And in a lot of threads. I'm always puzzled to see that here, somehow.

and then come here every day spouting how bad things are. I'm not willing to accept that. Perhaps they would feel better singing Kumbaya on the outside looking in, complaining.

I'll be working to try to prevent it, any way I can.

People can take on many identities on the internet, meanwhile in the real world.......

Thanks so much for posting that.

I too will be voting Democrat all the way down the line.

Clinton hasn't even declared yet and there's all this drama about what might happen if we don't line up behind her right now.

Last I heard, it's my vote and I'm going to use it or not use it as my principles direct me to.

Compare non-supporters to Republicans all you like, the facts remain:

If the DNC wants to serve the people and the principles of the party, they will keep the field as open as possible at this point in time

I, and others, are pulling for a progressive candidate, or two, or three.

HRC ain't progressive.

I'll be voting, I always vote, I won't sit this one out, but Hillary won't get my vote in the primary and she won't get it in the general.

How odd. I mentioned all sorts of people who won't be voting for Hillary Clinton if she is the candidate. As I said, most of them are Republicans. I'm not sure which category of those I mentioned you'd fit into, though. And I don't care. This thread is not about you, individually. It's about something completely different.

It's interesting, though, that you thought I was calling you out. I'm most certainly not. I don't know you. I assume you will do as you choose when November, 2016 rolls around. I assume we will all do as we choose.

I think your OP is a thinly veiled callout of DU members who don't care to see another Clinton or Bush.

Today seems to be a day for such things.

Me, in about 5 minutes I'll be taking the dog out for a walk along the cliff and then down to the beach.

I'm just here for the hilarity of the Internet discussion board and to see what my friends are doing!

It's hard to resist but it's a beautiful day and a shame not to be out in the sun.

dancing to keep their feet of the -4 degree sidewalk. Our walks are seriously abbreviated these days. I'm glad you're in a warmer place. Have fun.

We don't select candidates. We ELECT them. I'm not sure if you're aware, but there's this thing called a PRIMARY. It's where all the candidates who WANT to run for POTUS get to debate on the issues and woo voters. You want a different candidate, GOTV. Pissing and moaning on DU won't get you your perfect candidate, but GOTV will.

We do not elect the president by popular vote.

Please research how it works, the electoral college and "winner take all" primaries.

Get on that, okay?

about and they're right... get a candidate that is better than Hillary or just continue to yell in the dark when a candle is near by

We have a primary...

I'll be voting for whomever the democrat is

I never mentioned the popular vote. Matter of fact, I'm GLAD we don't elect via popular vote. There's something the Founders got right the first time.

However, you appear to be unaware of the primary system and how delegates work. Of course, it all varies state to state.

But you would rather piss and moan than actually GOTV. You want something different, DO SOMETHING. It's not like a junior Senator with very little experience ever ended up as a presidential candidate over the favored primary choice and then went on to win the Presidential election... Oh wait, that did happen. How did that happen? GOTV.

but if you want to be a part of the problem....the problem that gets more Republicans elected not less...then yes its a problem!

pathetic - why people who say b.s. like this are allowed to stay is something i dont understand.

Like you I am and have always been a "true Democrat". My opinion is, I haven't moved an inch. I am still a member of the true Democratic base. The left behind true Democratic base.

Hillary is a great supporter of womens' rights, gay rights, and other matters that are NO BRAINERS.

Any and every Democrat had damned well better be a huge supporter of these.

But when it comes to bank regulation, unions, protecting the working class from unfair global competition, etc....

Crickets.

I love ya, Autumn!

but we can't continue on this same road. Time to take a left turn. Love ya too SKP

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Saying you won't vote for the Democratic nominee in the general election is both a violation of TOS and Community Standards. Don't use DU's bandwidth to advocate against Democratic candidates when running against republicans.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Feb 22, 2015, 01:37 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: So allegiance to HRC is required to be a "good Democrat"? Not buying it. Poster didn't say he/she would vote Repub -- just wouldn't vote for HRC.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This is Democratic Underground.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry MM. Not gonna get a hide vote from me.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

... looks like the push to silence opposition to Anointed One is on.

