Under President Gore, there would have been no Citizens United or Hobby Lobby decision. The Court is already stacked against us. One more right wing member, and it is stacked against basic human rights 6-3 for the next generation.

This is NOT a trivial side issue.

(except maybe Lyndon LaRouche--well, maybe even him on the theory that one of our paranoid loonies is still better than one of their paranoid loonies).

The problem isn't about whether "the left" will vote for a Corpodem. It's about whether anyone else will.

The Democratic Party has one huge problem--they have to credibly get compelling messages through to the low-information, uncommitted voters. All those people who came out in 2008 and 2012 for Obama and who are now back at work, but at jobs that pay 25% less than their old jobs. All those people who got (marginal) health insurance but not needed health care because of high deductibles and copays. All those people barely struggling by on SocSec who watched the Dems put the CPI on the table….

We need candidates who not only talk a good game, but are willing to get in there and scrap for the people they were elected to represent, not just the ones who dropped big piles of money on them.

What I'm saying is that if we lose in 2016, it won't be the Left that lost it.

And that would be a replay of 2000 and its aftermath. That would scare me precisely because I find it such a plausible possibility.

However, since you asked: if either Joe Leiberman or Zell Miller is our nominee, I'm voting Green Party.

Thankfully!

If Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller is our nominee, I'm applying for political asylum in Germany.

But I'm with you!

And I'm married to a German. I don't think I'd have a hard time, although I speak Dutch, too, so I could probably have that, too, if I wanted.

"Sonya Sotomayor clone vs. Samuel Alito clone as the next Supreme Court member." What's THAT worth to the Democratic leadership? What's THAT worth to the Democratic Party?

Comes a time when "people must do as they will."

Clarence Thomas / Joe Biden.

Yes indeed "do as you will."

but I'm hoping I won't have to do so holding my nose.

But better that than getting our nose (and our rights, what is left of them) cut off altogether by the next Clarence Thomas.

we should be programmed to do as we are told... no thanks

fight like hell in the primary.

...You should vote with your eyes wide open to the reality of what will happen is a Republican is elected.

go to any right wing site and there's more of that than in dem circles. where on earth did you get the idea that all repubs will be on board with whoever the repub candidate is?

Gerrymandering, Republican election fraud and dirty money did the rest.

Hit the nail on the head.

... a couple percent by dividing the left ... and a couple percent by breaking the government so bad that some people just give up on government completely.

Suddenly, the GOP wins when they should lose.

I am not even a Democrat. I am a proud Independent, but I don't care who you (reasonably) place in the Democratic ticket for the Presidency at this time, there is just no, NONE, no Republican out there that I am willing to risk getting the Presidency.

Explanation of (Reasonably) - Those that has an actual chance of getting the Democratic candidacy.

I don't know of any Republican I am willing to vote for at this time. I did consider Jon Huntsman at one point, but I really do not know. Even if the Republican seems reasonable, I don't think I am willing to chance it at this time, nor am I willing to make the Republicans think that they any legitimacy in regards to the actual will of the people(those that vote and those that can not).

Reasonable until they started to do ANYTHING. Cheney was running the show from behind the curtain, so we got Aschcroft as AG, Rummy as SecDef, and Rice and Wolfowitz to head up the "let's ignore AL Qaeda and let's get Saddam" team, with Cheney licking his chops at all the money he envisaged scooping up in the process. They put W out there to have a beer with the common folk and make them feel good about having lousy grammar (this must have been about the time Americans started thinking en masse that you form plurals in English with an apostrophe, and that it is correct to say "for you and I&quot . Don't misunderestimate me, it's still OK to read ecolectic books.....

No one thought there was any danger until they saw that it was Cheney pulling the strings.

Bush was just there to drink beer with truck drivers, clear away brush weed and embarrass us with foreign leaders.

is pro-Wall Street, pro-War, pro-Big Oil and pro-Security State is to repeatedly say "I hope we'll have a good candidate, but will vote for a bad one anyway."

