What Will Happen on DU if Hillary Cllinton Wins the Primary Race

[MineralMan]

Last edited Mon May 4, 2015, 03:09 PM - Edit history (1)

and when Bernie Sanders endorses her? And he will do that if she gets the nomination, I guarantee. So will Elizabeth Warren, who is no longer mentioned much here these days. So will Al Franken and every other progressive Democrat in Congress. The endorsements will be solid and strong, and will be unequivocal.

Odds are pretty strong for Clinton to be the nominee. Sanders will endorse her strongly if that happens.

How will those who are all in for Senator Sanders react to that endorsement? That will be a very interesting thing to watch, I believe.

[HERVEPA]

1. They'll be disappointed, will shut up, and the huge majority of them will vote for Clinton

[MineralMan]

4. I hope you're right.

Truly I do.

[randys1]

58. me 2

[angrychair]

7. As a Bernie supporter

I am confident we will all vote for HRC. Why would we not? We are all Democrats. What are you implying?

[MineralMan]

12. I'm not implying anything. I'm asking a question.

There is a difference, and it involves more than a question mark.

[angrychair]

123. To be clear

Democrats vote for Democrats. To do otherwise gets you Walker or Jeb. Any Dem is better, on any day, than a rethug. To those that say "it should be about the best person for the job" I say this:
A Democrat is always the best person for the job. It is not an opinion, that is a historical fact, by any standard of evaluation.
I will work as hard as I can to get Bernie through the primary. If not, than I, as well as any other Democrat, should work as hard as they can to get get that primary winner elected president. That is all that matters.

[brooklynite]

101. So, you haven't seen the "I'll never vote for Clinton" posts?

They've been here for months.

Take a look at #99 as an example.

[rock]

108. As I've made these points before. I'm glad to make them again

1) The number of posters that take that view appear to be at most several dozen (anecdotal - they could be several hundred);
2) I have nothing to go on that convinces me they are Democrats (in fact, I strongly suspect they are mostly trolls);
3) I strongly support their having that choice.

[Agschmid]

147. Waffles.

[Doctor_J]

45. Yep. Contrast with the PUMAs in 2008

I assume most of them voted for the president, but the screaming was deafening.

Let's be clear: Electing Clinton as president will not do nearly as much for the country and its people than would electing Sanders. But it's better than any of the Republicans

[Jim Lane]

134. I agree except for the "shut up" part

On into the general election campaign there'll be occasional posts about that incident in the caucuses in the state of ____ when the caucus chair, an ardent Hillary booster, egregiously violated the rules. After the debate in which Clinton expresses concern about income inequality but refuses to denounce the banksters as criminals, there'll be some posts about how much more persuasively O'Malley or Sanders would have handled the question. And so on.

On DU, "shut up" is just too much to expect.

If Clinton does win the nomination, most of us who would prefer a different nominee will nevertheless be resigned to voting for her (however grumpily) even before the convention ends -- probably well before that, given that nominations are no longer decided at the conventions. Even those who don't feel that way will follow the campaign and thus be constantly reminded how bad the Republican is. As a result, of the few who are "won't vote for Clinton" holdouts as of early September, quite a few will relent by the end of October, or, at the latest, when they walk into the booth and realize that four years with THAT guy as President is just too awful to contemplate. (Sorry, Carly, I write "guy" because you ain't goin' nowhere.)

If the Democratic nominee wins the election, then, regardless of who it is, DU will immediately set to work second-guessing his or her Cabinet picks. We're just not a "shut up" type of crowd.

[still_one]

152. Without a doubt

[get the red out]

2. I have a feeling that

[Thinkingabout]

3. It will be time to get behind the DNC candidate and go for a win in the general election.

This is one of DU purposes is to elect Democrats.

[MineralMan]

9. I think it's likely that we'll be finding out.

People seem to be taking strong positions with little room to fall back from them. A few have openly declared that they will not vote for Hillary Clinton if she is the nominee. Personally, I'm going to be caucusing for Senator Sanders here in Minnesota when we have our caucuses on March 1, which coincides with Super Tuesday. I'll be supporting the nominee for he general election enthusiastically, though, whoever it is. That's why I'm not spending any time on DU trying to detract from any primary candidate. Democratic primaries should be a positive competition, not a barroom brawl, in my opinion. There's too much to lose. Constantly attacking any Democratic candidate is a losing proposition, it seems to me.

One of the candidates will be the Democratic nominee. Senator Sanders knows that, which is why he has pledged to not run any negative ads. Hillary Clinton has openly welcomed him into the race, as well. Democrats should conduct themselves reasonably during primary campaigns. Let the Republicans fight it out among themselves. We should not be doing that, I think.

[cali]

74. you are showing your lack of knowledge about DU in primary season

You should have seen 2004 and 2008.

[MineralMan]

92. Since I wasn't here at that time,

and haven't delved into the archives, you may be right. This, however is not 2004 or 2008. It is approaching 2016. See, I don't know what people here were writing in 2004 and 2008. I joined DU after that, as anyone can see in my profile. I'm here now, though, and have been here for seven years.