This will be what puts the final nails into HRC's run, the absolute incredible asshattery of her most vocal and strident supporters. Truly clueless.

I prefer discussion.

Hillary fans are brutal!

"Last I heard, it's my vote and I'm going to use it or not use it as my principles direct me to."

"I'll be voting, I always vote, I won't sit this one out, but Hillary won't get my vote in the primary and she won't get it in the general."

So are you going to vote for the GOP, or waste your vote on a third party, if Hillary gets the nomination?

For the record, I expect I will oppose HRC in the primaries (assuming there's a choice), but I'll be damned if I vote against the Democratic candidate in the general election.

I don't have to justify my vote for anybody, to anybody.

If the Dems want my vote in 2015, then they'll have to earn it. I'm tired of holding my nose and voting for a half-assed candidate because they're "better than the Republicans" or, "if you don't vote for X, the Republicans win". That's the kind of attitude that lets the Democrats get away with being little better than the Republicans.

It's time we hold their asses to the fire, and refuse to support people who only spout the party line when it's time for money or votes.

I don't especially like Hillary Clinton. However, if she does become the nominee I will vote for her because I'm a "yellow dog" Democrat and I will always vote for the Democrat as against any Republican. Now that the GOP has become a collection of outright lunatics, and not merely a party whose principles I disagree with like it used to be, I will do whatever I can to keep those nutballs out of power. I agree that Clinton is altogether too cozy with Wall Street, but if a Supreme Court position opens up I would rather have her pick the next Justice, not Jeb Bush or - God help us - somebody like Huckabee or Rand Paul.

Right now, I have no idea who the candidates on my state's Democratic primary ballot will be. I expect Clinton's name to be on there, for sure, but beyond that, I have no idea at all. Our primary is late in the cycle, so some who announce won't be on it, or will have withdrawn by that time.

I have just one vote in choosing the candidate. I won't be a delegate at the National Convention, although I'll be one at the MN state convention, most likely. I'll caucus for the choice made by my precinct and district convention. I don't tilt at windmills. We'll see how that works out.

I just have a problem with people declaring that they simply won't vote for Clinton if her name appears on their General Election ballot. I fail to see any good coming from that refusal. None at all. In November, I'll vote for every Democrat on my ballot. I can't imagine doing anything else.

And Republicans are NEVER good for our country. So whoever the Dem nominee is will get my vote.

With luck, common sense will prevail. I hope it does, more than I can say. The very thought of a Republican President with a Republican Congress is very, very frightening to me, and always has been.

With my current salary, if I was a selfish idiot, you would think I would vote Republican. But giving me tax cuts is a failed economic theory that has been proven through out history. I am a union member who believes middle class economics works best. And don't even get me started on SCOTUS nominations, a Repub prez would spell DOOM.

in any high percentile group, that's for sure. My days of high earnings are over, and the Bush economy wiped out my retirement funds, so I'm going to be working until I slump over my keyboard. Not a pleasant thing to consider.

Retirement funds. I'm in my 8th year of work and have a long way to go, wouldn't want my retirement funds raided because Republicans caused another financial collapse and can't balance a budget because they under-funded America due to endless war. Tax the rich to fund America or the middle class will eventually pay a hefty price. My retirement funds already only cover half of my working salary, can't afford to lose that half.

I believe the American People will jump at the chance to elect a smart, strong & experienced Female President of the United States.

We have all seen the gridlock in Washington over the past 6 years & I believe that should Hillary run she will have the support of women regardless of party affiliation because if 2008 taught us anything it is that Americans are tired of the status quo.

Whether male or female Hillary Clinton will symbolize a change to the 'good old boys' network of corrupt politicians who have plagued Washington for far to long.

Also let's not forget that over 18 million people from all walks of life came out to caucus & vote for Hillary in the 2008 primary.

In my own family, the only woman excited about a Hillary presidency is elderly. I hope she lives to cast her vote for Hillary, assuming Hillary's the nominee, because she is quite frail and in poor health.

One woman in the family, a normally reliable Democratic voter, will absolutely not vote for Hillary because of her vote on the Iraq War. She's very adamant and stubborn about it. She grumbled about having to vote for Biden, due to the same reason, and would not have voted for a Biden/Obama ticket. Polls show that a large majority of Democrats oppose the Iraq War and believe it was an enormous mistake for our country. It would be a lot easier to get all of them to the polls to vote for someone who opposed that war from day one, like Obama. Hillary's femaleness won't overcome that disadvantage in the case of all voters.

As a feminist, I'm not at all excited about Hillary Clinton as the first woman president. Nor are my young female relatives.

When I voted for Obama, I knew that I was also voting for Michelle Obama to become the First Lady, and I was quite pleased about that. Six plus years later and I still have positive feelings about the First Lady and First Grandma and First Daughters, and it's a factor in my positive feelings toward President Obama, in spite of some policy disagreements with him. Michelle has done a great job encouraging American children to eat right and get some exercise, and it's actually shown up in improved childhood obesity stats. Good job, Michelle. And I smile when I see a pic of Sasha in a Tshirt with a big peace sign, or a pic of the First Grandma joining the family at the Christmas tree.

When I vote for Hillary, assuming she's the nominee (and I will), it will be with disgust at the idea of Bill Clinton returning to the White House as first horndog, and no joy at the thought of a couple of hedge fund sharks as first daughter and son-in-law. I'm sure the first grandbaby will be a cutie, though, so there is that.

The Clinton baggage is so heavy that I truly don't believe she can win, no matter what the polls might say today.

Returning Bill Clinton to the White House as First Spouse will not be a feminist triumph. Polls might show that young feminists are excited today to vote for Hillary, but they are too young to have lived through the Lewinsky saga. If Hillary is the nominee, the right wing will make sure the story is rehashed fully.

As a professional woman not much older than Lewinsky, Clinton's behavior was quite troubling and wrong to me at the time. I didn't believe it was worthy of impeachment, but it was sexual harassment. The power differential between Clinton and Lewinsky made that relationship all kinds of wrong, and it was incumbent on Clinton to say No, no matter if Lewinsky was 100% willing.

The best evidence that the relationship was wrong and abusive is the fact that Bill is now considered a respected former president, rolling in money and prestige, while Lewinsky has never been able to find a job or a boyfriend. The Clinton machine threw Lewinsky to the wolves. Of course, the Republican wolves have plenty to be ashamed of, too.

No, Hillary was not, and is not, responsible for Bill's behavior. But a vote for Hillary is a vote for Bill as First Gentleman. I can imagine a lot of young feminists, after a full airing of that old laundry, might feel a little bit of hesitation when it actually comes time to vote. They might decide to wait for a better candidate to come along to be the first woman president and first gentleman, since they will see themselves as having lots more elections to vote in.

Bill's horndog days are not behind him, as made clear by testimony in the ongoing Epstein billionaire underage sex slave court case brought by three victims. The depositions publicized have made clear that Bill did not have sex with underage victims, but he did party with men who were doing so, while surrounded by his own entourage of women. Who knows what might continue to drip out of that court case, just in time for the election.

As far as Republican women voting for Hillary to make history with the first woman president, I don't see it happening much at all. I sure wasn't tempted to vote for Sarah Palin to make history as the first woman vice-president. Woman vote with their ideology, for the most part.

Another issue that I'm concerned about: Low turnout elections are won by the Repubs. I can't imagine a more surefire recipe for the lowest turnout election in history than a Clinton - Bush mashup. Disgusted anti-dynasty voters will stay home in droves.

If Dems want to win, we'll need a candidate who can fire up enthusiasm and bring lots of voters to the polls. My gut is telling me that Hillary's not that candidate. If and when she becomes our nominee, I'm going to hope I'm wrong.

and I expect many republican female voters.

I agree with you that some women, even normally Republican women, will vote for Hillary to shatter that glass ceiling. Some men will vote that way, too.

Unfortunately, I can also see some people (mostly men but some women) who are normally Democratic but who are just not reconciled to a woman as Commander in Chief. We can hope that most of the sexism is on the other side, among people who wouldn't vote for a male Democrat either, so gender makes no difference. Still, I don't think we can assume that our ranks our pure.

My guess (and hope) is that, if Clinton is the nominee, the gender factor will be a net plus.

This is of course irrelevant to the OP's point that, regardless of gender, we should vote for the Democratic nominee.

There was a huge amount of bad blood between Hillary and Obama supporters in 08, but when a real live Republican candidate showed up, that scared most of the disgruntled Hillary supporters straight.

I suspect the same will happen with most of the "there's no difference" crowd this time around.

One thing that could change that would be a Nader-style spoiler candidate. But the most likely for that would be Sanders, and he's already indicated that he's not going to play that role.

There's lots that will happen between now and November, 2016. The only thing I'm certain of is that my vote will go to the Democrat on the line for President, along with every other Democrat on my ballot. My progressive congressional district in Minnesota will vote with a 60% majority, at least, in that same way. That much I know.

I make a practice of not cutting off my nose to spite my face.

* The Illinois primary is March 15, 2016. I have a lot of time to make up my mind.

I'd rather see someone who will win get my vote.

That makes absolutely zero sense. Failing to vote for the Democrat helps a Republican win.

I"m talking about the general election here, not the primaries.

I can't vote for her in the primaries because I'm a Dem Socialist, not a Democrat. But if she gets to the general, she better pray she's up against a total loon like Cruz to win. If she comes up against someone farther to the right than she is who is also triangulating and claiming to be a moderate, I'm thinking we're going to get hit with a Repub in the WH. And then we're all screwed for 4 years. (With a Repub Congress and WH, the godawful legislation rammed through will ensure a Dem wave election in either 2 or 4 years.)

Which is why I'm praying those folks who CAN vote in the Dem primaries will realize HRC isn't as beloved outside of her own boosters as they seem to think, and offer up someone who can win over indies and other left of center non-Dems who belong to other parties.

Frankly, I cannot think of a way that Hillary will not get the nomination if she enters the primaries. I don't see any challenger on the horizon who has any chance of beating her. Would I prefer a different eventual candidate? Yes. Do I think that is possible in 2016? Absolutely not. My personal preferences have literally nothing to do with the outcome.

Frankly, I'm looking toward the general election. We are not going to see a viable true progressive on the primary ballot. I think people are confused about how the voting will go in the primary. They don't like Hillary and believe that enough people agree with them to let some unnamed progressive beat her in the primaries. Based on my experience, I don't see any chance of that happening.

Elizabeth Warren is probably the name that would get the most votes, but it would be nowhere near close enough to keep Hillary from getting the nomination. If she ran in the primaries, which she won't, she might get as much as 25% of the primary vote in a couple of heavily blue states. Maybe. That's not anywhere near enough. People are overestimating how many votes would go to a progressive candidate, I"m certain.

Then there's Bernie Sanders. I seriously doubt that he will actually enter the Democratic primaries. If he does, he'll do about as well as Kucinich did in 2008, and will be eliminated in the first few primaries. The other current potential primary candidates are either Hillary supporters or not progressive enough to gain real support from that wing.

That's my analysis of the situation as it appears to be falling out. If I'm right, as I'm sure I am, Hillary will be the Democratic candidate. She is a Democrat. She's not as progressive as many would like, including myself. She is, however, a Democrat. Whoever the Democratic candidate will get my vote in the General Election. Period. There is no alternative to that that is not superbly frightening and disastrous. Anyone who believes otherwise is seriously confused, IMO.

I'll probably vote for her. The real problem is low voter turnout, because Hillary is about as motivating as cabbage soup.

Her candidacy is such a bad idea and a strategic error.

get a great Democratic turnout. Not to mention the state legislative offices up for a vote. I'll be out trying to stir up motivation for all of those reasons. The President is just one office on the 2016 ballot.

"We aren't Republicans" fails every time.

A Hillary campaign sends a message about the intent of the Democratic leadership, and that message is that the DNC/DLC will continue to mouth platitudes and continue to promote the corporate interests at the cost of American citizens.

HRC will lose for several reasons, an important one being that the number of her supporters is dropping off because of age, another being that her presence will motivate a huge turnout from the right and the anti-HRC independent voters. Whereas the only people she'll motivate is a shrinking number of aging women voters in the Democratic Party.

