And remember, there's lots of people here claiming that only Clinton can get anything through Congress.

But they do!

but are forced to take that stance as a result of

1. Buying into the "unelectability" nonsense about Sanders, and

2. More than a little ignorance (willful or otherwise) about Sanders's long and solid legislative record.

Good points!

she's going to get us the House, too? She's that awesome?

think the House is possible this time (IMHO)--too much gerrymandering but getting some in will help--then there is 2020

I think you had a sarcasm icon you forgot??

People have to vote. If the millenials and Bernsters refuse to vote all the downticket and then later midterms will screw us for 4-8 years.

Beyond that.. what can we do.

I'll realize I'm voting for a centrist, but I'll vote for her because I'm not stupid.

And by all means, turn your back on the millenials instead of giving them a reason to vote. Sweet Jesus, I know you don't like Bernie, but did you not hear the truth that Dems win when more people get out to vote? How about you quit with the jabs at groups you are going to want to vote for you.

he could win the General. There's little chance of that. The Republicans are dangerous and we can't let them ruin our country. Hillary is willing to stand up to them.

could not beat the R's and that only Hillary could.

reelection when the White vote and the Millennial vote abandoned him in 2012.

Hillary Clinton had the Black and Hispanic vote solidly on her side back then, even as Senator Obama was in full running mode. He didn't have my vote, that's for sure.

But Blacks and Hispanics didn't trust him and didn't think he'd win until President Bill Clinton's "Jesse Jackson" gaffe. That pissed off a LOT of Black voters who then rushed to support Senator Obama.

To date, three months before the first presidential elections will be held in Iowa and New Hampshire, Senator Sanders has yet to get PoC - the most reliable Democratic voters - to warm up to him.

Don't me wrong...Senator Sanders has wonderful ideas and he's correct on the vast majority of issues that matter (except guns, immigration, Gitmo, calling for a primary challenger to President Obama in 2012), but he hasn't made any friends in Congress and, as you know, without the backing of Democrats in Congress, his agenda will never come to fruition. At least, not without a LOT of compromising, which would water down his proposals and defeat the purpose of his campaign.

You're describing how won Obama the primary.

In the general election, it was voters under 35 who provided the largest number of Obama votes. Turnout shot way up in under-35 voters from 2004. Minority turnout did not change massively from 2004. It was up some.

And you started talking about how Obama won the primary, except worded it as if it was the way Obama won the general.

I think Bernie comes across too quirky for the mainstream in general. He hasn't had the time or inclination to fashion an acceptable mainstream political image.

The Poc thing is a shame. He's very much a champion for Poc and hasn't known how to get his message across.

I think Bernie comes across too quirky for the mainstream in general. He hasn't had the time or inclination to fashion an acceptable mainstream political image.

The Poc thing is a shame. He's very much a champion for Poc and hasn't known how to get his message across.

She wouldn't try to "compromise like Obama did."

Good luck, Hillary!

Sanders is the nominee. Republicans shout "Socialist!!!!" ensuring he gets no crossover votes. Democrats really don't give a shit about "Socialist!!!" so it doesn't change their votes. Also, crossover votes are less than 10% of the electorate. Offsetting the loss of that 10% is the large number amount of excited youth who do vote for him. And start continuing to vote in future elections because one party finally gives a shit about what people under 50 want.

Clinton is the nominee. Republicans shout "Socialist!!!!" ensuring she gets no crossover votes. Democrats really don't give a shit about "Socialist!!!" so it doesn't change their votes. Also, crossover votes are less than 10% of the electorate. She gets a big "meh" from younger voters and Democratic-leaning independents, reducing their turnout. Millennials also see, as GenX did, that there's no point in getting involved in politics. It's all corporatist versus corporatist, ensuring low turnout in future elections.

Now....which scenario do you think would work out better for us?

It surprises me that so many are out of touch with GenX. We know we've been screwed over repeatedly by the political process, and we are tired of it. Most of us know that we are headed into being "retired" and that many of our friends are in precarious positions.

Hillary Clinton, in my eyes, brings absolutely nothing to the table to improve the economy and will just bring 4 years of drama to the White House. I don't want any more drama. I want action, I want things to be done - and for things to be done the *DEMOCRATIC LIBERAL* way, not the bogus third way crud.