I'm talking about DU now, not in the past. Thank you for noticing.

[bluesbassman]

85. Same can be said for strong Clinton supporters.

Do you think they have the same lack of room to fall back from?

Personally I think the vast majority of us on DU understand the value of electing a Democrat in the general and will vote accordingly regardless of who they backed leading up to the primary.

[MineralMan]

88. I certainly hope you're correct.

[brooklynite]

103. No Clinton supporter has said they won't vote for Sanders or any other nominee...

...in fact, no Clinton supporter has challenged a policy position of Sanders. The argument is largely about electability and the risk of allowing the Republicans to win.

[bluesbassman]

110. OK. Let's see how that plays out as we get closer to the primary.

The hypothesis of this OP was "backing away from strongly held positions". Many Clinton supporters are so invested in the idea that she cannot lose in the primary, it will be interesting to see what happens should she not receive the nomination.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. I'll vote for the most progressive, anti-war, candidate on the ballot.

I'll vote for him if he wins the nomination. If, he doesn't and endorses Hillary....see above.

[lovemydog]

25. +1

[Martin Eden]

86. Me too

I just hope I don't have to hold my nose while I'm doing it.

[jwirr]

6. The same way the other Hillary candidates react if she doesn't win. We will vote to keep the Rs out.

[AtomicKitten]

8. What will happen if Bernie wins the primary?

We actually have data for that event dating back to 2008. It goes like this: Hillary will refuse to concede and will rile up her supporters threatening to "take it to the convention." Some of her supporters, the "demi-glace of bitter" as Chris Hayes calls them, will go full PUMA. A second primary loss will probably erase any pretense of sportsmanship and the Clintons will abandon US politics for the global community.

[MineralMan]

11. If he does, Hillary will endorse him.

As you say, we have data back to 2008. Almost all Clinton supporters voted for and worked for Obama's election. That is how Democrats do things. You think it will be different in 2016? I don't.

[GeorgeGist]

75. Disingenuous much?

[MineralMan]

79. I beg your pardon.

Please be more specific. I have no idea what you're talking about.

[morningfog]

109. Your OP asked a question and then answered it with post 11 as if the questionhad not been asked.

[MineralMan]

141. Are you GeorgeGist?

I'm not sure you can answer for that DUer. He made a statement and I asked what he meant. Your reply was not responsive to either.

[morningfog]

164. I'm just trying to help you.

You seem to be suggesting that Sanders Democrats are different than Obama or Clinton or any other Democrats. If you don't understand you inconsistency I would be surprised.

The poster's point was quite clear. I think you are playing dumb. Or maybe not?

[hrmjustin]

22. Since you used the term puma I ask you will you go "full puma" if Clinton wins?

[AtomicKitten]

23. I will not advocate voting against her.

I will not show up on the MSM sniveling about the outcome.
I will not petition the DNC to count disqualified votes.
I will not threaten to take it to the convention.
I will not start an anti-Hillary website.
I will not picket the Democratic Convention.

[hrmjustin]

29. Will you vote for her?

[AtomicKitten]

36. Already asked and answered.

My vote belongs to me and I will not use it as a cudgel nor will I display it to the conductor of this ride to punch my ticket. I have not changed my mind about Hillary since 2007/08. That primary and her subsequent stint as SOS have only bolstered my point of view.

[hrmjustin]

37. Ok.

Have s good week.

[AtomicKitten]

42. back at ya

cheers

[Jester Messiah]

63. Gee, I remember a time when a person's vote was their own business and no one else's.

Just one more cause to mourn the death of civility in this country.

[hrmjustin]

67. Imagine someone on a political website asking someone who they will vote for.

I feel so ashamed of myself!

[Jester Messiah]

72. You should.

Talking about issues, weighing candidate pros and cons, debating policy, that's all fair game.

Somebody demanding to know how someone else will cast their vote? Brazen. Uncouth. Indicative of poor upbringing.

[hrmjustin]

77. Demanding?

Did you read what I wrote?

I asked if the poster will vote for her.

I made no demands and you are making things up now.


And don't you dare mention my upbringing.

[Jester Messiah]

116. I believe I spoke generally enough.

I was speaking about what a given behavior might indicate. But if it strikes a chord with you, well... who can say why that might be?

[hrmjustin]

118. You said you.

Seemed rather personal to me.

And asking someone about who they will vote for on a political website is not out of order.

[Jester Messiah]

119. Sure it's not.

Who are you trying to convince? In any case, I did say that you personally should be ashamed, but then went on to speak of what the behavior you engaged in tends to represent, but that was a short and non-all-inclusive list, so you pick what resonates with you. Maybe all of the above, maybe none. Who can know but you?

[hrmjustin]

120. I am defending myself from yout bogus claims.

[Jester Messiah]

125. If you say so. [nt]

[hrmjustin]

126. Yeah I do!

[brooklynite]

105. Just a reminder that the 1st Amendment doesn't apply here...

You don't have to vote for anyone you don't want to...