In order for the Democrats to make any strides in the coming election, they need to find a candidate that represents a basic change in the culture of the Democratic Party and wrangle the leadership to push for a fundamental shift from corporate interests to the public interest. This message will motivate others to work on local campaigns much more than "We aren't Republicans. Get out the vote or else".

Why is that? If you aren't going to help "find a candidate," how do you suppose one will be found? If you're not part of the "they," you have no role at all.

In the meantime, my canvassing strategy is focused on individual candidates for whatever offices are on the ballot, not the "they're not Republicans" message. I discover what the people I talk to consider to be important issues and talk about what a particular candidate will do to help. My goal is to get people into the voting booth. All Democratic candidates benefit.

My emphasis is never on the Presidential election. That's not what's important to the people I talk to. They want to know what the candidates will do that affects them directly, and it's the local candidates who affect them most. That's my starting point.

I mostly vote for the Ds, never for the Rs, and occasionally for independents.

Your strategy seems fine to me, and I support it. Your effort should have a positive impact on some local elections, if not a net positive impact. My criticism is that an HRC national race will have a greater negative effect on local elections.

Good luck, MineralMan. It's going to be a rough election.

Who were inspired by Barack Obama didn't turn out for midterms or local elections.

And they will not turn out for Mrs. Clinton.

*edit to add* Not just Mrs. Clinton, I don't think they'll turn out for anybody.

I don't have enough experience with your thinking to know whether you have any credibility, frankly. I do know a lot of millennials, though, and they don't fit neatly into any particular category.

They often feel the DNC and elections in general have little impact, if they are aware of them at all.

They see nothing in it for them.

They see old, they see stale, no new ideas, voting positively on social issues is what they see as should be the proper position to begin with, and fealty to big money over all else.

My bet is there won't be a lot of young faces at those Hillary primary rallies.

Give them Hillary as the candidate, and many of them will be less than enthusiastic about voting in the general.

Last edited Sun Feb 22, 2015, 07:16 PM - Edit history (3)

Both corporate parties, that is.

The idea that average people will do just as well with a Republican-controlled government as with a Democratic-controlled government is ludicrous. History demonstrates that quite clearly.

If you think it doesn't matter which party wins, you're not paying attention at all to the entire spectrum of issues that have national consequences.

I never claim that both parties are the same. That is a convenient strawman often used by corporate posters to divert from the *actual* main idea in a post.

In fact, I have repeatedly pointed out how the parties deliberately diverge on social issues that are important to people but which the One Percent could not care less about, in order to blackmail people into voting for the predatory economic, war, and police state agenda that the One Percent DO care about and that the parties deliberately share.

Of course, you knew that already. You might even have seen my most recent post about it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6231259
Yes, that's certainly the Lesser of Two Evils Scam that corporatists in both parties keep using on us.

Red vs. Blue = Oligarchy Theater for the masses.

Mass spying on Americans? Both parties support it.
Handing the internet to corporations? Both parties support it.
Austerity for the masses? Both parties support it.
Cutting social safety nets? Both parties support it.
Corporatists in the cabinet? Both parties support it.
Tolling our interstate highways? Both parties support it.
Corporate education policy? Both parties support it.
Bank bailouts? Both parties support it.
Ignoring the trillions stashed overseas? Both parties support it.
Trans-Pacific Job/Wage Killing Secret Agreement? Both parties support it.
TISA corporate overlord agreement? Both parties support it.
Drilling and fracking? Both parties support it.
Wars on medical marijuana instead of corrupt banks? Both parties support it.
Deregulation of the food industry? Both parties support it.
GMO's? Both parties support it.
Privatization of the TVA? Both parties support it.
Immunity for telecoms? Both parties support it.
"Looking forward" and letting war criminals off the hook? Both parties support it.
Deciding torturers are patriots? Both parties support it.
Militarized police and assaults on protesters? Both parties support it.
Indefinite detention? Both parties support it.
Drone wars and kill lists? Both parties support it.
Targeting of journalists and whistleblowers? Both parties support it.
Private prisons replacing public prisons? Both parties support it.
Unions? Both parties view them with contempt.
Trillion dollar increase in nuclear weapons. Both parties support it.
New war in Iraq. Both parties support it.
New war in Syria. Both parties support it.
Carpet bombing of captive population in Gaza. Both parties support it.
Selling off swaths of the Gulf of Mexico for drilling? Both parties support it.
Drilling along the Atlantic Coast? Both parties support it.
BUT, we are reminded by sneering corporate Democrats, Republicans will do all of this to us, too, PLUS inflict transvaginal ultrasounds!