---is to volunteer, donate your time and whatever money you can spare, knock on doors and work phone banks for them during the primaries. You can always whine and shout "corporatist (whatever that means)" afterward if you don't get your way. In the meantime, if you feel that strongly, get involved and do something. If, after the primary slugfest, the nominee is Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren (or HRC), I don't much like our chances, but I'll do whatever the hell I can to elect that nominee. I am not a part-time Democrat, nor do I like to speculate on what I think will become of the country if a Republican president nominates the next two justices to the Supreme Court.

But stating up front "Hey, Democrats - we don't really care if your policies are bankrupt and that you're taking millions in contributions from our enemies, you've got our vote no matter what!" does nothing but encourage candidates to sell out.

Besides, I don't know of anyone whose name is even under discussion at this point who matches that description.

Instead of name-calling like the schoolyard bully, go out and work your ass off for whoever you like in the primaries. I won't even call you names for it, and if your candidate wins the Democratic nomination, I'll do whatever I can to help them elected, and don't even demand reciprocation. That's the advantage of not being Catholic, I guess. I don't address anyone as "your holiness."

I frankly don't see anyone as having a lock on the nomination at this point, and for the first time, I disagree with Howard (doesn't happen much) that Hillary gets it if she wants it. I frankly still there is room for the big unknown out there in the "none-of-the-above" category. Hillary is just too obvious. I'm sure she wants to be president. I am FAR from convinced she wants to be a CANDIDATE for president. She's been there, done that, and I doubt she found it much fun. I think there is at LEAST an even chance she'll say, "I'm 68, I've accomplished a lot in my life, I do NOT need to go through this shit again," and gracefully bow out, leave some supporters frustrated, and a lot of Republicans gnashing their teeth in rage that they just spent $350 million on trashing someone who isn't running in the first place.

Republicans, including extremists like the Tea Party bunch, currently control the majority in Congress. I cringe to think what a Republican president would do, particularly with SCOTUS.

A pox on the head of anyone who is petty enough in 2016 to sit home if their candidate of choice does not win the nomination. The hell with them!!!!

This place has become as repugnant in its viciousness as Free Republic. The batshit crazy articles and general negativity are depressing. That's why I mostly stay away and only comment sporadically.

"It's not like it used to be."

If Democrats want to win the Presidency it is their responsibility to field a quality candidate, not my responsibility to surrender my vote to a horrible one.

i will write in WEBBY!!

Many did not vote for McCain or Romney because they were establishment hacks. Many will never vote for a Bush again, just like many of us will never vote for a Clinton.

Three terms in a row of a Democrat in the White House? There hasn't been that since FDR, and FDR did it without Kochs and Citizens United. Diebold will get Republicans to the polls, even if they were in New Zealand in election day and never saw an absentee ballot in their lives.

Whether they win in a landslide, or lose in one, 45-65 million people will lean Republican. Not all 45-65 million will vote for the nominee. Some will stay home, some will vote for the Constitution or Libertarian Party nominee. Did you even check out Free Republic in 2012? Their leader said not to vote for Romney under any circumstances.

They probably had about as much an impact on the national results as DU did. The world does not revolve around them--or us. One big difference is that no one is spending a quarter billion dollars to prevent Republicans from exercising their voting rights. That's an advantage we cannot claim.

Fox Noise is a far bigger problem than any blog. They get free national advertising 24/7 along with their football scores and beer ads. We have to pay for ours. The purists on both sides will use their stock labels ("liberals!" for them, "corporatists!" for us, and both are pretty tired at this point), but the brainwashing will be done in the media and the electoral fraud, and they are ahead of us in both areas. That we are competitive at all attests to the notion that not everyone is swayed by ads that appeal to their baser instincts. The fraud is our bigger enemy. It already cost us at least our Senate seat in North Carolina.

As for third parties, I don't see any of them ever having cost a Republican the presidency. There hasn't been a Republican Ralph Nader. Yet, anyway. I'd love it if Ted Cruz would do it and sabotage the Republican nominee in 2016, but it won't happen.

