I'm not telling anyone not to vote for her. I'm not suppressing any votes. I'm not attempting to change anybody's mind. Just stating my thoughts.

And really? You think that if Sanders doesn't win, I, a socialist, am going to vote for a Republican?

Nah.

Also, not voting for a Democrat is not the same as voting for a Republican. I know you know that, and I know that, so can we stop pretending that is true? Even if it were, the few like me that will put their votes towards someone truly representative are on the order of a few percent at most--almost inconsequential in the general, particularly compared to the vast numbers that will refuse to vote entirely, something I abhor.

I assumed you would not be voting or you would vote for the other side. Like I said, choices.

other parties and write ins

but this "you.re either with us or against us" stuff actually reminds me of someone else.....

Either a Democrat or a Republican is going to win. That is the fact.

I am voting for Bernie in the primary and I will work hard to see it gets the nomination.

Republicans hate LGBT, and I am not going to do anything to enable them capturing the White House.

Of course you are free to vote how you want, or to sit home.

but i will vote my conscience, both in the primary and in the general.

for every lgbt person in the US.

believe me, the concerns are not lost on me.

if you care to, please look at my comment number 87 down thread. I explain my reasoning a little bit more.

If the Democratic nominee doesn't win, just stop and think for a minute about what happens with maybe two Scalia clones on the Supreme Court replacing two of the liberal votes.

I was responding more to the OP. I'm not certain yet how I will vote in our primary, but I know for certain that I will be voting in November of 2016 for the Democratic candidate.

It's the only outcome where the response form the "mainstream" (i.e., the right wing) of our party isn't "fuck the left!"

starting with the Cold War, deepening with white unease at Civil Rights and the War on Poverty, gaining financial and political clout through Reagan's transformation of America's economics, and then hardening and spreading far and wide through conservative talk radio demonization of "libruls." Bill Clinton was the first Dem president after Reagan, and he utterly capitulated to the anti-left, anti-liberal pressure, institutionalizing it in the DLC and a new class of "Democrats."

That is the trajectory of the rightward movement we have witnessed among former liberals. It is encouraged, rewarded, and strengthened by the oligarchy -- which Reagan's supply side economics set in motion. That is why "we" keep fearing that we must "move right" to survive. The pressures are huge.

Bernie Sanders, an exceptionally courageous, clear-thinking 73 year-old, is committed to reversing that trend. We can continue to capitulate with Clinton, put on a superficially "social justice" face while cooperating with everything the oligarchs want, or we can take a hard look at what's happened and give it a massive, resounding, "NO."

If Bernie Sanders' entirely peaceful, legitimate efforts fail, I think there will be revolution at some point in the future (because eventually people will fight back), and I think the oligarchs are quite ready for that possibility.

It's our choice. We can fight peacefully now or violently later. (Am reminded of the saying, "I'd rather have a battle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.&quot

By the way, I am not a Socialist, although I think Bernie's brand of democratic socialism would work very well to give America back to the American people so that we can pick up where we left off before Reagan got elected. I remember that America. Flawed as it was, it was a GOOD place to live. We can have it again.

There are two main reasons that most people think there are only two choices, the Republican and Democratic parties. They don't want you to think there are any other choices when there are many.

Please educate yourself about the candidates and then choose the best one. If they all cost the same would you select a car or washing machine because it was only the second worst model, or because it was good enough, or would you select the best model? Why do that with politicians when they don't cost you anything? There is only one way the best candidates win and that is to vote for them. While voting is free, please don't waste your votes they are too valuable.

YOU were able to figure out that there are third parties but nobody else could? It couldn't be because the voters just didn't want to vote for a third party could it?

Nah.

I think the voters in Vermont knew very well that there were more than two parties when the overwhelmingly voted for Bernie.

You may be thinking of the poster I was responding to that thought there were usually only two choices on the ballot when normally there are several, at least in New York there are.

Please see my note in my previous post about voter education and it's importance. I just can't stress it enough.

That the way it is. I may not like that, but it is the current reality. If you don't believe me, point to the third party candidates that have been elected President.

I don't need to "educate" myself. My choice is Bernie. I will do my best to make sure he gets the nomination.

If by some chance he doesn't, I am voting for the Democratic nominee. I'm not throwing away my vote on a write in or third party vote. Stakes are too high, I've seen the Republican debates.

You should vote as you see fit, it is your right.

The only reason third party candidates don't win is because too many people wrongly believe they can't win. The only way the best candidate wins is if you vote for them.

The truth hurts, hahaha!

Period.

If you do not vote for the Dem nominee, or write someone else's name in, the GOPer will win.

I have seen this happen in too many elections - since 1968, in fact. I want a Dem candidate to win in 2016. Period.