I can complain about many things that President Obama has done, but one thing he has done is not drag us into more useless wars. I can concede to adoring him for that fact alone.

Every time someone says Bernie can't win the General that's what they're buying into.

And do you really think he isn't willing to stand up to Republicans? Or that he hasn't done so already?

Hillary promises Republican Lite at best. No real support for defending and expanding Medicare, Social Security, the minimum wage, and all the other things that actually matter to most of the people in this country. Still defending her Iraq War vote. In bed with Wall Street, big Pharma, and so on.

I get seriously depressed when I think of a Clinton Presidency.

They can remain on the outside of they wish. I voted when I was young. I knew it was my adult responsibility. Maybe people who are adults only by age should stay out of it

Enjoy!

Or if you want to actually win elections, you might want to find out what they want. A bit harder than pontificating about how awful the kids are, but it does have the benefit of actually winning elections.

But I should've worded my post better.

Hope and Change is what got "the kids" excited. 2012 had a lot less Hope and Change.

I would venture to say fewer of them voted in 2012 than 2008 as 2012 was not as "exciting."

And Bernie is about as exciting as dry paint. BS people here seem to live in a bubble and not get that their feelings are not spreading much farther.

even in a Quinnipiac poll!

Credit should be given where it's due, and no one can deny that Sanders has that fire that people love seeing in candidates. But his message has gone stale, and his poll numbers reflect that, as reality begins to sink in that he's not really presidential material.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has shown that she's more than ready to take on that difficult mantle.

She's turned perceived weaknesses into strengths when this past week should have been her undoing. THIS is a sign of a strong leader. It's what I loved about Obama: his skill at political jiu-jitsu. I don't see Senator Sanders with that skill at all.

Why is their vote worth more?

We don't lose without some number of them too dumb to go and vote. The ones that don't vote, don't count, regardless of age.

Younger people who have to be "excited" have always existed. Dems have won elections in the past. They don't vote Republican either. What if it was the Rs that "excited" them?

And who says a lot of them are not "excited" by the idea of the first female POTUS? (The people you describe WOULD be that shallow).

You've spent your adult life having the political machines of the country serving you. So you don't quite understand their position.

But if you're unable to summon even that slight bit of empathy, you have to care about them more because they are willing to walk away from the election. And you are not.

Oh, wait, that's kind of a stupid position to take when those people will likely vote for the Dem candidate. But whatever makes you happy, I guess. Certainly they can't be feeling like they don't want to vote because of people with attitudes like you.

People who don't vote of any age don't count anyway.

And how do we know they will vote Democratic? What if some "exciting" Republicans comes along?

The people you refer to may not even exist.

And I don't care what "excites" them, I want the best President possible. If that happened to be the same in 2008, that's nice, but it does not require that we have a losing candidate because they will vote. Others won't.

If you were correct, McGovern would have won, since then they were even a larger body of voters.

It will look like.

They will work any better with one candidate than another.

There's only "working for" them.

Hillary Clinton won't approach them with kid gloves. She knows, from the get-go, that they hate her with a passion - as they've once again proven yesterday - but she also knows she has the backing of congressional Democrats of all flavors. In 2016, Teapublicans will lose the Senate, but we've seen what President Obama can accomplish when he stops trying to play nice with Teapublicans.

A President Hillary Clinton will NOT play nice. That's what I'm looking forward to.

Bernie has been able to work with them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128027637

(How Bernie fought for veterans, becoming a case study in successful negotiation.) And, he worked with John McCain to get the legislation through.

Z

SoS Clinton is highly respected by some establishment Republicans in the Senate, but the Senate won't be in Republican hands in 2017, so that's a non-issue.

Although I highly respect Senator Bernie Sanders who was able to work with a couple of sane Republicans in the past, that was the past. Today, the insane are running the asylum on the other side of the aisle, and short of 100% capitulation by any Democrat or, in Bernie's case, Socialist, Teapublicans in both the House and Senate will continue to obstruct everything a President Sanders administration puts forward - just as they've done with the President Obama Administration. The only reason why he got stuff done is because he got the backing of Democrats in both the House and Senate.

Hillary Clinton is not the type to let Teapublicans run her administration, as we've seen during the debate and during the 11-hour grilling. I'm not so sure about Senator Sanders.

