The other side of this is one could easily argue Clinton supporters are morons. She's shown no integrity for decades, has a record of supporting disastrous bills and invasions because it was 'trendy' at the time, and is so devoid of character she'll only hold onto a belief until the polls shift. She's so bad you can even hear her 'I don't give a fuck, I just want your vote' attitude in every speech she makes. I don't think Trump would make a great president, but he's not really what you're saying anyway: http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/15/news/economy/donald-trump-wall-street/ http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/12/wall-streets-wise-men-and-women-rap-trump.html Wall Street really doesn't want him in office. They're fine with Hillary.
This just proves my point. That a lot of Sanders supporters don't care about his actual platform or the issues at hand; if they'd vote for Trump - someone who is pretty much on the complete opposite side of the ideological spectrum as Sanders - just to spite Clinton, they've just bought into the narrative the GoP has been spinning about her for the past 20 years. Which is fine, everyone's free to vote for whomever they want. Just own up to the fact that if you'll do this you're voting out of emotion and personal dislike and not reason or the candidates' platforms.
I've been witnessing the GoP shit on her for over 20 years - all the way back to Whitewater. The treatment she got during the Lewinsky scandal just solidified it's been a blatant smear campaign. There were questions on whether or not Hillary would divorce Bill either during or after her presidency, and no matter what her presumed decision the claim was that it was just a power-play: "If she divorces Bill it's just because she wants to distance herself from him so her own political aspirations aren't endangered." "If she stays with Bill it's just because she wants to continue to reap the political connections he made while President." Fucking please. She's no saint and hasn't satisfactorily addressed some of the decisions she's made, but the idea that she's nothing but a power-hungry ladder climber is absurd. So what if she made some choices with her political career in mind? That describes every career politician, ever. Even your boy Bernie has flip-flopped when it's apparently been convenient for him: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...t-checking-gun-manufacturer-liability-bernie/ I'm going to support whomever makes it out of the Democratic primarily, because the broader Democratic platform is leaps and bounds more in line with my beliefs and ideals than the GoP. But the narrative that Clinton is nothing but a power-hungry opportunist while Sanders is some saintly outsider come to fix all the ills of the Federal Government is either intellectually dishonest or laughably naive. Take your pick.
Yep, that would be it. Really though, the disgust with Hillary doesn't have so much to do with GOP propaganda as it does with what Hillary's actually done. Her record speaks for itself and has been posted a lot about earlier in this thread. I can't believe you posted one piece about gun manufacturer liability and are acting as if the flipping and pandering between Clinton/Sanders is somehow the same. That's fucking ridiculous dude. If you actually want to have that argument we can, but it's a foregone conclusion. More importantly I wasn't trying to make a case for either Trump or Clinton. I don't like either of them, I was just saying why some would prefer Trump. Clinton is a shape shifting reptile and Trump is a half man child/orangutan. Explained thoroughly here: When you say these potential ex-Sanders supporting are voting for emotional reasons and personal dislike, did you ever think that might factor into your feelings about the GOP? I ask because about an hour ago you referred to Trump as the Wall street candidate so this doesn't seem to be a deeply researched opinion. Just for fun though, I would say that IS true about Clinton. As far as Sanders fixing all the ills of our dysfunctional government; not by a fucking long shot.
And I explained why I have absolutely no respect for those reasons. Are you kidding me? My issues with the GOP have everything to do with their platform; Every one of them could be pillars of honesty and virtue and I'd still not vote for them because of the garbage positions they hold on several issues very important to me. But going from Sanders to Trump? Can you show me a single issue Sanders and Trump share a common position on that's also somehow at odds with Clinton's position on said issue?
Well yes, I can. Russia comes to mind. http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2016/02/sanders-and-trump-share-common-ground-2776306.html http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/01/what-bernie-sanders-and-donald-trump-have-in-common/422907/ Some of those aren't anti-Hillary anymore as she has flipped, or it's not a position she's against period, but yeah that phenomena exists. Why do you care so much about this anyway? What are you so upset about? Just because someone supports Sanders right now in no way means that they are obligated to share your seething hatred of all things Republican. I might also note that what Clinton claims she will do and what she will actually do aren't at all the same thing, but it's the voters choice if they want to believe that.
