People are still ignoring that Hillary was finally able to address a woman's right to choose after the subject didn't come up in all the previous debates. It is indicative of the most important duty a president has besides national security and, I would argue, more important than the economy. What duty is that? Whoever is President appoints lifetime Federal judges, including the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court. Unless the people here want extremists to take those positions, they should vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever that might be. Those voting in the Democratic primaries who are proclaiming that if Hillary gets the nod, they'll sit out the election or even vote for one of the two extremists running for the GOP nomination, have to be either ignorant of the stakes involved with the Federal judiciary and the interpretation of the US Constitution, or brutally stupid.
Yeah, this shows her judgement and gutsiness to take great initiative on the number one issue of our time despite overwhelming opposition within her own Democratic Party and the fearlessness to take on the entire mainstream media and the rest of the corporate establishment.
i always felt that she was at least a $2 w****.. http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/16/politics/sanders-clinton-fundraiser-dollar-bills/index.html
Sarcasm noted, if disagreed with. Do you disagree with this statement? Those voting in the Democratic primaries who are proclaiming that if Hillary gets the nod, they'll sit out the election or even vote for one of the two extremists running for the GOP nomination, have to be either ignorant of the stakes involved with the Federal judiciary and the interpretation of the US Constitution, or brutally stupid.
Oh no! My taxes went up 6% and now I can go to the doctor and university without incurring life-ending amounts of debt! WHATEVER SHALL I DO!!?!??
No - Donny just wants other people to pay for his benefits and he's too lazy to actually research feasibility.
We need a high marginal tax rate on the rich - coupled with allowing great tax write offs for investing in America. What's happening is trillions of dollars of capital flow out of this country into tax havens and foreign markets. Tighten that up and increase the margin rates and it will push countries to reinvest those record profits instead of buying of property all around the world.
One it is an easy choice for you as you seem to be pretty satisfied with Clinton, her cautious incrementalism and her hawkish foreign policy positions. As far as voting for the Republicans, I doubt there will much of that by Bernie supporters, despite it being a meme promoted by the Hillary campaign. Some younger new Bernie voters hungry for a change and honesty who got politically involved due to Bernie may not have the discipline to vote for the cynical old Hillary. For what it is worth I would urge them to take the minimum time it takes do so. After many years of DLC corporate Dem campaigns whose principle strategy is to be socially liberal and economically corporate many Americans, especailly those in the lower 1/2 just don't think see much difference between the parties. If you are really that concerned about the S.Ct you should support politicians like Bernie who will not just attract the same truncated DLC electoral coalition that produces a GOP Congress and a presidency that turns of close elections in a handful of states.
This same sentiment in 99/2000 led to Nader getting 2.8% of the vote, which ultimately cost Gore enough votes to win Florida despite the cluster it became. My gut is starting to make me feel this will happen again to Hillary if she wins the nomination and we will be looking at a Cruz White House. I can see all these vocal Bernie supporters either staying home or voting for Jill Stein out of protest.
If I were in a swing state I would vote for Hillary, but i'll vote for Stein in the general if Hillary gets the nod since Texas is a lost cause. As for the Bernie or Bust people, I think that they should swallow their pride and vote for her. But to be fair, Hillary is not making it easy. She has repeatedly implied that the young people supporting him are misinformed or are being "duped", is far too inconsistent on issues for comfort, and continues to distort Bernie's views on issues. She really isn't helping her case. If you're a candidate running for office, you have to get people to vote for you, not just fear-monger or expect people to fall in line just because you're running against a fascist or theocrat. However, there is a larger underlying issue here and that's the DLC's stupid general election strategy which just ignores half the states and makes each election dependent on just a few contests. It's a terrible strategy and Bernie was the one who brought up the fact that the Dems need a 50 state plan. People can blame Nader all they want but Gore's defeat had arguably much more to do with that strategy than anything else. It's not like Nader had the same success in 2004 when Kerry lost. The "third-way" Democratic establishment is finally rearing its ugly head in this election and people need to wake up.
Professor Jill with her zero name recognition will get her typical 1/2 or possibly percent, though the tiny Green Party views disaffected young Bernie supporters as their big chance and trolls Bernie boards. It could happen with Hillary's high negatives with independents and lack of appeal as the polls show to half of the Democrats.. The Dem establishment with its many rules and techniques e.g you had to register as a Dem in NY back in October to vote for Bernie are designed to bake the cake for Hillary or the establishment. These will be the main reson why young Bernie voters don't convert to Wall Street Dem Hillary. I have gone down and phone banked with these kids and many would never have even have gotten involved at all but for Bernie. Nevertheless given the likely Cruz or Trump , Hillary has a good chance to win an election in Ohio or Forida with no coat tails as the DLC strategy relegates us to. I think the core cynical Wal Street Dems (and especially their big funders) but not your average Dem voter would rather lose than cede power to the Political Revolution that is just beginning.
I've noted Sanders supporters including yourself have no problem though accusing Clinton supporters of being misinformed and duped. The problem though with that reasoning is that the nature of the electoral college system means that it does have to be fought out in battleground states. If you complain about money effecting the system a true 50 state battle would bring far far more money into the system as no campaign has the resources to actually campaign in all 50 states. For example why should a Democratic candidate bother spending time in a state like CT with very few electoral votes and safely in the Dem column while a state like OH has a lot of electoral votes and is a tossup? As you even note there are safe and swing states and you are saying you will make a strategic decision how you vote. At that point why wouldn't you expect the campaigns not to do the same?
