Either Hillary's a Weak Candidate and/or Bernie's a Strong Candidate and/or his Message is Powerful

[Tom Rinaldo]

Usually I post long OP's. Not this time. Clinton started out this campaign with every advantage conceivable, at least among Democrats, while Sanders was snickered at by the establishment. Unlike Donald Trump, Bernie wasn't lavished with near infinite hours of free Network television coverage either. Standard Politics 101 had Hillary winning this in a laugher. So why hasn't she, and what does that mean for November? Draw your own conclusions.

[Gwhittey]

1. Yea but Bernie got tons of media attention

I mean just other dam there was 16 or more articles on WaPo about Sanders.

[morningfog]

2. It means if HIllary ends up being the nominee, she better damn well fight like an underdog.

Drop the hubris, the sense of entitlement and the early laissez faire campaigning.

She has serious trustworthiness problems that I am not sure can be corrected. She'd have to deal with it though. She shouldn't take a single state for granted, either.

It would be hard for her to win, but I think she could.

[malthaussen]

5. She should, but will she?

I am of the opinion that she and her advisers will just wipe their brows, say "Oh, that was a close one," and learn nothing. Indeed, the win could easily convince them that they were right all along.

-- Mal

[KPN]

66. My fear is that she can't.

It just strikes me that hubris and entitlement are part of her basic makeup -- it's hard to appear as something other than what you are over the long haul. Maybe I'm wrong, and if she does win the nomination, I certainly hope so -- but it is something I am deeply concerned about (not to mention her record, GOP/Tea Party and some Independents' outright hatred -- irrational or not -- for all things Clintonian). Frankly, I don't have a high level of confidence that she can win the GE.

[Victor_c3]

78. I too don't have a high level of confidence that Hillary can win the presidential general election

She'd motivate republicans to come out and vote against her and many Sanders supporters wouldn't be motivated at all to vote for her (myself being one). Democrat turnout would be low and republican turnout would be high, or at least that's my prediction.

[Jitter65]

73. Hillary has always been a fighter. Look what she's had to put up with since the 90's.

Bernie has not had any of that.

[zalinda]

84. Most of it, both Bill and Hillary brought on theirselves.

If they had been upfront and honest when questions were asked, they would not have had the problems that they did.

Hillary did the same this cycle. She had been praised for her SOS tenure. Even though every one knew she was going to run for President again, she did things that would be questionable. I'm starting to think that she loves it this way.

Z

[malthaussen]

3. One wonders how things would stand...

... had Mr Sanders received even rudimentary media attention.

-- Mal

[BuelahWitch]

13. No "coin tosses," very likely, just outright wins

although that might require a DNC chair who wasn't in the tank for Hill as well.

[mythology]

86. Still with the inaccurate coin toss garbage

No delegates to the national convention were decided by coin flip. And yet some Sanders supporters keep clinging to that to discredit Clinton.

[BuelahWitch]

88. Really? Prove it

The news stories I see all say she won by a coin toss (even if, like NPR, they try to refute it, they still can't say the coin tosses didn't win it for her).

Keep up the Clinton "mythology," it's all you got!

[Armstead]

4. All of the Above

[Duval]

55. +1

[livetohike]

6. She has more total votes than Sanders and 2-1

margin on delegates. I call that winning. He is almost out of this race. Depends on the delegate count on March 15.

[morningfog]

9. She is not 2-1 on delegates. She is up 771 to 550.

Bernie won't be out unless and until Hillary secures a majority of the pledged delegates. And that will not happen until the penultimate day of he primary, if at all. June 7.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. Her Super Delegate lead is part of the "every advantage" I was referencing

Bernie won such a high percentage of the the vote in Vermont that Hillary couldn't earn a single pledged delegate there. Yet the Vermont Party Establishment rewarded her with enough Super Delegates there to almost give her a tie, if you count them the same as pledged delegates. Talk about having a process wired...

The Primary calendar was heavily stacked with Southern States at the front end, we'll see how total voter counts play out over time. But that misses the point. Hillary well may win, but this "wasn't supposed" to be a competitive race.

[TDale313]

7. Yes. All of the above. n/t

[Trust Buster]

8. In my opinion, Sanders' popularity is not a mystery.

He travels from college campus to college campus promising young Americans trillions of dollars in new entitlements. Sanders knows that, due to gerrymandering, the next president is guaranteed to be dealing with a Republican-controlled House of Representatives. I think it's only fair that Sanders inform these young Americans of the unlikelihood of a Republican-controlled House considering his new entitlement spending proposals. That would be a fairer approach IMO.