It's not manufactured out of thin air... she's doing a ton of shit all on her own. One of the biggest reasons she's faltering so badly right now is that she's trying to run a smear campaign against Sanders, but it's not sticking, for the most part. Every time she opens her mouth she has to shove her foot into it. "Where was he when I was fighting for health care reform in the 90's?!?" "Uhmmm... standing right behind you on the podium..." "oh." http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a42965/hillary-questions-bernies-record-on-healthcare/ Her stance on the Reagans contributions to fighting AIDS is yet another one... ALL FROM THIS WEEK ALONE. http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a42948/hillary-clinton-reagans-hiv-aids/ Or her email server fiasco and the bullshit around playing the technical illiterate who didn't understand... which is bullshit. Anyone who's ever had any kind of security clearance knows that there's no such concept of "I didn't know" or "I didn't realize"... you're toast, and liable. Or her Wall Street speeches. "I'll release it when everyone else does..." Again with the bullshit. Or her generic, "I'll tell you my stance on that once I'm in office" response... how does she even think that's a legitimate reply? The internet is her biggest downfall right now, because it is calling her on her bullshit. No sooner does she say something stupid or pandering than an army of fact-checkers look into it, and then call her out on her bullshit, and it gets broadcast for all to see... from GOP and Democrats alike. This isn't some back-room smear campaign from the GOP, this is her record being brought to light and called out publicly... and mostly from shit she herself is saying. The best thing she can do right now is to pretty well keep her mouth shut.
Which would be a death sentence in a campaign dominated by a reality tv star and a social media darling. This is a startling trend in presidential elections: social media plays a much bigger role and it doesn't seem to favor established candidates. Another interesting thought: in searching for who else would be a good candidate, there's some legitimate concern over a lack of leaders in both parties. Finally, God damn Ted Cruz is creepy. Jesus...
Apparently Bernie Sanders thinks trump needs to control his supporters. Funny, but the only people I've seen trying to disrupt rallies, charging the stage, bringing in busloads of protesters to deny free speech, fighting with police, posting pictures of themselves stealing campaign signs on social media, and outright calling for the assassination of political rivals are Bernie supporters. Seriously, go on Twitter and search Assassinate Sanders and then Assassinate Trump. Compare the difference. The more I see of Bernie supporters the more I know I don't want whoever these people are supporting as president.
Anyone who judges a candidate (or other public person, for that matter) based on the individual actions of someone who "follows" them is an idiot. There's always going to be some fuckwad/extremist/loser who does something crazy enough to get on the news or spammed across the Twitterverse, and it's nuts to think that that in any way reflects on the person they associate with.
I would agree with you if it were a handful of idiots doing this baiting and agitating, however there are thousands of them in this case and the fact that Bernie only says "Trump needs to control his supporters" tells me a great deal about his character.If the roles were reversed and Trump supporters were disrupting and shutting down rallies, attempting to attack Bernie, calling for his assassination...doing exactly what thousands of Bernie's supporters are doing...then maybe Bernie would have a case for his statement about controlling supporters. That is what reflects on Bernie, his reaction, which is to not take his own advice but rather attack the same person his supporters are attacking, in a sense condoning their actions.