What a vicious scam by both parties to justify relentless, predatory evil. To demand that we vote for our own sellout and exploitation and the dismantling of our democracy itself.

So...now that we've determined what my point wasn't, let's post again what I actually did write:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6261687

We live in an oligarchy, not a democracy.

Corporatists don't care which party wins, as long as the corporate agenda continues.

IMO both corporate parties want a Republican in next time. The Democratic Party is deliberately losing elections (Recall the DCCC "Accept Doom" email campaign) and deliberately alienating its base. Even the party mouthpieces are not just shoving Hillary down our throats, but being ostentatiously rude and obnoxious about it. The propaganda topic of the day everywhere is whether people will still vote for Hillary. I think they want people to abandon ship.

Why? Because six years of predatory Wall Street policies coming from a supposedly Democratic president have woken too many people in the country up to the fact that the parties are corrupt.

Once they have the Republican in office, I predict all the corporate Democrats will suddenly start pretending to oppose all these vicious corporate policies they have been shoving down our throats for eight years. The horrible policies will continue, and they will put on a good Kabuki show of being the vehement, albeit impotent, opposition party.

That way, the corporatists hope, the people will be reassured that we really still do have a democracy. We can stop all this silly talk about oligarchy and corruption. People will believe that the Democratic Party stands for their interests, and we can all go back to pretending that the only problem we have is that Republicans are in office and we need to get the corporate Democrats back in.

I don't think that's unclear at all.

Yes, it matters to *people* who wins elections. We are deliberately blackmailed and manipulated to support parties based on the the important social issues I mentioned (YOU DON'T WANT TO LOSE ABORTION RIGHTS, DO YOU?), but we are also relentlessly propagandized to hate the other team so that we will never unite with them to oppose the predatory economic, war, and police state agenda that the parties do share. So yes, the *people* are trained, and blackmailed, to consider party immensely important.

The oligarchs care only about putting into power whichever party can most easily, in the current political climate, continue implementing the predatory corporate agenda (economic, war, police state policies) that the two parties share.

The entrenchment and expansion of that predatory Bush agenda for two more terms, under a Democratic president who ran on Hope and Change, has awakened people to how corrupt our system has truly become. That both parties are working for Wall Street against our interests in these areas, whatever the other differences between the parties may be. That we have oligarchy rather than democracy. And that it is going to take more than voting for one of the corrupt parties to fix it.

That's the political climate in which decisions are being made about which party can most easily carry forward the next steps of the corporate takeover of this nation. And for the reasons I explained in my post, I think it will be very useful for the corporate elite to have Republicans back in power again, and corporate Democrats pretending to oppose them.

I think the behavior of corporate Democrats lately toward their own base suggests that I'm right. They're *trying* to suppress the 2016 Democratic vote.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see the truth.

I just posted this in another thread and I think it is relevant here.

Right now I see a series of boxes:

1 - seriously rich individuals & corporations (republicans)
2 - church families, baggers, gun nuts
3 - vast middle that doesn't know which way to go
4 - unions, labor, specific rights: women, gay, jewish, etc
5 - seriously rich individuals & investment banks (democrats)

The seriously rich individuals/corporations/banks are fighting it out. They use the components in 2 & 4 as pawns. The folks in 3 are stretched thinner and thinner.

Realize that 90% of the country falls in boxes 2-4.

It's been really frustrating to see all these lectures about voting for Hillary on DU way in advance of the election.

The reason is Hillary hasn't even announced her run for President yet. We are still in the straw-polling stage of deciding who WILL run. People are trying to declare their interest in candidates at this stage. The people who don't want Hillary to run do not want to contribute to an inflated picture of her viability.