DU and FR represent their respective Party's base. As much as some here call Fox Tea Party, they are not. They are best described as very conservative neo-cons. They beat the drums of war constantly, and are pro-police state (NDAA, Patriot Act, etc.), something that conflicts with the Tea Party.

This is getting a bit off topic, but do a search on FR (if you can stand it) for Jeb Bush. You think we are anti-Hillary? They are all openly calling him names and saying they would never vote for him. Yes, those guys are the most extreme, but many regular Republicans don't want another Bush either, and rightfully so.

You're right about third parties though. I though Buchanan would get in the 5% range in 2000, but I was wrong.

But at the same time I won't lift a finger or donate to help that campaign. My vote alone should be enough.

In terms of giving money I choose very carefully who I donate to and do it directly to that campaign. I'm sure there will be some worthy senate candidates that need help. As for time, I'm overseas so that pretty much limits what I can do anyway.

So we're in the same boat there. I stay somewhat more involved, though when Howard left as DNC chair, my direct involvement diminished somewhat, too (he says, on his way to the White House next week ).

Just don't like her.

Recent trends suggest the DEM will win my state (CT), so she'll have to win without my vote.

I will likely vote for any other DEM candidate besides Hillary.

I don't much care for the public persona she projects, but like her plenty in person one on one. I have a hard time reconciling the two. But I totally get how Republican Senators said they could talk to her with ease, and yet trash her in public afterward. She needs a few less insider advisers from the old days, and a few more outside professionals to tell her how to be herself.

who she wants to be, and that bothers me.

She needs some coaching, and isn't getting it. She lacks Bill's born ability to instantly connect whoever he's with, no matter how many are there.

I think she knows exactly who she is and wants to be, I wouldn't worry about that. At least that's how she came across to me. She's way cool in person, but for some reason doesn't project it to a crowd. Some people manage that brilliantly on pure instinct. Bill does. Hillary does not. But when you are chatting with her from two feet away, she's cool as a cucumber. She just needs better people helping her, and Bill isn't it. You can't teach someone close to you something you are born with.

I'm sure she is cool in person.
I wouldn't care if she won the presidency. If that's what the people decide, I am cool with it. I just won't be voting for her. I'm lucky that I live in CT so I can explore other options.

Our younger daughter came up from Frankfurt for Thanksgiving, and our elder one flew down to Dallas to be with our people there. I have to run down to Spain on Friday, then over to Washington on Wednesday for a few days, then back here. The 26th, all four of us will be on the same plane from Düsseldorf to Atlanta and then on to Charleston--hasn't happened in ten years, I think!

Never a dull moment (or any other kind), as usual.

is if they abandon any semblance of decency, common sense and compassion.

We know Mitt will gladly do this, not sure about Jeb.

BTW, remember when his brother W mocked and mimicked the woman begging for her life just before he, W, happily executed her?

He is a sociopath, for real.

As for W, he graduated from the same high school I did. I landed there almost by accident as a one-year senior. He was there for all 4 years, and I don't think I'd want ANYBODY from that place to be president, with the possible exception of the inner-city ghetto guys I hung out with. They were there to show how "representative of America" the school had become (NOT), and were almost the only guys there with their heads screwed on straight. I ended up rooming with two of them for my first two years of college.

About 98% of the others were exactly as W has been described: born on third base and thought they had hit a triple.

Well rounded, there are many problems in the world, we don't need a weak one.

I hope Hillary doesn't turn out to be the 800 pound gorilla in the room who intimidates all others into stepping aside instead of entering the primaries if they are so inclined. A lively primary season (though not an ugly one) can sensitize any winner to the views of the runners-up, especially if they seem to have broad backing, and that goes for any and all who might end up with the nomination. I'm with Chairman Mao in this instance--"let a hundred schools of thought contend."

It works for both sides, of course. I think some of the more radical rightists brought Willard to make some stupid utterances he wouldn't have made if he had not had to defend himself against them in the Republican primaries in 2012.