You don't have to TELL anyone who you voted for if you don't want to...

However, you CAN'T advocate for not voting for the Democratic nominee.

[Jester Messiah]

117. I haven't done so.

I've spoken about what might happen, generally speaking. There are risks to be weighed, possible and probable consequences that can be envisioned with various likelihoods of happening. One might even accuse me of being coy, but I'm not positively advocating for any given behavior. The line remains uncrossed.

It is very telling, however, whose partisans are trying to suppress speech. (Though the 1A only applies to government suppression of speech. Last I heard, Skinner hadn't signed on with the government and DU still sports a .com rather than a .gov TLD, so the board can suppress whatsoever speech it chooses.)

[ieoeja]

114. I don't think she will do that again.

If she loses Iowa again, and I think she will, I believe there is going to be a sudden shift in the electorate. I believe they will view her as unelectable after two defeats in a row. Instead of coming out of Super Tuesday in a virtual tie, she will come out well behind.

I think her campaign is falling into the "planning for the last war" trap. This time they made sure to prepare for campaigning in all 50 states. Which might have worked in 2008. But if she doesn't win at least 3 of the 4 pre-Super Tuesday primaries, I think she will be crushed on Super Tuesday making even her most ardent supporters telling her it's over.

And winning 3 of those could be really tough. Iowa is not Hillary country. People are going to remind Nevadans that Hillary tried to get a last minute rules change to suppress the Black vote in their state in 2008. South Carolina's large African-American voting population in the Democratic primaries are going to be reminded of the racist dog whistling that went on during the 2008 primary.

I think she has a far better chance of losing 3 of the 4 than of winning them. And will see the writing on the wall more quickly a second time around.

[Marr]

10. Don't worry, liberals don't run off to the Republicans like conservative Dems do when

they don't get exactly what they want.

[redgreenandblue]

49. +1

[hughee99]

13. I think all that you're saying will happen, and when Sanders endorses her, it will be for

the same reason that many of Clinton's supporters now are suggesting... she's the lesser of two evils, though he won't say that.

I think Obama ran a great campaign in 2008 and a big part of that was that he tried to give people something to vote FOR rather than just campaigning against the republicans. I don't believe Clinton will have nearly that much success if she tries that.

It's tough to campaign as someone with new ideas and a new vision if you've been in Washington for a long time (you're usually seen, fairly or not, as someone who is part of the problem), which is probably why Governors usually do better than candidates from congress (Obama being the recent exception, but he wasn't in Washington that log, either). I think Sanders might be one of the few people in Washington who could do that, but I don't think he'll come anywhere near raising the sort of money he'd need to mount a winning campaign, even for the nomination.

[Gothmog]

135. The ability to elect the first female POTUS will motivate some voters

I think that HRC will be able to motivate the voters. Electing the first female POTUS is still a first and will part of history

[hughee99]

142. Yes, but since we're talking about Sanders supporters here who would be switching over to Clinton

once the primary is over, I have to assume that's not their primary concern or they'd be supporting Clinton already. One thing Sanders has zero chance of being is the first female POTUS.

[99Forever]

14. Websites don't get to control my vote.

I'll follow the posting rules, but I will vote my conscience.

YMMV

[NCTraveler]

16. Would love to meet the person who feels their vote is controled by a website.

Never heard of that one before.

[okaawhatever]

41. Yeah, they want to be here on DU bashing Hillary but won't admit they won't vote for her because

it may get them booted. Oddly enough Democratic Underground is for Democrats.

[NCTraveler]

44. Here is what I don't get about those comments.

It doesn't mean they will be booted. It means they will have to not discuss the fact they aren't voting. They can still comment on candidates, races, issues, pitt bulls and Olive Garden. It is almost as if they are attempting to hoist their own cross.

[okaawhatever]

89. You're correct. nt

[MineralMan]

17. Nobody can control anyone's vote.

We still step into a booth to mark our ballot. Did you think I was talking to you, personally?

[99Forever]

24. Gee guy...

...why would you even ask that? I don't freakin' control anyone's actions here except myself, so I spoke to what my likely reaction would be. Lighten up MM.

[MineralMan]

28. Whenever someone tells me to "lighten up,"

I have a very specific reaction. I choose how I post. Just now, I'm not feeling like "lightening up." Sorry.

[NuclearDem]

32. They're called posting privileges for a reason.

[99Forever]

65. It's called a secret ballot for a reason.

[NuclearDem]

90. All well and good.

But outside of those few exceptions, declaring your intent to not vote Democratic is against the TOS.

[99Forever]

100. I will vote my conscience.

If that somehow offends you, I can't help that.

[NuclearDem]

104. Doesn't offend me one bit.

[99Forever]

112. Really?

Sure could have fooled me.

[NuclearDem]

136. No comment on that.

[99Forever]

138. Ahh...

... you're a "get the last worder."

Okay, go ahead. Carry on.

