This just another "supporter" so concerned as to give such sincere advice for Clinton to quit while the quitting is good, apparently not being aware the election is NEXT YEAR post is exactly why DU sucks so much, lately.

on "better not vote for Hillary and here's why" threads here. What a waste of bandwidth.

These OPs...

One scandal after the other. Rumors and allegations every day.

In spite of Clinton's appeasement of the right wing, it never stopped.

It isn't just republicans who don't want to go back to that.

She might be able to buy the nomination but she's dead meat in the general election.

her long, less-than-stellar history. Both Hillary and Obama were corporate friendly but Obama didn't come with Hillary's baggage. That baggage hasn't gone anywhere and with this new e-mail "scandal," it just reinforces people's prejudices against her. And you're right, it's not only Republicans who will remember that history.

...so I'm guessing they saw something worthwhile.

That's the only reason she looked good on paper.

Right, let's go with that one.

you recall what happened in those states, don't you?

was the moment she lost the 2008 primary.

If she didn't sell out that day, BHO's never would have had the air to beat her ...

but Obama had no real track record,
So most of America took a chance, and voted for the guy we didn't know instead of the Hillary we DID know.

That's kind of sad when you think about it. It also makes the prospect of having her as our nominee more than just a little alarming.

..a vote AGAINST Hillary.'

I fought "Moderate Republican Policy" all my life.
Why should I vote for it now?

I voted for Barack Obama 4 times as well. I was torn in '08.

I am really looking forward to voting for Hillary Clinton.

And even then, the second time, was very reluctantly.

I guess you like Republican and media liars across the board. Congratulations.


Hope no one ever tells a lie about you as it seems you would just accept it is fact and go hide under the bed.

of the OP. It's this: IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S TRUE OR NOT, THE PERCEPTION AND SENSATIONALISM IS WHAT MATTERS. I find it ironic that I'm having to point out reality to the "reality-based" community.

I assume you think President Clinton should have resigned the moment the House passed articles of impeachment.

You are the one in a fact free zone.

The fact is that this "scandal" is hurting her candidacy. The fact is that trajectories don't lie, particularly consistent ones.

I disagree.
Economic policy that reverses the transfer of wealth from the Working Class & Poor to the BILLIONAIRES
is what matters.

they'll just let Bernie Sanders coast to the Presidency. Just look at the birther stuff with Obama or the swift-boating of John Kerry.

(and she keeps handing it to them). She can't run from the scandal-ridden history, fairly or unfairly, the media is using it to boost ratings, the Republicans will use it to whip up votes. Neither Bernie nor O'Malley have anywhere near that much ammunition to give them. I don't know enough about O'Malley but the worst thing they have on Bernie is the socialist label and that has been wholly ineffective.

and I truly believe they've reached it.

The right is ignoring Sanders because he is getting smoked by Hillary. Hard to imagine Hillary having such a lead with so much baggage.

and even that is slipping.

All the s won't help her in the general.

1: The one thing that will bring RWers to the polls is their mutual hatred of the Clintons.
2: The left wing of the Democratic Party are getting tired of having to hold their nose to vote.

Latest polling shows Hillary with over 80% support with Dems..Not sure Bernie's fans are Dems?

Yes Bernie supporters (fans according to you) are Democrats (and Independents and disappointed Republicans).

PS: Thank you Laura Miller (former Democratic Mayor of Dallas) for not letting Jerry Jones and his Dallas Cowboys franchise rape the taxpayers of this city.

Her making jokes about it just makes her seem flippant. Like she doesn't take the issue seriously.

That's the end of it.

And even if it doesn't matter to the general public l, good lord stand on your morals have it matter to you.

That's why I could never personally support someone who voted Yes on the IWR, who voted FOR the Patriot Act, who supports the TPP and the XL Pipeline, who supported NAFTA and Welfare Reform and who had to "evolve" on marriage equality.

No one is perfect, but it appeared you are willing to believe a lie.