[Armstead]

11. I think we should just cancel the November election and just let Trump have it all

Forget all that hopey chgangey stuff.

[Trust Buster]

15. I don't see how your response relates to my post but I respect your right to respond.

.

[Armstead]

17. Because you are saying there is nothing Bernie could do so he should just shut up

If the prospects for change are as bleak as you say, Clinton will not be able to follow through on her campaign promises.


So therefore, it doesn't really matter who is in the WH. if that is the case, maybe the democrats should just take a vacay from this year's presidential election and enjoy the spring and summer and early autumn weather.

[Trust Buster]

21. I never said that Sanders should shut up. You must have read that in another post.

I do believe that he should balance his proposals by addressing the likelihood that the next president will be dealing with a Republican-controlled House. That's all I said.

[Armstead]

25. I was using hyperbolie.

...in response to the never-ending stuff on here about unicorns and realism, etc.

If I overexagerated your own position, I apologize.

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. I would warn the Democratic Party not to Patronize the Young

Those under 40 break strongly for Bernie. They represent the future both for Democrats and America, and in general they happen to be damn well informed, both on the issues and on the political process.

[Trust Buster]

19. You don't believe that the disenfranchising gerrymandering tactics that the Republicans have

engaged in guarantees them control of the House during the next presidency ?

[Tom Rinaldo]

26. I think this comment comes across as patronizing:

"I think it's only fair that Sanders inform these young Americans of the unlikelihood of a Republican-controlled House considering his new entitlement spending proposals."

I am 66 and have closely followed politics all of my life. I expect Republican obstruction of either a President Sanders or Clinton - but believe Democrats have to start fighting for an agenda like the one Sanders backs now in order to ever achieve our goals - just like Republicans fought for decades for privatized schools before they made serious inroads there. I dispute your implication that young voters need to be informed about current political realities.

[stupidicus]

31. they're obviously just a bunch of ignorant young tools and fools

that still need ma and pa to tell them how and what to think, which would be wrong if it was anything but vote HC

[anotherproletariat]

64. Saying that a group is idealistic is not the same as saying they are ignorant...

Every generation goes through the phase of wanting a 'new voice' (in quotes because obviously in this situation, the voice has been there for a long time, but the policies haven't yet been tried). Gary Hart, Ross Perot, Ron Paul...all excited young people with their novel approach to governing. Most older people realize that this is a normal part of youth, it is natural to be idealistic at this stage in life. Obama was idealistic enough to garner the youth vote, while mainstream enough to attract the rank and file.

I think what your sensing is the feeling people get as they become more experienced, that idealism gives way to pragmatism. It may seem sad to you, but truly, idealism on both sides (liberal and conservative) is generally too far out of the mainstream to work in a democracy that relies on give and take.

[stupidicus]

74. spare me

the last time I looked, ignorance is defined as

lack of knowledge or information.

and was the sole charge posed and addressed by me

"I think it's only fair that Sanders inform these young Americans of the unlikelihood of a Republican-controlled House considering his new entitlement spending proposals. That would be a fairer approach IMO."

gee, what does "informing" accomplish but a reduction in ignorance, well, except maybe in the criminally stupid?

I'm over 60 years old and think that pragmatism taken too far is an abandonment of principles. To say that revival of the New Deal spirit in principle and practice is being too "idealistic" serves as nothing more than an identifier of a few things about you, and nothing more.

sad indeed

[Trust Buster]

79. Thank you. I couldn't have said it better myself.

I believe that a lot of people don't realize that, if Sanders fails, not only will we not move 25 years ahead but a 6-2 Right leaning Supreme Court will send us back 25 years. That's a 50 year swing. I do not believe the average college student traditionally practices a broad cost/benefit analysis. My intention is not meant to denigrate them. I was young once too.

[KPN]

67. +1!

[daleanime]

62. You pick a perfect name for yourself.....

[Vincardog]

77. Obama has tried that tract. He never offers anything the GOP wouldn't accept and then waters it

Down even further during the "negotiations".
I call BS on that approach.
We are electing a DEMOCRAT to represent our DEMOCRATIC values.
You may support a different candidate but don't pretend that their is anything wrong with
Bernie's vision for America.

Your language betrays you " new entitlement spending " = code for "Anything that helps people".