[NuclearDem]

139. "... you're a "get the last worder." "

...you said in a reply to me.

[hrmjustin]

34. telling but honest.

[HERVEPA]

64. Yeh, and fuck those who are disadvantaged in any way who will be hurt much worse by a

Republican in the White House. You can call it principled, in actuality it's selfishness.

[99Forever]

69. I don't particularly care what you call it.

[HERVEPA]

107. Of course you don't

[99Forever]

113. Correct.

That's my reaction to anyone who is rude to me.

[NCTraveler]

15. The trolls, just using him for disruption, will be given the boot. <- very few

The members of the party who support him will take a day or two to decompress and then come back to support Hillary <- huge majority. Others will take it so personally that they won't be able to stop the Clinton hate <- loud minority. Really no different from Obama/Clinton. Please note, Hillary supporters in 08 did the same.

[cali]

18. Yes, he'll endorse her.

I'm fine with that, min.

If she's the nominee, we're stuck with her. I hope she can manage not to blow it.

What will Hillary supporters say if she loses? Ooh, I know. It's all the fault of the left.

[MineralMan]

21. Well if she gets the nomination and loses,

I'll be hanging my head, just as I have every time a Republican wins as President. It's a sad occasion when that happens, which is why I work hard to prevent such a thing. That's also why you won't find me posting anything negative about any Democratic candidate during primary elections.

I won't do it. There's plenty of right-wing negativity out there. The Clinton Cash nonsense is part of that.

[MattSh]

19. You mean like 9 - 13 months from now?

I've got other things to concern myself with before then.

[DawgHouse]

20. I think the majority will go vote for the nominee.

At least, I hope so!

[sufrommich]

26. Nothing will happen. Were you here for the 2008 primary?

Posters either keep their mouths shut or join the fight.

[MineralMan]

30. You can see from my profile that I was not.

[MADem]

27. They can help, or get out of the way. I think Elvis said it best....

Sanders is playing the stalking horse, I think. He'll do a good job of it.

[MineralMan]

33. Well, he says he's not doing that.

I'll take him at his word. He keeps saying he can win. Good for him, I say. I'm on his side, and will caucus for him in MN.

[MADem]

70. We'll see. nt

[INdemo]

31. But what if Hillary loses the Iowa Caucus

and loses NH or wins Iowa by a very narrow margin and loses NH? Will that give Bernie more clout for the Democratic platform,I think so. I think we will all be surprised a Bernie's showing in the first two primaries/caucus' What if he wins both outright and the money rolls in even stronger,what does that say for Hillary.. It appears what your OP really means is "I don't really like Hillary,wish we had someone else but what choice do I have as a Democrat"

Isn't that what your are really saying?
That's what I am thinking...If we have a Republican elected in 2016 good bye Democracy (what's left of it)

Hillary being the Republican lite that she is the next best thing to a real Democrat.

I've given a lot of thought to FDR,Harry Truman and JFK and given todays political climate I don't think these Great Presidents would have had a chance in todays Corporate owned elections.

[MineralMan]

35. There are many "what ifs."

I deal in probabilities, based on the information I can find. I don't see your scenarios as very probable, frankly. I'm concerned with the negativity toward a very probable candidate for President. I don't think it's helpful.

[INdemo]

130. I dont think it will be a cake walk for Hillary in Iowa or NH especially

But we will see.
If billionaires (Wall St. and the corporate mafia)ere able to buy the Presidency in 2016 then our Democracy will be in jeopardy.
What got me going about Hillary is the day Bernie announced within hours she said "I agree with Bernie"
That happened at the same time she was cashing those Wall St. checks. Don't you think that was pretty phony on her part?

[justiceischeap]

38. I can't help but think about how "we" treat our Democratic candidates we don't support

It's like they're the enemy, which leads to problems supporting them later down the road. I suspect that's why Bernie has stated he'll run a clean race, because he knows that if he doesn't win the nomination, anything he says or does will be used against his one-time opponent, whom the party will then need to get behind to get elected. That's hard to do if you've been running a smear campaign against your fellow caucus members.

[MineralMan]

43. Exactly my reason for posting this OP.

If we attack primary candidates, using similar arguments to the ones in play from the Republicans, are we not damaging that candidate in advance of the nomination process? How do we withdraw arguments we have made about the nominee, if we have made such arguments?

That is why I do not attack Democratic primary candidates. That is why I deplore attacks on Democratic primary candidates. I believe they are very harmful once a nominee is selected by the convention.

I have a preference in the primaries. That does not mean that I will not enthusiastically support the eventual Democratic candidate, even if my preferred candidate does not get the nomination. I am a Democrat. If I prefer one primary candidate over another, I will vote for that candidate in the primary election and say that I prefer that candidate. I prefer Bernie Sanders at this time. I fear he will not prevail and become the nominee, given the facts at hand.

I'm sure as Hell not going to trash a candidate who might get that nomination, and I'm sure as Hell not going to use right-wing propaganda to do it, either. I cannot say how much I deplore such activities. They are negative in their effect and are tantamount to supporting the opposing party, in my opinion. I will speak out against such primary tactics here and elsewhere.