"I believe that marriage is, not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman . . ." or any words to that effect?

and that includes Bernie Sanders. That speech of hers is a disgrace and she can't run from it.

Everyone evolved, to pretend otherwise is rediculous.

I know a lot of people who didn't have to evolve on this isse. And you're certainly free to call "bullshit" to anything but to be believable you really should have proof. Now, I proved that Hillary, had to "evolve" by providing a link. Feel free to provide some proof that some of us didn't have to evolve. I've been on this board since 2001. Feel free to link to any post of mine that proves differently or a link wherein Bernie Sanders claims marriage should be between a man and a woman. If you can't, well, then, bullshit indeed.

We have all evolved. And I'm not about to search your posts this isn't just about you.

Ever since I learned as a child that gay peole couldn't get married I was a supporter of same sex marriage.

Unless you have a problem with lgbt rights why wouldn't you?

1990?

Life did not begin in 2001.

But then again, I've always had a different perspective.

Sorry to jump in here but I am personally aware of 4 people 40+ that have always been for marriage equality. They are homosexuals, perhaps that may be where your blinders are.

No blinders.

No offense meant, in my circle we've all been very passionate about marriage rights for as long as we can remember.

Cheers!

Some of us always believed in "equal rights".

PS: in order to rediculous, you must first diculous.

It's all a decision at one point, we all made it.

Clearly some of us made it at different times, but I don't deserve "street cred" for getting there first.

Guess what no matter what candidate we elect on our side, it's a whole lot better than what the other side has to offer.

I don't look diculous or rediculous I'm stating a fact, we all were raised by someone, and someone helped us become the people we are today.

I'm gay, and I had to fight years of homophobia both external and internal in order to be comfortable with who I was... I evolved. So did you, and for that matter so did everyone else.

Must be nice.

i have lived in poverty from the get go. It's not all that nice, but I have survived.

However, when people here genuinely tell you they have always felt for marriage equality you should extend the possibility they're being genuine. People live through many different lenses. For some it's a slow burn, for others it's an explosion. I feel they're both real and both valid.

an aide remarked that the smear was a lie, Johnson said, "I don't care. I just want to see all the headlines saying, 'X denies that he f***s pigs' "!

The constant attacks on Hillary for so many made up "scandals" lead some people to blame her for all the noise about scandals (classic victim blaming). Some also buy into the notion that all that smoke must mean there really is a fire somewhere, but that just means that if the (very real) vast RW conspiracy slings enough mud, some will stick no matter whether, as you say, it is true or not.

But just because you spot a huge pile of BS, that doesn't mean there must be a bull in there somewhere.

Perception is everything. too many low info voters who are only seeing the headlines.

What kind of nonsense is thst...defeatism is not a liberal ideal.

Seems certain "supporters" are doing a lot more attacking, including such great "concern" as expressed, than much supporting!

I would vote for her of course if need be, but it's not necessary and too risky to risky to nominate her. Shitty uninspiring candidate, horrific campaign, pit bull media, and RW rage = bad outcome.
Bernie + O'Malley = blowout of whoever the GOP nominates ...

All her defenders will cry its unfair and the RW and MSM will go after whoever we nominate with equal venom. Yeah, all true. But fairness is irrelevant here, and both BS and MOM have thimble size baggage, are much more trusted, and are way better at shutting down media spin . And Bernie on any ticket free of HRC brings Obama 2008 level enthusiasm +

he has a "thimble size" war chest to match. He won't be able to deal with the GOP tsunami of cash in the GE.

With centrist pragmatics: they do not believe in DEMOCRACY they believe in MONEY

"having a thimble sized war chest". I never "claimed" anything else, other than his baggage matched his war chest.

Try winning the GE without slugging it out, toe to toe, against GOP campaign ads.

Be on the right side of history?

The continuous flow of GOP ad money.

I'll stick with Hillary, like her, I'm in it to win it.

A constant tsunami, but well worth the effort.

If so, perhaps you need to step back and think long and hard about the implications for what's left of our democracy.

ruling is in the driver's seat as far as campaign contributions are concerned. Hillary is forced to accept mountains of cash because that's what it will take to win.