Exactly this. Anyway, on to other topics. BIAS ALERT: I changed my party affiliation so that I could vote in the Democratic Primary (it's a closed state). I will be voting Sanders. Yes, I'm a conservative, but the Republican party nominees - all of them - are some version of neoconservatives and I'm tired of waiting around for conservatives to take back the party. First and foremost: this election is shaping up to be the most important since 1980. I have never seen so much anger among the electorate. They have good reason to be angry. Both Sanders and Trump are appealing to that anger, however, the way they do so is very different. Sanders will probably not be the nominee. There is a lot of material out there that will hurt him with the general electorate and a primary is overwhelmingly about putting up the best candidate to beat the other guy. Hillary, for all her foibles, has been extremely well vetted for 25 years. There are no surprises. Now as to the contention that Sanders voters will move to Trump, I find that highly unlikely. At the end of the day, you will see Sanders voters begrudgingly move towards Hillary because as between Hillary and the 4 candidates on the Republican side, she is way closer to Sanders than any of the others. There will certainly be some sour grapes voters that will go with Trump, but let's not lose sight of the fact that the only candidate with more votes than Trump is Hillary. By around 600K. You can also forget about Cruz. Yes, he's a Tea Party guy. However, let's not forget his wife was a higher up at Goldman Sachs. Let's also not forget that no one in his own party likes Cruz. Frankly, without Trump, Cruz would be gone at this point. Rubio is a dead man walking and should have bailed last week. His voters will probably go to Kasich long before they go to Cruz or Trump. Let's not forget, Cruz is NOT an 'establishment' candidate. Now here's the interesting bit: I suspect the Republican party is done. If you look at Cruz and Trump, about 70-80% of the electorate in each state is AGAINST establishment ideas. For a conservative like myself, this is good news. I would like to see a party that reflects my interests, and the Republicans have not done so since prior to 1968 (when the social wars began in earnest). At the rate things are going, I also see that the Democrats may well take back the Senate, if not the House. Ultimately, though, as I posted far back, I am sending my Amendment proposal to my House and Senate representatives. Either way, I want money out of politics as I firmly believe any change (whatever change you are in favor of) will not likely happen without us buying back our representatives.
This is what I'm finding to be the most interesting aspect so far. I think Hilarly will win, but the Republican Party seems destined to have a signficant shakeup sometime in the next few years. The conservative social values that propelled it during the Bush 2 era are out of line with the majority of Americans voters. I also think this conservatism lead to an extreme end where the Tea Party was created, and a candidate like Trump can actually win the Republican nomination. I think the Republican Party is going to have to go to the chalk board and re-think things. I think this will actually make things better for this country and hopefully they can develop a more moderate platform. Social values, especially with my generation, (I think anyway) are an important criteria and my generation is overwhelmingly liberal in those beliefs. And I hate using that word liberal, maybe there's a better word out there. If the republicans hope to appeal to Milllenials now and in the future, and some of us millienials are now 30 etc, their stance will have to change. I think conservative economic platform has a lot of appeal to my age group so they don't have to totally redraw their game plan.
I just don't understand how you can come to this conclusion when you look at the incredible success of the Republican party at the state level. As I said in a previous post, I don't know how having 34 of 50 current governors, control of both houses of congress, and majorities in 70 out of 99 state chambers can be anywhere near construed as 'done'. Unless you think the GOP is going to sustain massive losses at each of those levels (state legislatures, governorships, congress) saying they're done appears nonsensical.
I think that's what a lot of people are saying. The status quo for both parties isn't going to cut the mustard anymore. I think that establishment politics and Republican obstructionism in particular has soured the middle so badly that they'd rather vote for a Larry David impersonator or a reality TV star than deal with another second of that bullshit.
Before you posted this I forgot about the time I got most angry at the political machine. Remember the federal government shutdown of 2013? I had friends that took a 20% pay cut because republicans refused to budge. It was the first time in my life I say a legislative body effect someone directly. Their anger was split 50/50 between the republicans for not budging and president Obama for not budging. It was interesting as anger still seemed to be directed by what political party you were part of.
State politics usually lags behind federal. You have much lower turnout on midterm elections, which tends to favor Republican candidates. But here's the thing: The GOP had several rising stars of the so-called 'establishment' - Bobby Jindal, Chris Christie, Scott Walker and Marco Rubio. The 3 Governors are a distant memory (other than the one that was 'taken hostage' by Trump) and the lone remaining Governor - Kasich - can't statistically win the nomination at this point, and has to hope for a brokered convention. You also seem to be forgetting that the people who elect the state officials are largely the same folks voting in these primaries. And the establishment guys are not doing well at all. In sum, that's how I can say what I said, because the factual evidence in front of me suggests that even the very people who have elected those state officials have now decided - overwhelmingly so in some states - that they no longer want an establishment candidate. That's what the numbers look like to me.