[justiceischeap]

48. As I recall, we kind of went through this in 2008

Both candidates (Pres. Obama and Clinton) bloodied each other and then the Republicans used those same arguments against them. They don't need to do their own work to sully our candidates, we do it for them.

Yeah, I won't play that game either MM. It's at cross-purposes to what we eventually want, another Democratic President (and a Democratic House and Senate if anyone's listening). Plus, as much as I love politics, I hate dirty politics (though I am well-aware of the reality of them). If you can't discuss your politics without evolving into attacks, you're not very well informed about your candidate or your politics.

[Jim Lane]

131. I don't remember the Republicans using the same arguments

The essence of the Republican argument against Obama was identical to what it would have been against Clinton: tax-and-spend Democrat who won't protect our national security. The didn't have all that much to pick up on from the primary.

The closest the primary battle came was Clinton's "3:00 a.m." ad in which she tried to portray Obama as too inexperienced to be trusted with important decisions in a crisis. If McCain had made a more conventional pick for a running mate (someone like Huckabee, or even the very experienced but pro-choice Tom Ridge), then "experience" would probably have been a major theme of the campaign. There would definitely have been echoes of the "3:00 a.m." ad. As it was, however, with McCain picking a running mate who had even less experience than Obama, and who repeatedly showed her lack of knowledge, that line of attack pretty much dropped out of McCain's playbook.

[Jim Lane]

140. "Never attack Democrats" is going too far.

I see three categories of intra-party attacks on a candidate: from the left, from the right, and nonideological.

Attacks from the left have absolutely none of the danger you describe. If Sanders denounces Clinton for not supporting single-payer health care, are the Republicans going to pick up that line of attack in the general election? Of course not. In fact, that attack helps Clinton, if she's the nominee, by making her position appear to be the sensible middle between single payer and repealing Obamacare.

With attacks from the right, it's exactly the opposite -- they play into Republicans' hands. If Clinton charges that reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act, as supported by O'Malley, would hurt the competitiveness of U.S. financial institutions in the global arena, the Republicans will be happy to repeat that charge against O'Malley as the Democratic nominee.

The nonideological attacks are somewhere in between. Any candidate will have to deal with allegations like "didn't follow the rules about keeping emails" or "was arrested for drunk driving" or "misrepresented particular career episode". For primary opponents to publicize such charges can give them more currency but can also give the target the opportunity to perfect the counter-spin. By the time the general election campaign begins, the attack may have gotten so much attention that it's crystallized as common knowledge, or it may have gotten so much attention that voters are bored with it and it has less impact than it would if it were being trotted out for the first time

[Triana]

39. Can't speak for anyone else but as for me, I'll vote for Hillary.

She's immensely qualified.

[Smarmie Doofus]

40. The same thing that will "happen" in the country and in the world:

Not much.


In other words.... business as usual.

Make that busine$$.

[KingCharlemagne]

46. What Will Happen on DU when Bernard Sanders Wins the Primary Race? - nt

[MineralMan]

56. Then all the same people I mentioned, plus Hillary Clinton,

will endorse Sanders. I will work to get him elected. I will work to get whoever the Democratic nominee is elected. I will not, under any circumstances post negative propaganda about any Democratic candidate on DU or anywhere else. I'll support my preferred candidate, Senator Sanders, during the primaries. I will not do that, though, by repeating rumors and information from a right-wing book or other sources about another Democratic candidate.

I will not use every possible occasion to be negative about any Democratic candidate, because one of the primary candidates will be someone I support enthusiastically in the general election campaign. In fact, as soon as it becomes clear who the nominee will be, all of my efforts will be in support of that candidate.

That is how Democrats will win the election in 2016. Attacking our own candidates is not how we will win. This is DU. We should be supporting Democrats, not attacking them. Period. When a nominee is named, how can someone who attacked that candidate then turn to support that candidate? Their words will remain here on DU to be used against the candidate. It's a stupid way to win elections, in my opinion. I won't engage in it.

[KingCharlemagne]

165. I am not so sanguine about Sanders' eventual nomination and forsee something

of a reprise of 1972 when the Rahm Emmanuel types made nice with Tricky Dick, laughed at and even openly sabotaged McGovern's chances, and so on. (Or perhaps I'm thinking of Humphrey's 1968 run -- memories grow dim with age and a quick search is not proving fruitful.)

OTOH, a Sanders nomination might have the same salutary effect upon the Democratic Party that Goldwater's 1964 nomination had upon the Republicans, assuming of course that the country can survive 8 years of the one-party fascist state.

Shit, I'm almost scaring myself into supporting Hillary!