But please, by all means, feel good about your conscience while you watch US civil rights literally go down in flames if a GOPer wins next year.

I will work hard to get dems elected, and will work hard to get Bernie the nomination. But I will not vote for Hillary should she get the nomination.

and you do not vote for her, you had better hope that enough of us do so that she wins the GE. If not, we ALL will be well and truly screwed.

Fortunately, I have options and can easily continue residing in another country; I can also add a dual citizenship - or even change my citizenship altogether - so I won't ever again have to live under another warmongering and insane GOPer administration in the US. With these options, I may even be able to help my family members escape the most draconian effects of such a catastrophe. There is absolutely no doubt that a GOPer in the WH will be nothing less than a catastrophe.

The overwhelming majority of Americans will not have my options, however. I also sincerely hope that I never have to exercise the dual/changing citizenship options. Given my advanced age, that may well be the case.

Meanwhile, if the worst occurs, you will be able to feel righteous in your choice to have helped make the lives of all Americans unbearable by failing to vote for Hillary if she is the Dem nominee.

It's too bad that you are unable to see the forest for the trees. Bernie himself sees the forest.

that you regain your sanity.

I have no quarrel with your candidate and like him very much. I really wish that he had run for President earlier. But - again due to my advanced age - I have seen Dems shoot themselves in the foot electorally too many times just by using the same "purist" standards you (and the OP) use now.

For example, everyone here talks about how great Jimmy Carter was. I thought he was great then and proudly voted for him twice, but many self-styled "liberals" here now would never have supported him then. And many "liberals" didn't. The result: Ronald Reagan, who began the whole decline we have seen since 1981.

I am willing to support whoever is the Dem nominee. But for now, as a woman whose specialty is in public international law, although I have had several other professional incarnations (teacher, development worker, consultant, etc.) during my 50+ year working life, I support the woman candidate who has learned a lot about global affairs since her early missteps and who was responsible for the initial startup of the Iran Nuclear Deal negotiations.

2016 could be my last opportunity ever to support a woman candidate for President - one who is, in ALL respects, exceptionally qualified - and I will proudly support Hillary's candidacy until the Dem nominee is chosen. If that candidate is not Hillary, I will wholeheartedly support that person's candidacy. Winning the GE is more important than my personal concerns. Too bad that does not seem to be the case for all.

Oh, here, The Odd Couple will suffice:

and nonchalantly write it off as being "almost inconsequential in the general"?

Tell that to Al Gore, the rest of the country and Afghanistan and Iraq and now Syria and what will happen when repugs get to nominate the next SCOTUS justices.

Give us a break and think about more than yourself.

And two, if you still blame Nader for what happened, you have lost all credibility.

How about blaming the Dems who refused to speak when an election was stolen?

Oh yeah, you might have to admit they were complicit.

You cannot intimidate me into voting for a candidate.

Hi F4lconF16:

I completely agree with your perspectives on how the Florida GOP stole the 2000 election. Enough Nader bashing by "so called" Democrats. If there so "democratic", why don't they fight for a multiparty system! As a democratic socialist, I have lost a few "friends" because of my belief in voting for someone who reflects your values. As Jerry Garcia said: "Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil."

I am voting for Bernie in the Minnesota caucus March 1, 2016. If Bernie fails in his nomination for the Democratic Party, I cannot stomach voting for Hillary Clinton. I'm 66 years old and have seen the Democratic Party go from a genuine progressive party of Robert Kennedy, Shirley Chisholm and George McGovern to the center right neo-liberal, capitalism is king party of Bill Clinton and now Hillary "smoke and mirrors" Clinton. As some Jewish sage once said: "The only cause worth fighting for is a hopeless cause." A lot of people call me an impractical dreamer but at my age I have to vote my conscience. Jill Stein of the Green Party is an option...or even write in Bernie's name.

Keep the faith brother and like my rabbi once said: "We did not come out of slavery in Egypt to become slaves to despair. Our faith calls us to Tikkun Olam (Renewing the World). We may be prisoners in this world, but let us choose to be prisoners of hope."

Peace, Shalom, Salaam, Shanti in Solidarity,

Harold

Solidarity, brother

Welcome to DU!

Amen.

Have you seen what Obama and his SoS did over there? Yeah, they weren't Bush, but Jesus, they've done almost nothing useful, and a hell of a lot of harm.

Clinton is a hawk, period.

"What happened in florida" is a bunch of "moderate," "centrist," "sensible" democrats thought that Bush was a better choice than Gore.

Hopefully you can evolve and become more knowledgeable on how politics work. Participating on DU is a good start.... Good luck with your endeavors if you choose to become informed.

