Senate The 2016 U.S. Presidential Election has begun

Hilary's in support of the death penalty? Yuck

 

I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, natural, wholesome things that money can buy.* But it depends right? There's nothing inherently better about an election with more candidates. It might work out that way. It might not.


*Steve Martin

 

Lord Vivec--I shouldn't have phrased it that way, and I apologize for doing that. I let my emotions get the better of me.

If Bernie loses the total delegate count, and Hillary fails to win over his supporters (at least the ones who have an open mind), then the GOP wins this fall. If the majority of Bernie's supporters decide that Hillary can never be a candidate that they can support and refuse to give her a second look, and the GOP wins, well, I have a hard time solely blaming Clinton. She needs to work to win them over, but it's difficult to make a case to someone who's already decided that you're guilty.

 

If you are a member of the Democratic party and/or prefer Democratic party ideals to those of the GOP then yes, you are. Don't see how there are any two ways about that...

Primaries are for choosing, generals are for winning.

 

That's bs, villifying people who conscientiously object to a vote or who vote a preferable third party or write-in candidate is more a part of the problem than anything. We can talk about Nader voters in Florida winning the day for Bush all day long, but insisting that people only have two choices, thereby further entrenching us in this crappy lesser-of-two-evils system is the real problem. We need viable third and fourth and etc. parties to have a real discourse here, two parties is the problem.

 

Our emotions are probably to blame for much of our arguments here.

The reason that Hillary will have a lot more difficulty this time around convincing Sanders supporters to join up is because this election we are seeing a battle between whether the Democratic party will be a leftist party or a centrist party. I think a lot of us are tired of the slow approach. I don't think I'm being unfair to her, though I can see how it comes off as that with the arguments here. I do have genuine concerns about certain things.

I can't stress how much I disagree with this idea. Registering party preference does not mean I am beholden to the party leader. Preferring Democratic ideals over Republican ones doesn't mean I'm beholden to the Democratic party. I prefer the Green party to the GOP, but that doesn't mean I'm beholden to them.

 

Then vote for a third-party and don't complain about the Democratic party if that's where you identify. But saying "I'm a Democrat, but my preferred candidate didn't win so I'm going to take my toys and go home" does nothing except risk erosion of rights for women, GLTBQ folks, and basically everyone who's not, y'know, me.

Perfect is the enemy of good and all of that....

 

Once again, this kind of thinking implies that the Democratic nominee is owed the votes of everyone who is a member of the Democratic party. It's the other way around, the nominee needs to earn the votes, not take it for granted.

 

But Democrats aren't even "good."

 

And, if Hillary wins the nomination, voting for either candidate risks erosions of rights for people affected by the criminal justice system, the poor and middle-class, people in the middle-east, etc. Perfect may be the enemy of the good, but bad is also the enemy of the good.

 

I'm okay with that, given the erosion of other rights potentially to come. That's a perfectly fine trade-off in my book for loss of abortion rights, loss of healthcare, expansion of Citizen's United, much crazier foreign policy adventures, and empowering Israel's bad behavior under Bibi. Especially since you and I apparently have differences of opinion on at least the Middle East part.

 

it's fine that you're okay with that. but it's also fine that other people aren't.

people don't have to share your priorities or opinions to be members of the democratic party or whatever

 

Absolutely, but for a member of someone who identifies with the Democratic party to essentially say the Democrat is no different than a Republican is ludicrous by any reasonable definition, especially given this GOP slate (assuming none of the actual GOP moderates make it out alive).

Sorry, but if you'd like to be that ideologically pure in the party of the large tent then you're a part of the problem, imo.

 

nobody's saying that tho

 

"And, if Hillary wins the nomination, voting for either candidate risks erosions of rights for people affected by the criminal justice system, the poor and middle-class, people in the middle-east, etc. Perfect may be the enemy of the good, but bad is also the enemy of the good."

That's saying "voting for either the Republican nominee or Hillary" will lead to those things. As if they will be equally bad. Does Dani believe that? Maybe not? But it's what she typed, unless I'm misunderstanding there...

EDIT: And other people around the interwebs have definitely said Hillary is the same as the GOP, which is... yeah...

 

equating hillary's past and her stances on those three issues to those of the republican nominee's is not saying that hillary is the equivalent of the republican nominee.

 

1. I hope so. I just don't think it will be in the next 10 years. I think Hillary is the best person for the job right now.

2. I just disagree with that. Nobody is perfect, but I don't think most politicians are corrupt.

I think this is too cynical of a view. You can have a broad base of allies without being "bought," without making policy decisions for the benefit of one group at the expense of another because they gave you more money. I'm just not that cynical.

I think Sanders (and Warren) have been too divisive, almost demonizing anyone in the financial industry. While there are crooks there, and people too motivated by personal greed, I believe they're vastly outnumbered by good, hard-working Americans who aren't the stereotypical greedy oligarchs from comic books. They do a lot of good in the country too. The President is President of all Americans.

On the issues that matter, Hillary and Bernie largely agree. They both truly want to help the poor and middle class, and both have ideas on how to do that. I could list them again. I don't see how she's giving special preference to the rich, or to Wall Street banks, in her policy proposals.

 

if hillary wins the nomination i will vote third party, which i have done in three of the last four elections. but then, i also don't identify as a democrat.

 

I'm not Dani, but I think her point there is made without both being equally bad and that's not what she was saying.

 

when Clinton wins the nomination, which third party candidate will you vote for?

 

yes

 

Socialist Party USA!

(Rogue thinks they're a bunch of old trots but I think they're cool)

 

Are they actually socialist though?

This matters to me.