[Logical]

50. I will be depressed! nt

[Rilgin]

51. Well One Scenario is

Although winning the primary, she then goes on to lose the general election because the Republicans will put up someone who can "claim" be be a change agent because that candidate is outside the mainstream and does not have HRC's years as part of the status quo. Everyone knows politicians lie. However the most reliable political tact in any election is to label yourself a reformer and a change agent. This is regardless of parties and was true of every winning presidential candidate since carter (except for George H. W. Bush). Carter ran on change. Reagan ran on change. W ran on change. Obama ran on being a change agent. She lost in the democratic primary to Obama because she can not credibly run as a change agent.

In the coming election, HRC will certainly capture the reliable democratic voters but does not bring any new voters to the polls nor does she sway any voters who are unhappy with both parties (the rising tide of independents).

The election of a Republican of course will be a disaster. However, the democratic party will again not learn its lesson. Within the democratic party punditry, the conservative democrats will blame the left even though during the election (as in all past elections) all active reliable voting democrats (including progressives) vote for her as they have voted for democrats in all recent elections including the midterms where democrats lost ground in congress because conservative democratic candidates lost and liberal candidates won.

This is just one possibility. The other possibility is that HRC can raise enough money to buy her way past this problem (i.e. is electable because she can have an enormous bankroll). However, in this case, although we may stave off a republican disaster, but it does not spell great things for our country's future. Even if HRC's policies turn out more liberal than her past might indicate, it will enshrine the fact that our country is run by money and is no longer a functioning democracy.

This scenario is one of the risks of having HRC as a candidate. It is not clear that she can win the general, a point glossed over by most HRC supporters who just state that she is electable without wondering what almost all winning candidates have in common which is they can run as not part of the status quo.

[vadermike]

52. i will vote for the nominee

If we don't its game over for the country .. yes it really is (all three branches GOP) , HOUSE/SENATE GOP, most of the statehouse GOP... not sure if we can come back from that unfortunatley.. and even scarier it could be someone worse than Bush at the top of the ticket Walker, Carson, Rubio etc or even Cruz.. i don't underestimate any of these idiots...! I'm actually pretty frightened right now.. i am afraid with so many R's running they have more enthusiasm on their side etc and fear our voters just wont vote ever again and have totally given up... maybe i am just pessimistic right now today.. but this is what i see.... remember it is How hitler got power in germany .. even with a minority.. the oppo parties gave up and the voters gave up and just voted for him cause he said the right things and seemed "strong" even if they didnt agree with him on stuff.. thats why a Carso, a Cruz or Walker or Huckabee is dangerous at this time.. plus they habve 24/7 propaganda Fox , 100,000 hate radio stations .. and what do we have? Rant off.. just my thinking today

[LanternWaste]

53. I imagine there will be grudging acceptance.

I imagine there will be grudging acceptance. I also believe that many others will until then, petulantly bait the Sanders supporters with vague, meaningless questions of loyalty.

[polichick]

54. My response would be: "Same Ol' Shit" ...

What will your response be if HRC endorses Bernie?

[MineralMan]

61. Then, she'd be endorsing the Democratic nominee

and my favorite candidate. That Sanders is my favorite primary candidate has little to do whether I think he's likely to be the nominee. Frankly, I do not see a path to that. I think it is a vanishingly small possibility, so I'm expecting to be supporting Hillary Clinton in the general election campaign. How could I do that if I were to attack her now with questionable tactics?

I am completely consistent in my support for Democratic candidates at all levels. I will not change that. I am a Democrat.

[polichick]

124. While traveling throughout the country speaking with voters, Bernie said...

that he wouldn't run unless he felt the people are ready for the fight.

He concluded that enough people are ready - hope he's right.

[daleanime]

55. Like always we will try to make the best out of a bad situation....

don't expect delight or joy with these trying to improve our nation.


Now from these who say we have no chance, well....

[phantom power]

57. My bold plan would be to... vote for her

[beachbum bob]

59. typically whining to be expected and then reluctant support

as no one wants a conservative nutjob in the whitehouse who could name 3 supreme court justices........

[OKNancy]

60. Small note: Franken has already endorsed Hillary Clinton. n/t

[MineralMan]

62. Yes he has. I talked to him during the 2014 election campaign.

I asked him if he was considering a presidential run. He said, "No way." He'll be a staunch supporter of Clinton if she's the nominee, and probably before then, too. He admires Bernie Sanders, as well, but he does understand political realities. I'm a great admirer and supporter of Senator Franken.

[Lochloosa]

66. I don't think Obama would have won if the Hillary camp had not voted for him in the General

I'm sure the same will be true if she wins the nomination. We will vote for the Democratic nominee.

[Jester Messiah]

68. Are you asking if there will be consequences...

For handing the Democratic nomination to someone that many Democrats view as little better than a moderate Republican?

Because yeah, there probably will be.

[MineralMan]

76. No, that is not what I am asking.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

80. If...

If "many Democrats view Hillary Clinton as little better than a moderate Republican " then she won't won't win the nomination, am I right?

[MineralMan]

83. Well, that certainly seems to stand up to reason.

If she gets the nomination, Democrats will have voted for her in the primaries. One assumes that they will vote for her in the general election, too, as will most other Democrats. Right now, the primary election is the current topic, but once that's over, we'll have a candidate to elect. That's why I won't be attacking any Democratic candidate. I can't see any possible benefit of that.

