Why, when I was their age we had to fight just to be able to vote in the first place! I’d ask them to get off my lawn, but with the drought and everything, there isn’t much of one left!!
So the lazy and entitled generation, too self centered and disillusioned to vote, are going to be revolutionaries?
Tell me, are other generations embracing Hillary Clinton with great enthusiasm? If so, she should be murdering Trumpo in the polls. But… um, no, they are not. Sorting by age cohort, Clinton is doing much better with “Millennials” than with older voters.
So honestly, your criticism is senseless. You have single out for criticism of insufficient support for Clinton the cohort that is the most likely to vote for Clinton and not Trump.
Why aren’t you complaining about the age groups that are actually leaning Trump?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, we were all idealistic when we were young and naive…
Condescension towards the Bernie Bros and keeping minorities on the political plantation won’t hurt the Dems. Those are captive audiences.
Tell that to SlackerInc, he’s under the impression that Bernie Bros are threatening to vote 3rd party en masse. So which is it? Are they a sure thing or are they the only thing standing between us and president Trump?
Yeah, socialism, libertarianism…basically the same thing.
You completely miss the point. A bad option is better than a worse option. Just because Clinton is looking shaky doesn’t mean that Bernie (or whoever) would have been less shaky. It’s piss poor logic to suggest otherwise.
Further, anyone who won’t vote for a less worse candidate because they didn’t get their preferred candidate is a childish idiot, and deserves talking down to.
Your position might make sense if older dems put up someone who was unlikely to win the election, while millennials suggested someone more likely to win; but that isn’t the position.
The group that gets terminally triggered by a sombrero? What do you think a Trump presidency would do to their minds?
Mr and Mrs Clinton complement each other. He won an unwinnable election. She is looking ready to lose an unlosable one.
I already mostly explained this upthread, repeatedly. But let me put it another way:
Show me another demographic group who strongly supported Obama in 2012, not only by percentages but with strong turnout, and who show indications of not coming out for Hillary this time (either not voting or going third party) despite continuing to express support for Obama, and I’ll criticize them equally strongly. Fair?
Well you’re right of course, none of us can say for certain what would have happened in an alternate universe where Clinton hadn’t locked up the primary before it even started.
<sigh> I dunno, maybe. Probably. I just want Clinton supporters to show some remorse; talking down to people isn’t a great way to do that. This is like Walking Dead levels of stupidity here, where Rick puts everyone in a terrible position and then convinces everyone that he’s the only one who knows how to get them out of it. He might be right, but show some humility.
What do you mean that isn’t the position? I thought you just said we can’t know if Bernie would have been less shaky. What is it, can we not know, or do you know?
This isn’t the 2012 election, and unless I missed some fairly major events, Barack Obama is not running again.
If Trump is close to being elected, direct your vitriol at the people who are likely to vote for him.
She did what now? My impression was that Bernie did damn well for a guy as far out on the left as he is, but he lost because he’s as far out on the left as he is.
For what? Being right?
No what I said was merely because Clinton is shaky doesn’t mean Bernie would have been less shaky.
My opinion is he would have been more shaky. I’ve never heard anyone who bases their views on objective evidence suggest otherwise.
There is a rational basis for directing more vitriol at people who are sufficiently self centred to cut off their nose to spite their face (and so won’t vote for Clinton), than at those who hold political views such that they won’t vote for Clinton.
I’m not saying it’s necessarily appropriate to direct more vitriol as stated, but it is not by any means an illogical position.
Further, there is a rational argument for directing one’s vitriol in a direction where it may do some good. There is some chance that left wing snowflakes can be persuaded to hold their nose and vote Clinton. There is little chance that Trump supporters will change their minds.
No, capitalism is the revolution. They are disillusioned by government but not the market. Hardcore statist propaganda is the only thing preventing them from seeing the failures of central planning.
Libertarianism has nothing to do with it. You don’t need an ideology to notice the market works. You need an ideology to believe government works. This may be the downfall of markets, though, with the death of religion, democracy has attracted many fanatics. These are people who would in another age be whipping themselves with leather straps.
These propositions are far, far less self evident than I suspect you believe.
Or, you could just pay attention to the world around you. Quality-of-life-wise, how are countries without a functioning government doing?
You’ve never played team sports, have you? If I’m a quarterback and my left tackle decides to take a play off, I’m going to be mad at him, not at the defensive lineman from the opposing team who knocked the stuffing out of me.
Right. And you make me think of another reason for my irritation (putting it mildly). The right wingers who hate Hillary aren’t going to be the ones forwarding me complaints about the terrible, xenophobic, racist, sexist policies of the Trump Administration, and appealing for me to help them rise up in protest against said policies.
I will say, however, that at least the people I’m talking about aren’t spouting a lot of anarcho-capitalist claptrap. So it could be worse. :rolleyes:
How DARE these ungrateful whippersnappers vote for the candidate they prefer instead of the candidate we told them told to vote for!