I personally believe there will be mass apathy if Hillary does run for President, but the only reason I'm not playing the "Pledge to Vote for Hillary Now" games on DU is HILLARY ISN'T THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE YET! And I don't want her to be! At this point we are supposed to be campaigning for the people we want to win the primary! Pledging to vote for Hillary is campaigning for Hillary for the primary! Don't you see how certain parties on DU keep trying to manipulate that?

I reserve the right to maintain my threat I may join the apathetic masses in the future if Hillary gets the nomination as part of the campaigning activities prior to the Democratic Primary.

One of my key issues is control of the SCOTUS. We have seen campaign finance and the voting rights act gutted by the current SCOTUS. If Jeb or Rand Paul gets to appoint one or two SCOTUS justices, we can forget about Roe v. Wade and the rest of the voting rights act

Thanks!

Thanks for the reboot, too. I've decided I'm not going to debate or discuss with those loud (and usually obnoxious) members who are vehemently against voting for a Democratic candidate not of their choosing. You're right. There's no changing a set mind.

I share in your view that there are far more issues to vote for a Democrat like Hillary Clinton (not the least, the U.S. Supreme Court noms) instead of allowing a Republican to steal the White House.

Issues like maintaining and expanding LGBT rights (although I'm not gay), women's reproductive rights (although I'm past the age to reproduce), Voting Rights (although I'm Asian in the State of California), Civil Rights (pertinent since Republicans are trying to destroy them), expanding quality and accessible health care for all (although the PPACA is working perfectly for us), protecting Social Security (although I won't need to apply for another thirteen years), public education (although my children are college-aged and older), SNAP (although we're upper-middle class and don't need it), and comprehensive immigration reform (although I'm a U.S. citizen by birth and so are my children) - just to name a few.

I'm not so selfish that I would withhold my vote in 2016 because I don't get the candidate I prefer. I will vote for the candidate of my conscience in the primary and the candidate the majority of Americans want in the general because the world doesn't revolve around me.

Better one flawed Democrat in the White House than two perfect Liberals in the bushes.

All of the issues you brought up are valid reasons to elect Democrats, even if they're not as progressive as we'd like. I guarantee that the Republicans want to roll back all gains in every one of those issues, and they'll do just that if they get a chance.

You're correct. Republicans want to roll back everything that we've fought so hard for, and we can't let our biases stand in the way of common sense and allow them to steal the next election.

The Koch Bros understand how important the 2016 elections are. That's why they intend to spend $899 million alone. They know, just as we do, that three justices on SCOTUS are ready to retire. The Supreme Court of the U.S. is crucial to overturn everything we've gotten through.

They want to ensure we get another Roberts and Alito to replace them, as they work to replace the U.S. Constitution with a single U.S. Corporate Charter and turn the United States into a giant plantation where slave-wages will be the norm as we beg for crumbs at their posh doorsteps. This isn't hyperbole. Just look at the policies Republicans are trying to get passed now, and you can see where they want to take this country. We can't let them.

Obama ran a really religious and often anti gay campaign. He won the nomination, I voted for him. Voting for President is like ordering dinner at a banquet, limited choices that I just don't expect to be tailored to my personal tastes. A primary, which is what we get to do next, that's more ala carte dining.
I'm puzzled as to why so many seem to think the candidates should have all announced already, late May or early June is actually the more common time for it all to get rolling. Candidates announcing now are announcing earlier than usual. This goes for both Parties.

Well, I'd rather have seafood or a salad, but if I'm going to the wedding reception, I'll chose one of the available options.

You're also right about the announcements. They will come when they usually come, not now, yet.

And if my word isn't good enough for any of you, then check out what progressive Doris "Granny D" Haddock had to say on the matter over 10 years ago. . .

http://www.alternet.org/story/15789/don%27t_stand_in_the_way_of_our_joy

(snip)
There are many among us on the peace trail who will not support a candidate unless that candidate is perfect on every issue.
Politics is about winning.
For us, it is about winning to save lives and raise people up from poverty and illness and loneliness and injustice.
Those posturing on the left sometimes forget that.
Don't tell me that you can't support a particular candidate because of this or that.
This isn't about you and your precious political standards. It is about saving nature and our people.
We are coming out to win, so please don't stand in our way.
When we have reasonable people in power, let us start our arguments again, for we can not move forward unless we have a decent government underneath us and a Bill of Rights to let us speak freely.
(snip)

Also:
As our dear friend WilliamPitt said in an essay: Decisions are made by those who show up:
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/19833-william-rivers-pitt-decisions-are-made-by-those-who-show-up


Simply put, people:
If you are not at the table, you are on the menu.