[Jester Messiah]

115. Many may not equal most.

But it does raise the risk that a significant number will feel less than motivated to vote. I think that risk should bear on peoples' decisions, and that's all I'm going to say about that.

[Agnosticsherbet]

81. You are saying that if Clinton wins more votes in the primary than Sanders

that her nomination is illegitimate?

[Jester Messiah]

145. No, merely vehemently opposed.

You probably will lose some votes in the general. Just sayin'.

[TBF]

71. I will be caucusing for Bernie in Texas ~

and I will vote for Hillary if she's the nominee. Not as enthusiastically, but she's obviously preferable to Walker, Rubio, Bush et al

(ps this was also my approach in 2008 & my caucus candidate Obama did go on to win the nomination!)

[MineralMan]

73. I'll be doing the same in Minnesota, unless

he has already withdrawn. But I will not only vote for Clinton, I will GOTV for her and enthusiastically campaign for her, if she becomes the Democratic nominee. I will do that because it's essential that a Democrat be elected as President in 2016.

[Agnosticsherbet]

78. He will endorse her, and she will graciously help him pay campaign debt that he is going to incur.

Sanders will help write the platform for the Democratic Party, and will campaign for her because he knows that the country needs to have Democrats in charge.

People here are DU will do what people will do. If they make a statement to support the eventual nominee, or swear on a copy of Marx's communist manifesto that they can never support someone beholden to capitalist banks, I will accept what they say as truthful.

[tkmorris]

82. That's what you think will be interesting to watch huh?

That is rather telling. Of course it isn't surprising to anyone that you would feel this way. It IS entertaining however to see you throw out this OH SO INNOCENT "question", and then get indignant when someone asks what you're implying with it. Do you imagine you are truly that inscrutable?

[MineralMan]

87. Yes, it is. I'm a watcher of politics, as well as an activist.

In my watching, I've seen what negative campaigning in primaries does. I don't like it.

I am not inscrutable at all. I'm asking a question I think is important, but yes, I'll be interested to see what happens here. As you know, I'm a regular poster on DU, and like the forum.

[Warpy]

84. It depends on how nasty Hillary War II gets

I know people who left DU in 2008 over the first one. I also know people who re registered as Republicans out of sheer spite when she didn't win the nomination.

I sincerely hope DU puts up an Election 2016 Forum soon, one that can be ignored by the non combatants. That's the only thing that saved the site in 2008.

[sufrommich]

121. " hope DU puts up an Election 2016 Forum soon"

Me too.

[Gothmog]

133. That is a good idea

[hobbit709]

91. a lot of us will be holding our noses and carrying barf bags on election day.

[MineralMan]

95. A lot of us will be out campaigning for the nominee before

election day. Please join us, whoever the nominee is. It's important.

[DonViejo]

93. Al Franken has already endorsed Hillary Clinton...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025967471

What will go on at DU when and if Sec'y Clinton gets the Dem nomination? I think we should cross that bridge when we get to it.

[MineralMan]

94. Yes, I know. That has come up already in this thread.

He will do so again and even more strongly if she is the nominee. If she's not, he will endorse the nominee with equal sincerity.

[Rex]

96. Well at least you posted this in good faith and not to divide up DU further.

[MineralMan]

97. Thanks for recognizing that my post was in good faith.

Truly.

[cherokeeprogressive]

98. One side will scream "nananananana told you so..."

The other side will yell "poopyheads!"


Then everyone will support the nominee.

[mike_c]

99. my reaction will be the same as if Sanders had never run....

I will not vote for anyone who supported crimes against humanity in Iraq. Not John Kerry and not Hillary Clinton. Period. If Clinton is the democratic party candidate, then I won't be voting for the democratic party candidate. That's a personal decision, of course-- your miles may vary.

As it happens I do support Sanders and will absolutely vote democratic in the general election for the first time since 2000 if Sanders is the nominee. I vote for candidates, not for parties.

[upaloopa]

127. Question, do you watch election returns on

election night? Do you hope someone or other wins?
Even if your vote won't be for Hillary if she is the nominee do you care if the Dems or Repubs win the White House?

[foo_bar]

151. ye olde "Results of your Jury Service"

On Tue May 5, 2015, 02:29 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

my reaction will be the same as if Sanders had never run....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6619879

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

So I thought this website was devoted to electing Democrats? Something this guy hasn't done since 2000! WTF.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 5, 2015, 02:33 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I don't think juries are in the ToS business (at least for a guy with a bazillion posts), plus I don't recall any DU precedent for locking a post like this unless this were official post-primary lockdown season. I think people are allowed to talk about not voting for Democrats 100% of the time (unless they cop to voting for repubs), per the ToS:

<< 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). >>
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Hide this shit. If you haven't figured out a reason to vote for Democrats in the last 15 years, you are not only a godamn fool, but you don't belong here.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Well, sounds like he is going to vote for a Democrat next time around. Good enough for me.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[mike_c]

168. yep-- been here since the beginning and I understand the ToS well enough....