I think we have seen that you can't work with them. They do not play nice. We need to actively work against them. I wish the Dems would stop being such wimps.

dealing with. If Wes Clark has been the Democrat nominee in 2004, instead of John Kerry, the Swift Vote Veterans would still have existed. They just would have had a different name and a different lie.

Never once buckling under pressure.

If we only elect Bernie the GOP will act nice.

they'll do less damage to the country being busy with dog and pony shows while making fools out of themselves.

In fact, writing "President Donald Trump" itself went against every ounce of my own nature.

None the less. R president and that congress would get things done alright

He will still not only have deal with Republicans but Corporate Democrats who like the status quo. Yeay Third Way!

I can't bring myself to believe she really thinks that.

it may be enough to stop THEM from "getting things done".

It would be great to hope for single-payer health care, free university education, etc, etc, but ...

continue trying to destroy any president who is not one of their own.
That's the way Neo-Cons behave. There is a high percentage of
sociopaths among their leaders. Sociopaths can't help being this
way. It's their normal behavior.

Try Googling "Sociopaths Rule Our World." There are some 300,000+
articles dealing with this subject.

like that all through the GE. If people don't trust her now, wait until the repubs get done with her. We will have total Hillary burn out by the time the election rolls around. And, those that think Trump isn't such a bad guy, will vote for him. We will have the Reagan years all over again.

Z

They called Obama every vile name in the book and constantly lied about him

They will pull this shit on Bernie as soon as he wins Iowa and New Hampshire. I have no intention of rolling over and surrendering to the GOP lie machine.

but with Hillary, it will be wall to wall scandal day after day. Both Bill and Hillary let supposed scandals hang out there for months, instead of just telling the truth. That hurts the country.

With Bernie, there isn't much scandal to promote, and he answers questions fully.

Scandal fatigue will come from the Indies, light weight dems and moderate repubs, they wanted Bernie, are left with Hillary and so they probably won't vote at all. We'll be looking at a 2010, 2014 turnout, if Hillary wins the primary.

Z

Monty Python predicted all this when they did their skit on the election returns of the Silly Party vs the Serious Party... with the occasional 3rd party upset from the Very Silly Indeed Party.

And then pick THAT person?

Sounds like a great plan.

The Webb reference almost killed me!

Yea ... those fools were foaming at the mouth. The "YOU LIE" moment comes close. The fact that that the GOP met on the night Obama took office and decided to put ideology before country also comes to mind.

Back in 2008 ... I didn't want to have Hillary fighting these idiots. I wanted a functional government. The GOP decided that they will NEVER do that.

So now ... I want Hillary to come in, and fight these crazies.

won't be subjected to the same sort of behavior. She was tough, honest, and did a good job, and I have no doubt Bernie will handle them in a similar manner.

It's all there in black and white. That is all.

President Obama has weathered all the bullshit they've thrown his way, and President Clinton 45 will weather their nonsense with panache. They're the party of wanton and childish destruction, and they'll seek to destroy any Democrat who has the audacity to take up residence in the White House, be it Clinton or be it Sanders.

Absent a functional congress, courts and the president will act alone.

To examine her every move for 4 to 8 years.

Doesn't every Dem president require a personal prosecutor to follow her about and look for an impeachable offense?

They've been doing it to Obama for the past seven years

she can handle them, at least as well as Obama did. But the situation is bad for all of us.

Elizabeth Warren is running after all?

Hillary a little more liberal on certain issues and vice versa.

She identified herself as progressive during the debates. Given that politics is an ever-changing landscape, I am pleased as punch with Hillary instead of Jeb!

She will need a vice president, and except for the fact we need them in the Senate, Bernie or Elizabeth would be great. If Bernie gets the nom,, I'd support him too.

I used to be a Hillary Hater. None of us can afford that luxury now. We need to pull together ASAP.

will be when she delivers her State of the Union address.

We have known BC was arrogant and negligent in his behavior when he was president. The email thing makes me think the same may be true for Hillary. Regardless of what turned up, she did do something that invited suspicion.

I think Sanders is humble and too squeaky clean for them to find grounds for the kinds of investigations both Clintons seem to have invited.

at the expense of working people and the middle class. We will get bipartisanship for the oligarchy and sniping for the rest of us. I think it will be so bad that a Republican will be elected in 2020.