I know because when I talk to people about this campaign who are sick to death of the way things are in this country, who dislike all politicians, and yes, those are HUGE numbers of people, if I responded with a comment like yours, all I would be doing is confirming the cynicism that is now rampant wrt to our politics in this country.

So I listen to what they are saying, and have to agree with a lot of it. But unlike many of them, I have NOT given up on the system being turned around and made to work FOR THE PEOPLE.

And that is what I would say to this OP. I agree, it's pretty disheartening to watch this country waste its treasure, both human and financial, no matter who we put in office. Wars, Drug Wars, Military Wars, trillions are spent on War Profiteering and it's not as if any of it has worked, we are told things are WORSE, we are in MORE DANGER, see Feinstein on this, war monger that she is herself, yet doesn't see the irony of using 'terror' which if war was the answer, would be over by now.

And in the past I focused, like many of us did, on simply throwing out the Republicans, who we viewed as the problem.

NOW after years of repeating the same tired 'well, we can't change the system but we can slow it down' tactic, people are no longer willing to do that.

First, what we know now is that until WE GET THE MONEY out of politics, as Biden said, agreeing with Bernie, NOTHING else can be accomplished.

For that reason alone, I am supporting Bernie Sanders. It's my #1 issue and if I disagreed with him on everything else, his outspoken opposition to this blight on our system would get my support.

It's like opening a door, you need a key to get inside before you can start rearranging the furniture.

If he can open the door, then we can all go back to arguing about to rearrange the furniture.

But until we get that key, I agree with Biden, we can do nothing else.

And when I explain this to people who, like the OP, do not feel ANYONE represents them, they generally see the point that we 'have to start somewhere' and that Bernie is a good start, but by no means the entire solution.

This is my second 1972 and I have had enough of this shit .

I have to confess I have pretty much given up on politics. Will vote for Sanders but will not vote for Corporate person like Clinton. Will never forgive her for so many things.

Even if Sanders gets the Democratic Party nomination to be the candidate to run in 2016, we have the same type of election machinery, and the news networks and the MIC Republican Party that totally control the announcing of who wins. And the Democratic Leadership has continued to look the other way, so they are collusionary.

That is why I am too cynical to worry about this platform or that platform of this candidate or that candidate. I celebrated with a great deal of fervor the night Obama won in 2008, but within a few weeks of his election, he appointed arch economic criminal Geithner to head up the US Treasury, and then I realized the fix was in. (Same as it almost always was.)

I think he supports cannabis legalization and decriminalization for usage for everything else. That would fit with his views on prisons as well. But I'm not sure.

Not only that he is waking up the Tiger. Lots of people are waking up to join his battle. Lots of young people, who are our future.

Medical Use of Marijuana: Marijuana has medicinal properties and ought to be legalized for medicinal use.

//////////////////////////

legalizing and taxing mj for recreational use at a reasonable rate is a huge cash cow begging to be tapped and maybe the dea could spend its time on dangerous drugs like heroin,meth,& coke

But unfortunately if Bernie is out she is the only viable option. What scares the shit out of me is the lack of enthusiasm that I think will lead to low voter turnout if she is the nominee.
I know she's with me on at least a few issues that are very important to me so I won't have a problem voting for her over one of the Republicans but I think she's also a candidate who will simply perpetuate the march toward privatization of public goods and services.

I will vote for HRC without much enthusiasm if she's the nominee, and hope for the best. Maybe they can readjust HRC's image back to being a 'fighter' again, who has the experience and track record to withstand and lead through ANY attack or national crisis. I hope it works, because that's the only way I see her regaining her favorables.

If we're looking to win the WH, we're in a tough situation right now, regardless of who will be our party's nominee.

But this is my limit.

It is an incredibly unjust institution that throughout history has been profoundly undemocratic regardless of the judges on it. I much prefer to build a movement to force their hands (see gay marriage) than to worry about those on it. I get why people see it as important, but in my perspective, it simply isn't. We cannot allow their dictates to decide how we act; the rule of law cannot be supreme (heh. Get it?).

Which is how she is acting.

What a delightful reference, there.

Protestors blocking highways also are not following the law. So were those participating in sit-ins. So were those arrested in the thousands refusing to take part in the Vietnam War.

It works more than one way.

I will say it again: the rule of law cannot be supreme. Our legal and justice system is profoundly biased towards the needs of the state and the rich and powerful. It is not just in any way, and I will (and have) refused to follow it when I believed it to be wrong.

Kim Davis absolutely has the right to refuse to do that part of her job. She does not have the right to remain employed there when she does. That is an entirely different situation, which I think you would realize if you weren't trying so hard to smear me.

It can be used by the right or the left. But to not use it means never getting anything done.

