in the realm of civil rights for African Americans, right before South Carolina--combined with a well-respected civil rights leader who also happens to be a longtime politician and friend of the Clintons who said, "I never saw him"--implying that Bernie didn't do what he says he did, he wasn't part of the civil rights picture at all. It's not the photo in and of itself--it's the ugly and obvious tactics that are the issue.

attempts to cast light on his integrity, more broadly, not just among African Americans.

One of Bernie's many strong points, and a virtue identified by NH voters was integrity.
The bad thing about swift boating is that even when totally de-bunked, it can leave
some with a glimmer of doubt. That's the horrible thing about it. It's like with climate
denial, it may trigger a twinge of skepticism in the susceptible.

So, this is such a heinous and despicable thing to do, it leaves me nauseous.

I believe Bernie will get the nomination, but if not, my husband I will not vote
for Hillary. This is the final straw.

Is that a valid topic for discussion?

not have the enthusiasm for him in the GE because of that kind of bullshit, and how well that works out

You think you don't need Hillary supporters if Bernie wins the nomination?

Nothing has changed. She is a war hawk. It's her supporters who have to get over many people not enjoying that trait in a would-be president. She chose it...she is responsible. Period.

I don't have to regurgitate her war record. It's shameful for a Democrat. That's all. And if Hillary supporters want to go home and curl up with a good book on election day when she is not nominated, well, sobeit...that's politics.

But to try and silence her record...not happening. It's called the "Public Realm" for a reason.

so difficult about that. Guess you forgot the Sarcasm Thingy. Will HRC people vote for Bernie, or will they blame the "terrible Sanders Supporters" and pass?

Oh, and note my sig line before you go all inferring "Hillary is terrible" on me.

It's grown up time.

won't vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination, and if she does win the nomination she will lose the GE, because she is Hillary. Those are the ones who play the blame game

And I don't see any of that there here...please stick to this thread or go join those that are doing what you think they should not be doing and give them the "what for".

believe what you want

I remember PUMA

where I have spammed anyone or is that just a genaric insult you keep around for when you are called on your crap?

That is what it was, and my wording was a sarcastic reference to what has transpired among quite a few threads

As for PUMA, I was never a PUMA, nor supported them or Hillary at the time, and they did not represent a large segment of the populous

but that was 2008, and this is 2016, and the links and posts I have seen from some have been quite bad

you were PUMA. You brought up the possibility of Sec. Clinton supporters not working for Sen. Sanders if he becomes the candidate. I wanted to point out that it is a historically possibility.

I was saying they didn't represent a large portion. Historically possible, sure, but there will always be a few in that spectrum on all sides.

The reason I brought up the possibility of Clinton supporters not working for Sanders, was because their have been posts claiming they were Sanders supporters who had no intention to support Hillary if she won the nomination. My point was that thought process is a double-edged sword, and no one wins anything in that case.

either Democratic candidate is better than anyone in the Republican roster. I can't say I've seen either side having more supporters threatening not to vote for the other. Seems about the same amount for each.

The Dems may actually get more votes that way since the loss of independents in the general is greater than the number of Hillary supporters who won't vote for the dem nominee.

I could be wrong though. I've supported Dennis Kucinich for President so and remember the shut up and get in line from all the way back in the first primary season here. It sucks, but we do what we must against the rethuglicans.

It has changed my view of the good faith of the Clinton campaign by 180 degrees.

It is a wonderfully crafted piece of ratfuckery, and was part of a well coordinated attack.

It was the work of amoral lying shitbags.

Want to ally yourself with that lot? Feel free. Not me.

The key to all this was how they contacted the University of Chicago to have the caption changed.

If we're confident and can demonstrate it most likely is Sanders in the pic, then I wonder if some people could contact the University and ask to have the caption changed back. We do have the photographer's statement.

Even more so now.

And have been since day one. There's no way I will ally myself, especially now. I was just making a point. Badly too, apparently.

It reminds me of the "Obama is a Muslim" ratfuckery, as well as the Kerry swiftboating, because people lose sight that, unusually, the truth doesn't matter anyway. We get all whipped up over ... Nothing.

There's nothing wrong with being Muslim and if it wasn't Bernie in the photo... So what? It wouldn't actually change anything. Arguing over whether a Muslim can be President, when there's no law that says she or he cannot, is better than trying to prove Obama wasn't Muslim. Same thing here, trying to prove it's Bernie in the photo takes us off the key point. But that's what they want. It's how rumors work, but we don't have to respond that way.

It's. All. Based. On. PERCEPTION, not fact.

The nasty tricks are worse than the rumor and that's definitely worth getting upset over but I am not going to argue over the validity of the photo - because that is exactly what they want us to do.

It's bait and quicksand. I kindly decline the offer.

It's not about the photo. As you note, whether there was ever a photo of Bernie engaged in activism in the 60's does not, itself, change the facts about his lifelong involvement and commitment to social progress.

The "thing about the photo" is much more revealing than the photo itself. Yes, the photo doesn't matter. But what this episode - the coordinated attack of which this was just one corn in the turd - has demonstrated is a diabolical moral degeneracy.

The "yourself" is a rhetorical "yourself", not you personally.

It's about over compensated media personalities running rampant with rumors without bothering to so much as ask the famous and respected photographer who took the pictures in question. It's about a very clearly coordinated attack by a campaign that is obviously willing to sink to any low to gain a bit more pie.

counter Hillary's bullshit, is running THE MOST NEGATIVE campaign in HISTORY!!


The Clinton Machine is a broken and wheezing behemoth...leaving a trail of filth in its death throes.

Total non-issue...