It's not that I want different things. It's that voting for Democrats has a very poor record of getting me closer to those things. And the current Democratic party leadership does not show much interest in changing that.

I've voted for Democrats every election since I could vote....in 1992. I have missed one primary and one general election due to registration issues - I moved too close to the election to vote from my new address in both cases.

I've received NAFTA and other free-trade deals, tax cuts for businesses, deregulation, shredding of the safety net, massive increases in the supposedly temporary H1B visa, abortion is icky, unions are icky. There has been a constant insistence that my issues will be dealt with later. It's been 20 years, and there's halfhearted attempts to start thinking about someday addressing my issues. For example, very high tuition is bad and Democratic politicians are now willing to shake their heads about how bad it is.

Even when they do get closer (ex. the ACA, reducing interest rates on student loans), the current Democratic leadership spends years desperately apologizing for getting closer to what I want.

We have 50 years of shit to clean up. We can't get the current leadership to acknowledge that something smells, much less acknowledge the giant pile of shit. If a few more turds fall on the pile in order to get the leadership to give a damn, so be it.

We're still recovering from the GW Bush crap. We'll still be doing that in the next two terms. You want more Republicans? Really?

Do what you will.

The ones you remember that make you continue to vote for the party.

Voting for DLC-style candidates doesn't get me that. I've given them over two decades, so this isn't a pissy "I didn't get what I wanted instantly" crap.

I want change. My choices are status quo or status quo. Lecturing me about how evil the status quo is doesn't change that.

Get off the high horse and give a damn about "the kids", or enjoy what ignoring us brings.

Actually, he went a little further, saying that it might be good if Bush won because we had to hit bottom before people would wake up and fix things. We all know how well that theory worked out. Yes, we did hit bottom. But we're no closer to fixing things.

Or hold a gun to my head in the voting booth, and if you do, you best be ready to pull the trigger too.

That is what it takes for me to vote for Hillary otherwise I am voting for someone else who reflects my values and corporate dems do not reflect my values.

Other can do what they want.

where you will or will not be voting. If you're that far along in your decision, I wouldn't waste any time trying to change your mind, anyhow. Do as you will.

If the party wants to win consistently, it needs to accept that it has an obligation to actively work to increase vpter turnout and to give nonvoters a reason to start voting.

Democrats can't win if we all take your "you peasants HAVE to vote for us, and you have no right to expect anything in return" attitude.

No one OWES it to us to vote. And the more nonvoters we can turn into voters by actually supporting things THEY want, the better our odds of holding the White House and flipping Congress are.

Nobody is that social issues "don't matter". What a lot of people whose votes we could get but don't are saying s "social issues are important, but not so important that they excuse right-wing policies on economics, foreign/military policy, thedeath penalty and the role of corporations in American life". We don't want to go bacj to the Nineties, when eight years of a Democratic president generally governing as a conservative were excused by "it's enough that he's pro-choice, and think of the Court".

Besides, we all know that no Democratic president elected in 2016 will be allowed to put anyone on the Court.

We all want the Dems to win...but it's useless to win as bland centrists.

eom

Never has my vote been represented in the electoral college. Never. Not once. That can be depressing.

That being so, I am free to cast my vote in protest.

I may well hold my nose and vote for her if I must but only because of the SCOTUS. She will sell off what little is left of the Democratic party to her owners at Goldman and the MIC because that is what they want. If the polling indicates one candidate or the other is comfortably ahead, I will under no circumstances vote for HRC. i will vote for every other Democrat on the ballot but I will vote Green for president.

Why? This is why:





The only difference in economic policy between HRC and any puke is that Hillary will boil us frogs a little more slowly, but boil us she certainly will. She will serve her corporate masters without any second thoughts for the well being of the little people (a/k/a us).

Some are pretenders and will vote for her and not tell anyone and others are pretenders and never planned to vote for her but say they will. I think it is obvious by now.