Yes, how dare people not vote for a candidate who shares none of their fundamental positions?
OK, let’s say you are a pro-war, pro-undeclared-war, pro-assassination, pro-imperialism, pro-Obamacare, pro-choice, pro-gay, Hillary Clinton voter. And to you someone who is opposed to war, opposed to continuing a war against the express directives of Congress, or at any point was in favor of self-determination in any part of Latin America is just beyond the pale. And advocates of Medicare For All need to die so they can get off your beautifully manicured lawn.
So you will tolerate anti-war voters voting Democrat, even if it means you get a Congressional majority & have to take responsibility for passing laws (:eek:). And if they are also pro-gay and/or pro-choice, you feel entitled to their votes, if they vote at all.
But there are all these “young” progressives. As in, young enough to still have children under 25, and poor enough that their children might actually enlist to fight in a dirty, dirty war like poor people. And they’re not so fond of the American war machine, because those are their friends and neighbors, their own children, themselves getting dragged off into foreign adventures by the likes of the Bushes and Clintons. And they are probably pro-gay, and they may be pro-choice, but they are not really pro-imperialism and pro-war, and if you are, well, they think you can go vote GOP then, because the GOP purged its anti-war voters back in 2003, right? *There’s *your home, as far as they’re concerned.
And they have opinions about student debt (Who do you know who’s a student? Oh, some of your straight friends might have grandchildren, right?) and about Wall Street’s financialization of the economy (which you assume is fine and good and pays your pension). And you don’t get any of that because you are an out of touch rich old gay man.
So they look at Hillary, with her Wall Street ties, and her Walmart ties, and her private prison ties, and her chumminess with the Bushes and the Kissingers (like, literally, she spends the holidays with Henry Kissinger, he is a *close *personal friend, I am not even making this up), and to them, Hillary Clinton is not a progressive. She’s not a squishy ally. She’s the other side. She’s a part of the problems.
So, yeah, she’s pro-gay. And she has black friends, sort of. For a wealthy, conservative, White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, ruling class matron, she’s a little, ooh, “liberal” (gasp!)–but only by those standards. As far as the larger society is concerned, she’s practically a Bush.
To you, she’s an ally, like a gay-friendly Habsburg.
To the commoners, she’s another enemy, like all of your pro-war, profiteering, financialized faction. And they don’t accept that anti-war, pro-socialized-medicine populist democrats need to line up beyond a pro-war, pro-profiteering aristocrat, just because she calls herself a “Democrat.”
They are talking about a revolution, and they are looking to the Democratic Party as a vehicle. But even by the standards of old-time New Deal Democrats, Hillary Clinton is a bit–classist, untrustworthy, and even backward. She could steal that vehicle from them for the next eight years. And then what?
Yeah, I guess I will take Trump over her. Sorry.