I don't urge anyone else to vote against democrats. Voting is a personal choice, and the policy on this site has always allowed DUers to discuss their choices, just not to campaign on behalf of non-democratic party candidates. Hell, I was a lifelong democrat until I lost faith in the party. I hope to be a democrat again, some day. They just need to run candidates that represent my best political interests and for whom I don't have to hold my nose closed to vote. Politics is not a team sport.

[Jamastiene]

102. Most of us will accept defeat and get ready

to vote for her in the general election, because there really is no rational alternative. I certainly don't want Jeb Bush all up in my house with disease. Or any of those other right wing nincompoops.

[tularetom]

106. I've voted for crappy Democratic candidates in 64, 68, 72, 84, 88, 96, 2000, 2012

No reason I can't do it in 2016.

I would gladly vote for Sen. Sanders in the General election, but if he is not the nominee, I will undoubtedly vote for whoever is selected. I might be really pissed about it and I'll bitch about it afterward but I will hold my nose and vote for the party's candidate.

[DCBob]

111. Many will be pissed and probably hope someone will run third party.

[TheKentuckian]

122. My support is not transferable upon request from whom I support. Support does not mean vassal,

minion, or subject. Sanders controls his vote not mine.

[bluedigger]

128. There will be a lot of smug and self-congratulatory I-told-you-so OPs, I suppose..

[WillyT]

129. Same As Usually Happens... Hold Your Nose, And Vote For The Establishment Democrat

[davidn3600]

132. I imagine there will be a lot of "I told you so" after she loses the general election

But that's what you get when you throw principles to the wind.

[ucrdem]

137. Oh she'll win, but when was winning ever enough when Clintons are involved?

Get ready for a non-stop clown parade of lawsuits, Congressional investigations, sinister accusations, sordid insinuations, and spectacular media flameouts for the next 8 years, each meticulously chronicled with profane filigree right here on the DU.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

143. One will vote for the Democratic nominee

[Greybnk48]

144. I will vote for Hillary, of course.

I will vote for our nominee.

[LWolf]

146. The same thing that happens every time. nt

[Bonobo]

148. Oh god, not one of these fucking kinds of posts ALREADY?

What the hell is the purpose of this meta shit?

[ibegurpard]

149. We'll all vote for her

Gladly considering the alternatives. But some of us will work for other options first.

[A HERETIC I AM]

150. DEFCON 1

All the ships and subs will put to sea, all the bombers will fly 24 hour sorties, all the reserves will be called up and the Pantsuit industry will be placed on full standby.

[nadinbrzezinski]

153. Silly season will be over... there is a reason why it is called that

though, given 2008, I expect a few people to leave on a huff if she loses, form a PUMA group and vote for the other side out of spite.

And for those of us who don't care... silly season will be highly entertaining.

[samsingh]

154. i'll be happy

[Quixote1818]

155. I support Sanders but would get behind Hillary 100% if she gets the nomination. nt

[cantbeserious]

156. They Will Be Disappointed - Some Will Then Not Vote For The Lesser Of Two Evils

eom

[liberal N proud]

157. Based on current fervor over Bernie, I predict a melt-down of epic proportion.

Like nothing ever before.

[oberliner]

158. Everyone will unite behind Hillary and do everything they can to help her win

At least that would be my hope.

[freshwest]

159. Wailing and gnashing of teeth, accusations of robbery, then sell out, quiet if she wins the general,

I told you so's if she doesn't, and then back the same old grind of finding fault. At least that's what I've read from some.

Sanders already said if he's not the nominee, he WILL support the Democratic Party winner. He sees a definite difference in the two parties on the economic issues he supports.

He's thinking about the country more than putting anyone down, or himself. HRC would do the same if Sanders wins, as she did with Obama.

Those who have sworn they will not vote if HRC gets it will be true to their word and then make fun of us who did vote for the general for the Democratic Party nominee, since they have no skin in this.

Just sayin'

[yuiyoshida]

160. So its all over already? gee...

That didn't last long.

[TM99]

161. If Clinton wins the Primary,

until after election season is through, I will voluntarily leave DU and not return until November 5th 2016. I would not be able to refrain from criticism of her policies or positions.

I do not vote for the lesser of two evils. I am not affiliated with any party so I do not vote out of party loyalty. I am behind Sanders now because his policies and positions match mine and my principles. I will not vote for a neo-liberal/neo-conservative ever again. I know that change can only occur when we stop electing the same damned people to our higher government offices expecting something wonderful and different will occur.

Who I actually vote for if Sanders does not win the primary is none of yours or anyone's god damned business.

[L0oniX]

162. Dream on. n/t

[PowerToThePeople]

163. I will stay quiet on DU until after the general election. n/t

[KG]

166. nothing. it will go on being an income stream for the owners.

[RedCappedBandit]

167. Most will vote Dem down the ballot. What will happen if the opposite is true? nt