Even if you only agree with 50% if her agenda it's better than the alternative who you probably agree with on 0% if the issues. We can change Presidents minds, for example, Obama just rejected KXL most likely due to activist pressure. Activists will be shunned under a Republican president.

And perhaps come general election time, someone will change my mind.

Unfortunately at this point, I feel like she will do more harm than good for me--she will let this whole mess continue while hiding and growing the worst parts. She will be the curtain in front of the wizard, would be a good way to put it.

We simply don't have time (climate change, etc.) to continue pretending this system works. Each step we take into neo-feudalism takes two steps to get back out.

Climate change, civil rights, voting rights, protecting safety nets, wall street reform, criminal justice reform, economic policy praised by Joseph Stiglitz, etc. She has released policy proposals on all of these issues.

But like Obama and his healthcare proposal, I have little hope of seeing any of it actually followed through. Less actually, with her.

Sorry, but the candidate most exemplifying why citizens united was a bad decision is not going to get anything done about campaign finance. It's a joke.

I think she really believes in and does advocate for those things. I do. But she has shown a remarkable tendency to forget all of it when it is convenient for her.

Whether its women and children rights overseas, to fighting AIDS in Africa, to standing up to the NRA, to fighting the vast rightwing conspiracy. Ultimately it's your choice, but like I said, the ONLY ones who benefit from not voting or voting 3rd party are Republicans.

On the contrary, legitimizing the system benefits the powerful far more than it helps us. But that is my opinion and my perspective, and you are entitled to yours. I don't have the time to defend that, and honestly, it is a whole other discussion.

How about the coup in Honduras that killed women and children?
How about the fighting in Libya that has killed women and children?
How about the fighting in Iraq that has killed women and children?
How about the fighting in Syria that has killed women and children?

I don't trust her stance on anything unless she was fighting for it before she decided to run for POTUS.

Go GOP go!!

On the contrary, I encourage everyone I know to vote; even if they are Republican.

Voting is a sacred part of democracy.

Voting for those who represent you is as well.

Voting regardless of intimidation to vote for a particular candidate becomes all that much more important from that perspective.

You can be part of the solution, or part of the problem.

please don't think about all this. We need a Democrat in the white house.

Joe Lieberman was 'a Democrat'. There have been plenty of corrupt Democrats, stupid Democrats, Democrats in name only.

We need 'a Democrat' who actually isn't going to compromise away our civil rights and our economic wellbeing under the guise of doing 'what works' - ie the same old same old.

The Justices Bernie might nominate are going to be a hell of a lot better for workers than those Hillary might nominate.

I pine for the days of William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall.

if he doesn't get the nomination, I will vote for whoever the Democratic Party nominates.

I will not sit at home or vote 3rd party. That's like voting republican. We've seen that movie before in Florida in 2000.

Take a look at this paragraph:

Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

(Relevant passages bolded)

He made a great post that helped others see where he was coming from.

These types of posts and responses HELP us work together when the time calls for it.

I do very much look forward to us all working together to make sure the White House stays in Democratic hands.

It is not general election time yet. I will be silenced (aka I will leave) or I will withdraw to the groups here when and if that time comes.

I agree that the primary season is the time for us to promote the candidates that we think will be the best choice in November. I look forward to us all rallying together to make sure that person defeats his or her Republican challenger.

Someone is ALWAYS ready to bust that out, as if there were no difference between a Democrat with a conscience and a Republican troll.

It's always good to remind folks that we are all working together here towards the common goal of getting Democrats elected and Republicans defeated (In addition to make sure we have the best Democratic candidates possible).

I look forward to the general election when DU can have that all in the together feeling again.

"as if there were no difference between a Democrat with a conscience and a Republican troll."

Neo-liberals always try and shut-down discussion with appeals to authority.

the tos encourages people on this website, during a general election, not to advocate for or campaign while on this site, for other candidates. And while they can encourage people to vote for Democrats all it wants to, NO ONE OWNS OUR VOTES except for us.

The administrators of this website have every right to request that we not come on here and bash Democratic candidates in the general election. But no one is trying to tell us how to vote, and they shouldn't be

this was a thoughtful, courageous and reflective post. And I applaud someone for having the guts to say it especially on a website where there are going to be attempts to browbeat, bully or intimidate them into voting for a certain candidate.

and fwiw, he is not alone in his views or intentions on election day.

I agree that the post is definitely all of the things you say. I think people should support and advocate for the Democrat of their choice throughout the primary. I look forward to us all working together to get that person elected in November.

i will be focusing on the primary. i think it will be a long and interesting primary season.

that is what the ToS rule is referring to

The poster says "as a certainty" that they will not be able to vote for Hillary in November if she ends up being the candidate.

of being reminded.

Working our tails off to get our nominee to the White House!