and we grew up being unenthused with Clintons and Bushes.

[doc03]

231. 50% of Americans will not even consider voting for a socialist so we

should just accept the loss I guess. If we lose it will be because of the circular firing squad in our own ranks.

[PatrickforO]

237. Well, Fearless, this turned out to be a really long thread. So I'll add to it...

Clinton is not inspiring at all. She's the same middle-of-the-road Third Way type we had in 2010 and 2014 when we got crushed at the polls. Why? Because people are tired of bullshit. They are tired of politicians who care more about being reelected than they do about upholding the interests of the people they supposedly represent.

In my state, we had some truly lackluster candidates on the Dem side; they were SO lackluster, in fact, that listening to them was like pushing your face through mush. They didn't really take any positions, didn't seem to even try to stand for anything. Just 'hey put me back in office, please.'

The problem is that I and millions of other Americans have had enough. We have high debt, our purchasing power has actually gone down, we are being nickel and dimed to death, and the centrists of both parties are moving their lips and mumbling about 'entitlements.'

Me and probably millions of others are wondering why our kids are in college debt up to their nosehairs, they are talking about raising the retirement age, and we have rationed healthcare when these big multinational corporations have hidden over $2 trillion in UNTAXED profits offshore, and their CEOs are making in the millions while laying off workers and forcing the wages and benefits of those they keep down.

Americans are suffering and it is these neoliberal centrists that are picking our pockets while at the same time trying to get us to mistrust and even hate one another.

That is why I'm for Bernie. He's the only genuine presidential candidate I've seen in my voting lifetime. He actually talks about the issues, has positions, and wants to put policies in place that will genuinely help me and millions of others.

Clinton can't hold a candle to Bernie on the issues. She's just another third way neolib centrist.

[Live and Learn]

244. +1 Everyone at work is now turning on to Bernie.

He is the easiest sell ever. All I have to do is convince people to listen to him once. And by the way, these are mainly Asians, a group Bernie is just beginning to know about Bernie.

[akbacchus_BC]

239. No, she will not lose! No matter how many here on DU says she

feels she is entitled, she is the best you all have. We are screwed too, we have Harper. However, I will take Mrs. Clinton in a heart beat. Mulcair is not ready nor is Justin Trudeau!

If it comes down to Mrs. Clinton and Trump, I hope you know whom you will vote for!

[Historic NY]

240. So the new progressives-socialists won't come out...

Okay I guess that accounts for the majority of signups here. We know Democrats will come out to vote.

[awoke_in_2003]

241. Regardless who the pick is

We had better all vote. The Supreme Court is in stake.

[grahamhgreen]

254. Plus, wrong about Wars, past, present & future.

[RandySF]

255. And women would not come out for Obama in 2008

and black voters would not show up in 2012. I hear the same version of this story every four years.

[YabaDabaNoDinoNo]

256. We will also see a decrease in democratic party membership too, many will leave the party

I know I will be done with them after many many decades in the party if HRC is the nominee.

I will no longer support those who support wall street, America can no longer afford it.

Thanks for posting truth!

[eridani]

257. I think that will be the case only if JEB is the Repub nominee

Voters under 30 have zero interest in going back to the 90s.

[Scuba]

259. If Hillary is our candidate, we will lose.

In the unlikely even that she should win the GE, we still lose.

[NCTraveler]

261. You will put forth a concerted effort to make it so.

Progressives will overcome your wishes.

[NYCButterfinger]

263. If Hillary has low turnout, then it may be the way it, is

Maybe she doesn't inspire people. If that happens and the nation elects a Republican then it gets what it deserves. Hillary Clinton needs a running mate like a Tim Kaine or a Martin Heinrich to show confidence in governing.

[Rose Siding]

265. Gore won

DU was established out of disgust that he wasn't serving as president.

[Thinkingabout]

270. Bookmarking

[bigwillq]

271. Possibly.

We shall see what happens.

[DCBob]

272. There will be massive voter turnout.

Probably the highest in our lifetime due to voter anger and fear on both sides. This benefits the Democratic nominee. Hillary will win easily.

[LanternWaste]

274. Seems useless to flame a mere allegation...

"Flame away..."

Seems useless to flame a simple allegation dramatically lacking any substantive source material; much as arguing with a bumper sticker or a fortune cookie is also bound to fail and fall on little more than adhesive or flour, sugar and vanilla.