The youngsters were feelin’ the Bern, then he dropped out, so now they’re feelin’ the Johnson. Is that a surprise?
Yup. Saw it too late to edit. Should have said:
Better?
They actually are. I described the differences. If you’d like to believe your personal capital is at Obama’s level, or that your rhetoric is, I’m not going to bang my head against that wall.
I’ll check again:
Huh. You might want to check that first next time before denying it.
Touché. The weird thing is that I did a Ctrl-F on each of the three pages of the thread, and other than our rapid-fire exchange here, the only hit I got for “snowflake” was octopus’s mention. And now I try the same thing again, and still don’t get any other hits! WTF? 
That’s really weird.
Maybe you put an apostrophe in it.
Shouldn’t matter, though, should it? Anyway, I was wrong, even though I tried to exert due diligence before making that assertion. Oh well.
I still think Obama’s saying more or less the same thing. You are dismissing that as, essentially, “well, *he *can say it because he’s the man…but other Hillary supporters can’t”. Okay…I mean, I *guess *that’s an argument. No, it *is *an argument. I don’t think it’s a super duper *awesome *argument, but it is undeniably true that he’s the man and I am not. I would have thought your standard would still demand consistency regardless, but I guess not. ::shrug::
Sheesh, this guy just doesn’t know when to quit, does he. This is like our own little left-wing Doper version of the “basket of deplorables” fiasco.
Funny you should mention that, because I don’t think that was a fiasco at all. And neither, BTW, do the analysts at 538.
Funny. Plenty of folks in the media are blaming HRC’s collapse (in the polls, not the actual collapse she had on 9/11) on her “basket of deplorables” fiasco, but which analysts in particular are you referring to? The only mention of it I’ve seen over there was that she should try to avoid repeating something like that in the debate. Seems like a weird tact to take if they didn’t think it was a mistake.
They said that in their podcast. They weren’t all in agreement but at least a couple of them thought that it was a mistake for Trump to try to take advantage by using it in his ads, that in fact it might be a clever trap that Hillary had laid for him.
If you think that remark hurt her in the polls, where she has only lost a very slight amount of ground since making that comment, you must think that her 9/11 collapse and concealing her illness did not hurt her at all. And I find that rather unlikely.
Way too much feelin’ their Johnsons. They need to get some girlfriends.
Precious Little Voter Needs To Feel Inspired By Candidate
Perhaps we should give them a participation trophy if they show up and vote. 
The way I see it, younger voters tend to be idealistic, which has its benefits and its hazards. Young voters will vote for someone whom they perceive to be a ‘change’ candidate, with a fresh perspective. Hence their support for Obama and hence their support for Bernie Sanders. Clinton is not that kind of candidate and is probably the furthest thing from it. That in and of itself is not an indictment of Clinton but that is the risk we take in nominating someone like her with eyes wide open. The hope - dare I say the expectation - in nominating her was that millennials would see the upside of Clinton and the potential disaster of electing her opponent. Needless to say, there is some doubt about that. I blame atrocious news coverage for a lot of this problem though some of it goes back to the decision to nominate the ultimate establishment candidate.
It’s half youth and half snowflake.
Youth:
They don’t grasp the concept of choosing the lesser of two evils when you are going to get stuck with one or the other no matter what. There’s nothing new about that.
Snowflake:
They are used to bending over parents and school administrators to get whatever they want and are shocked and butthurt when it doesn’t happen. Start a Twitter campaign and the target doesn’t cave? You’re being “disrespected” and “not listened to.” Why bother voting, you might not win.
In their social lives, they use not showing up and lack of commitment until the last second as a form of power. In politics, all that gets you is no power.
Hi, 22-year-old here. I’m angry, and I don’t expect to reach too many millenials here.
This may be the single most meaningful election since World War II. The republican candidate is not just a little bad, but so fundamentally incapable and heinous that it’s hard to predict just how harmful he could be to this country. There’s a lot on the line. Yeah, neither politician is great. Neither caters specifically to you. Big deal. There’s a better and a worse choice, the gulf between the two is massive, and if you’re necessarily stuck with one of two evils, you’d have to be a fool not to recognize the importance of doing what you can to end up with the lesser one. I’d sooner have to take a 3-inch dildo than a 12-inch one, if that makes the comparison more obvious.
But that’s just it, though. These people have made it pretty clear what they want and don’t want, and one candidate is clearly better. It doesn’t take a whole lot of basic sense to understand that:
A) Jill and Gary stand no chance of winning
B) Between the two candidates who do stand a chance, one is clearly better
At this point, not coming out to support Clinton is somewhere between cutting off your nose to spite your face, cutting off your nose because you think your face would look better without a nose, and cutting off your nose because you’re sure your nose can grow back.
They have aims. Clinton would further those aims. What’s wrong with this picture?
That was bad and you should feel bad.
If Hillary Clinton loses the election, which she still probably won’t, one perceived “screw-up” will be having nominated her.
You said she was electable and Bernie wasn’t. I think that probably either was electable or neither was. But Bernie was probably more electable than she, in part because he hasn’t been tarred as having murdered an ambassador.
Hillary Clinton has been defamed, mocked, and demonized for decades, and she thought she was going to win? Never mind that, once she wins she thinks she can work with Republicans in Congress? She’s delusional. Even if everything people say about her is lies, even if Trump is ten times worse, the fact remains that in a brute popularity contest, her bad reputation hurts her.
She wants to say, with Joan Jett, that she doesn’t give a damn about her bad reputation. Great. That’d be great, if you were a hereditary monarch. Oh, wait, even then, no, because you’d probably be deposed, or reduced to a figurehead.
Delusional woman.
I still think she’ll win. I think she’ll be better than Pence (assuming Trump is removed in some way quickly). And I still think, and this is no contradiction, that she’ll be hit as hard by the GOP as Obama has been, and start to feel like a millstone around the Democratic Party’s neck.
See, if Trump is a disaster, that means that better than Trump doesn’t have to mean good. Cutting off your own arm is better than feeding your children to cannibalistic Canadians, but it’s still regrettable in its own way.
As a voter born in the 80s, I started this election cycle with one real desire: No more Clintons, no more Bushes. (Which also reminds me, as much as you want to make fun of the younger part of the generation, the older part vividly remembers the last 16 years.) I still don’t see how Sanders was never going to get anything through a hostile Congress but somehow Clinton was going to. Hooray four more years of grinding stagnation! That’s something the country and the planet can really afford.
I agree that most Stein supporters will in a very real way find that voting for Clinton instead of Stein is the best way to further their aims. The arguments I’ve heard about opening the way for third-party candidates are unpersuasive, in my opinion, and Stein supporters should, strategically speaking, spend the next four years organizing like hell to get Green candidates elected on a local and state level, but keep voting for Democrats whenever a Green candidate doesn’t have a chance of actually winning.
I disagree that team sport, or traitor, or any metaphor like that, is productive or wise. I disagree that having someone who continuously sneers at leftists continue to sneer at leftists is going to do any good.
What moderates and pragmatic leftists should do is this:
- Ally with the far left wherever possible.
- Respect their concerns.
- Build rapport.
- Make persuasive arguments.
- Refrain from belittling insults.
OK, so you didn’t get your wish. Now what?