I do not want to have to BREAK my nose in order to vote for her, but it is looking that way!

I would have a serious talk with myself if it started leaning towards trump.

That said this is the best article so far in documenting what the Clinton campaign has been up to.

So you have to own it.
Myself, I couldn't do it.
I don't want to have anything to do with it.

I could stay home.

negative partisanship is and has been ruining America for years... if you're voting out of fear or out of cynicism you're not helping America.... IMO.

Why would the party ever change?

eom

... or Sanders wasn't throwing shade against Obama with Cornell West and Bigga.

that's dishonest

... but go ahead and keep think Sanders can throw no stones.

Those who understand the context of his words know different

Enterprise doesn't just throw money away. Some return will be expected.

To paraphrase, "That money has no effect on anything, they give it from the goodness of their hearts." That's insanity, nobody believes that. There might be single instances where that is true, but on the whole the exact opposite is the truth. There's an entire industry called "lobbying" (sounds so polite) based on such allegedly insignificant sums accompanying corporate legislative proposals, nobody believes the money has no influence.

... thousand a year then that sounds like a tickle and not a bribe.

Sanders talks out the side of his mouth

What are you saying?

It doesn't sound reasonable.

Clintonites are totally cool with corruption... they have to pretend not to be on here, but if you push hard enough they admit they think she's corrupt and some even say that they like it, because they think it means she's more able to deal with corrupt DC politics... like hiring Charles Mason to catch Hannibal Lecter.

I find it more terrifying than Donald Trump.

These are people who are fine with the slaughter of over a million Arabs, in a sequence of military invasions that defy common sense.
They can't distinguish the refugees from the terrorists who act out in rage.

It's nothing to them.

Wow, that it's come to this.

Even if the huge payments for speeches was "innocent" with no quid pro quos, Clinton showed bad judgement by seeking and accepting it if she was considering a run for the WH. The Clintons already had mega millions, and didn't need that pocket change.

It shows a level of insensitivity and arrogance that is worth noting for those who really give a damn about "electability" and political judgement in the general election.

... Those of us who've kept up with Hillary or know new grand mother's see different

So now she should be given a pass because she's a grandmother?

Well, Bernie is a grandfather. Does that give him an excuse for any mistakes he may have made?

then wander off to my bunk bed and go to sleep.

Ooops! I think I ate the wrong pill.

Bernie to Sheriff Joe (the papers please sheriff).



It's so hilarious because one of Bernie's biggest lines is about ending for profit prisons.... which Sheriff Joe is a benefactor.

belongs in the Onion as satire, but The Hillary liars club is trying to pass it off complete fabrications as facts! Talk about desperation!

they want to cut it off at the quick...fast!

Every example in the link has a match for Hillary -- that Hillary is homopohobic, that Hillary stereotyped black youth as superpredators, that Hillary is responsible for the coup in Honduras, that Hillary is a neocon, that Hillary only does Wall Street's bidding. The claims against Hillary are just as exaggerated as the claims against Sanders. There's an element of truth in all the claims, but an element of distortion and exaggeration as well. That's what we call the democratic system. As Churchill said, "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others that have been tried."

It isn't about whether Hillary or Bernie is homophobic, or racist.
Wherever did that idea come from, anyway?

No. It's about whether specific policies, prescriptions, work or not.
If they work, how do they work?

Hillary did facilitate the coup in Honduras.
Hillary is in fact a neocon.
Hillary did in fact take home a shitload of money from lobbyists, as "speaking fees" --- $160+million between her and and her husband.
So let's get real.
The actual policies, for example policies having impact on the private prison industry, aren't exactly shit hot.
For example policies having impact on social welfare aka "welfare reform", aren't something she wants to talk about.

She doesn't want to talk about how she wanted to heat up the war against Syria, after she destroyed Libya.

She wants you to look at Trump and vote for her instead, as if that could save you.

No, Hilary did not facilitate the coup in Honduras. The Obama administration chose to ignore it, but there's no evidence they were involved. No, Hillary is not a neocon. Even in her comments voting for Iraq, she said that war was the last resort and ME policy has been largely hands-off. There is nothing neocon about her views. She's far more like JFK, than Dick Cheney. Yeah, she got a lot of money, but she continued in public service throughout. No, her role in the private prison industry is negligible; in fact, the private prison industry is a tiny part of the prison complex and not the biggest problem. And welfare reform was her husband's policy, forced on them by an America that was lurching to the right with its contract on america. She did not destroy Libya. The Obama administration rightly supported the Arab spring, which was the first time in recent memory that moderates and progressives rose up and discovered they had power too. Libya is in transition, and it will be a long time before we know if it's better or worse off.

But, using your nonsense, I could say that Sanders wants to destroy the 401Ks of the middle class retirees with his new taxes on Wall Street, wants to provide protection to gun companies that other companies don't have, supports anti-immigrant vigilantes, supports the military industrial complex with his advocacy for the $1 trillion boondoggle stealth bomber, has been politically corrupt by giving his family paid jobs in political campaigns, etc. Of course that's all true and all distortions at the same time, just as you did with Hillary. The difference is that I don't fall for that bullshit. You do.

The Clinton campaign presents Sanders mistakes in the worst possible light, and the Sanders campaign does the same to Clinton. That's politics. If you notice, now some Sanders supporters are claiming Clinton is a neocon, that her support for the Arab Spring was wrong, that she helped bring about the Honduran coup, and so on. This sort of nonsense is part and parcel of the game of politics. It's too bad, but both sides play the same game.

He's not perfect but he's my candidate.

How could you?
All the available evidence is to the contrary.

There are usually risks in attacking one's political opponent -- mostly that the voters see you as a dirty or dishonest campaigner, or that they see you as part of what's wrong with democracy in this country. Attacking Obama with the turban photo and other crap doomed HRC in 2008.

HRC hired the guy who ran Obama's 2008 campaign against her. He is the one who claimed with no basis that Sanders was running "a negative campaign" but that was merely the set-up for Team Clinton to unleash round after round of easily debunked crap. Most recently they tired to convince us that Jane Sanders has secretly supported Sherriff Joe Arpaio. The same guy that advised Obama not to go overtly negative on HRC is now on-board with HRC's defensive efforts against Sanders.

Unlike what Benenson found for Obama in 2008, Sanders provides little to work with in terms of legitimate attacks. Compare sanders to what Benenson targeted on Hillary: