Reading. It actually helps to understand why I support Hillary.
If you read, that first vote was in 2009, just after Obama came to power. Bernie did not vote with him to close Gitmo. Only 6 had the balls to stand with Obama. The rest were worried they’d look like weaklings. Hillary was Sec of State so her views were the President’s views. Bernie somehow glossed over that when he said Hillary didn’t share the same thoughts about closing it down. In point of fact she and Diane Fienstein co-sponsored a bill to send detainees away from Gitmo and off of American soil as early as 2007.
Your tone is not helpful to the discourse. I invite you to review the vote of 2009 for yourself.
So what if, when he doesn’t get the nomination, Bernie actually said point blank to his supporters to work and vote for Hillary, saying something like, “My vision of America’s future may not be Secretary Clinton’s, but there is a much better chance something like it will come to pass under her administration than that of Donald Trumps, and I will join with her to make that vision a reality”. What percentage of his hardcore, enthusiastic supporters would be swayed by that?
I have to think that it’s a significant number, but how significant, in volume and effect, I can’t say.
I don’t know about some, but I have held my nose and voted in some elections, just because the alternative is so much worse. I can’t think of a better reason to not let a xenophobic racist in the White House. I can’t imagine, or maybe I can imagine what type of individual he would nominate to the Supreme Court. Someone to the right of Scalia on progressive thought for sure, since progressive values don’t put change in Trump’s pockets.
I think that last claim is getting into what could be reasonably called hyperbolic scaremongering. I really don’t think Trump would put someone more right wing than Scalia on the court. But he’d definitely put someone more right wing than Hillary would, and that’s bad enough and reason enough to vote for her.
Obama and Clinton are very very similar in their ideologies. Did you think Obama was a republican when you voted for him?
Someone posted an excellent article about why Clinton was being successful where Bush failed, and part of the reasoning of the author was that Bush was harking back to continuing the policies of the Bush administration where Clinton would be continuing the policies of Obama and Clinton. I see her as akin to Obama’s vp running.
Not anymore scaremongering than Trump himself. The KKK has endorsed the guy, 20% of his followers think the Emancipation Proclamation wasn’t a good idea. An old tape of Trump back in 1996 surfaced. He said on it that if he ran for President it would probably be as a Republican because “those people are so stupid, they get everything from FOX News” and he said his numbers would be huge. The guy is such a loose cannon that anything is possible.
Plus those comments in re Fox News in 1996 (the year it was created) don’t make a lot of sense. Fox News hadn’t really caught on yet, for the first few years of its existence it wasn’t even available in most homes and had very low viewership. Rupert Murdoch adopted a strategy of paying cable providers to carry it (normally cable works the opposite way, with the cable companies paying channels $x/mo per subscriber) to increase its distribution. Fox News distribution had gotten it in enough homes by the early 2000s that it was primed for a big ratings jump, which it got during the invasion of Iraq in 2003, largely because conservative Americans were put off by the fairly anti-war analysis and interpretations of the operation by CNN and talking heads like Wolf Blitzer.
When Fox realized that was where the ratings were it really double down on its conservative talking head shows (O’Reilly Factor and Hannity & Colmes, shows which had been on the channel for years but hadn’t yet reached high levels of viewership), it totally overhauled itself to be “THE Right Wing channel” and its ratings spiked and it never looked back, I don’t think CNN has ever taken the cable news ratings crown back since the mid-2000s.
It seems to me that all these repugs are running to his defense, but the guy is outrageous in calling a lot of people dumb and various other names in his own party. if you think he’s not laughing at people you’re mistaken. He’s in this for sport as much as anything. The sentiment from Trump, oh yeah, he loves the poorly educated. Keep em stupid, then they’ll vote for him.
God help me that i was ever wrong about that Racist bastard.
David Duke is supporting him and is trying to get all his followers to canvass for Trump. If that’s not people trying to exploit idiots I don’t know what is.
When you have a “throw everything at the wall and some might stick” style, and when one of the things you throw is false, it makes everything you say less credible. Own up to bad sources and this effect is lessened or reversed. Right now, I’m not bothering with your links because I don’t trust that you’ve vetted them.
You’re being pretty ridiculous. I point out that you believed an obvious lie and so I’m a “repug” and jsgoddess is just hating on a Hillary supporter. You’re madly flailing about.
Obama’s foreign policy staff have been awful, sorry. Remember, “Shoulda had a better dad?” Helping topple Gadhafi without the consent of Congress? Blowing up stable, secular, reasonably progressive dictators & unleashing Daesh?
On economics, Obama’s team was too happy to stop with bailing out Wall Street banks, while washing their hands of the great numbers of Americans who lost their homes. I would like better, is that OK with you?
Being his VP, or his Sec’y of State, or his SecDef, or whatever, doesn’t make you a better candidate than the alternatives. She has to be better than him, not just only slightly worse.
I think it’s time for a change. Not a sex-change, but a political change. And a lot of low-information voters will agree with me, and I bet some of them will vote for Trump over another Ivy League elitist.
Bernie will already be handicapped more than helped being of Obama’s party. But at least he has a program to offer people. Hillary’s base is little old ladies who want to see Wonder Woman inaugurated before they die, and that’s the extent of what she offers over Bernie. Can you understand how offensive that is to Americans who have lost their homes?
So, yes, I want Hillary to fail. I want her to fall to Bernie now; that’s probably best. If she wins the general election, I want her to be challenged from the left in four years; that’s great. But for the sake of a long-term marriage of progressives & the Democratic Party brand, Hillary being nominated and losing big is OK too, because I can rub the faces of privileged Second Wave feminists, Yale men, and neoliberals in their abject loss to a nationalist punk amateur and their inability to win the votes of the poor with a mercenary elitist like Hillary Rodham C.
If she can win without my vote, fine, good luck to her. But for an effective national party, you need the populists. Bernie has them, and Trump may be able to con them once; Hillary, though, is just another bankster/aristocrat.