Sorry, but I'm not buying that. (Literally. Or figuratively.)

That's right up there with "We had to burn the village in order to save it."

You don't need to buy reality, it's free.

So is fantasy.

Bye now

The Republicans tried this with the Benghazi thing, but they peaked way too early. They figured there was enough material they could draw it out, releasing one little daily tidbit after another. The email thing is following the same pattern, with some "new and shocking revelation" coming at us every two or three days. My hunch is the Republicans have miscalculated again by starting too early. By next October, we will be asking Trey Gowdy why he leaked classified information to Breitbart, and Clinton will be in the clear.

is her candidacy status. No one but hard right wingers were interested in the Benghazi stuff but as a candidate for her party's nomination, the email "scandal" is garnering more widespread scrutiny. Fairly or unfairly, it's hurting her candidacy.

I just don't like Hillary. I don't want her to be the nominee. She's not what this country needs at this time, imo.

So you guys should stop wasting bandwidth. We get it...

should quit wasting bandwidth. We get it...

it would affect her in the General should she become the nominee. Technically, I couldn't tell you thing one about the subject because I'm just not interested.

You're not fooling anyone.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

thinks they have any clue as to other peoples' motivations over the internet.

My interest is exactly as stated. If you want to manufacture sinister motivations that's on you.

I count that as a negative.

Harkin is the man behind factory Farming of Pigs, mono cropping of GMO corn, and containing "pig waste" in million gallon ponds,
and those were the qualities President Obama was looking for when he appointed Tom (Mr Monsanto)as the Sec. of Ag (USDA).....top dog.

If you care what you eat....Harkin is NOT your guy.

She's 20 points up in Iowa, before Tom Harkin's endorsement. The OP is about FUD affecting voters.

Hey! She even beat Bernie in the "Corn Poll" after all...

Why don't you open another thread about Hillary, Tom and Monsanto?

(Iowa is the first caucus/primary, BTW)

Because Tom Harkin, factory Pig Farming, and mono-cropping GMO crops are all part of the same Monsanto scam.

You can't talk about Tom Harkin without talking about Millions & Millions of Gallons of Pig Shit being "held" in retaining ponds.

Tom Harkin and Pig Shit are inseparably entwined.

Try to set aside that it bothers you.

The MSM *always* have a bone--especially with Democratic front-runners. Anyone who thinks the MSM or Republicans will be all sweetness and light with *any* Dem front-runner isn't dealing with reality.

The sky is *not* falling

Every time I see it, I imagine that the Q has outfitted HRC with a tactical pantsuit...

Done. Although I'd love to blame it on a typo, I have to admit to the misspelling.

She will not draw new voters. She will not draw the disgusted voter.

I don't see how she wins the general.

There is not enough there to get the turnout necessary for a Dem win. I have however heard from some of my moderate republican friends and family that they could get behind Sanders if they do not like the republican nominee. I only mention that to illustrate that even when getting crossover votes I do not think Hillary could pick up any. I do not think republican females would vote for her just because if anyone is putting eggs in that basket they can forget about it. My wife doesn't even like her, a solid Democrat.

Ain't gonna happen. She will energize the tea party to come out for whatever the R are running.

I simply don't see how she wins the general election.

Of the females in my family (13 that I communicate with), none (D or R) like HRC.

Of the males (too many to count) only one would consider her.

When it comes to friends it is pretty much the same.

My question is, how long does the DNC think we will hold our noses?

Like the BLM movement, I think many of us are ready to tear it all down.

and why is now a right-wing smear? Interesting

candidate cause the rw lies about her.

I'm saying she's radioactive at this point. It's why the DNC is courting other candidates.

active kinda sorta like, needs to be dumped, dontcha think?

who is saying it?

what that means.

That's the criteria. Everything else is conjecture.

understood what sea means?

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

all criticism of her sell out of tech workers with the H-1b visa program is racism and xenophobia

they have no case for her, only labels for anyone who doesn't support her