[BernieforPres2016]

12. Running against Hillary is like playing a basketball game on the other team's home court

Where the other team also has hand picked the officials and given themselves a 20-0 lead to start the game.

But Bernie is applying the full court press and Hillary keeps throwing the ball away.

[brooklynite]

16. Just an observation that the "weak" candidates has gotten 60% of the vote so far...

And is ahead by 200+ pledged delegates. Let's wait and see if Michigan is a trend or an anomoly, shall we?

[Armstead]

20. You should take that 40 percent seriously

[Bluenorthwest]

27. Shall we? You never do. Here is you not waiting for a single vote to be cast: Aug 10

Has Bernie Sanders plateaued?
The polling aggregation model at Pollster.com is dramatic: Bernie Sanders shooting up from virtually nothing (note - while he does so, Hillary Clinton does not notably drop):
It appears that a lot of his original growth was in anticipation of his campaign, rather than because of it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251507696

[Onlooker]

18. Well, right now the fact is she is winning

Sanders is doing really well, basically feeding off the same sort of anger that Donald Trump is on the Republican side. There is a fierce anti-establishment sentiment in the country right now. I don't know if it will be enough for Sanders to prevail, but it's clearly enough for him to be competitive, and frankly it looks like he's getting stronger, not weaker, just like Donald Trump. Of course, that is the only similarity between Trump and Sanders, but it's an important one. In my opinion, if Sanders was more populist and less left, he would probably be running away with this election. In other words, he is not the ideal insurgent, like Trump apparently is to the Republicans, but Bernie is certainly good enough to shake up the whole Democratic Party. Even if he doesn't win the nomination, he is doing wonders for the Democrats.

[fun n serious]

22. I mostly agree with you here.

It's nice to see civil intelligent debating for once.

[Armstead]

23. There is a fundamental difference between Bernie and Trump

Bernie does have a certain personal political appeal to people, including his basic integrity and straightforwardness, and part of his support is based on that. Evidence of that is the comparative support he has received compared to Dennis Kucinich, who had a similar message but failed miserably becfause he didn't have that personal appeal to people.

However, on a deeper level, Bernie is simply channeling a coherent set of ideas and a message that is resonating with a large number of people's core beliefs and their frustrations. (Including many Democrats who agree with Bernie, but vote for Clinton for "pragmatic" reasons.)

That is what is driving his support..

Trump, on the otehr hand is simply a personality driven candidate. His only real message is "The people who run government are stupid. Vote for me because I know how to get great things done." The fact that he is a conservative and is appealing to bigotry is marketing.

Big difference in the larger scheme of things.

[Tom Rinaldo]

24. Thanks for a thoughtful comment

I framed the question as I did for careful reasons. I left it open for discussion, rather than simply leaping to the conclusion for example that Hillary is a weak candidate. That can be debated, I have my own opinions on that, but clearly something is happening and it falls within the range of the and/ors that I highlighted.

Sanders does seem at first to be speaking from "the Left" because there are so few prominent political voices in America arguing from his perspective, but mostly that's because those views are stifled by lack of money and widespread media access. The more he is heard however the more people realize that his values and priorities resonate with core America ones, and the ideological filters begin to fall away.

[fun n serious]

29. I give Sanders a lot of credit for his campaign..

He has a lot going against his idea. Not just our vote.. he will need to pull in republicans too and today DR Carson on CNN was alluding that Hillary was an EXTREME socialist and started using crazy conspiracy theory scare tactics.. He said these things about HILLARY during a press conference where he endorsed Trump. Imagine what they will say of Sanders if they are saying that of Hillary.

[Bluenorthwest]

32. Reason tells me that those who will call Hillary an extreme socialist and Obama a Kenyan Muslim

Marxist have no need of actual motive or cue to say whatever crazy shit they decide will serve them. This means that your suggested method of altering our choices to avoid what they might say about them is not the best idea. We could nominate Jim Webb and they'd call him a Commie Pacifist Lefty.

[fun n serious]

36. I am not saying WE must change our idea..

I am saying a socialist idea can not be sold to the majority right now.

[Tom Rinaldo]

34. See, that's why Sanders has an advantage, seriously...

He doesn't immediately run for cover and cower in a defense offense when a Republican tries to red bait him, the way Democrats for decades ran away from the "liberal" tag. He goes marital arts on them instead and turns the power of the attack into a full force debate on the issues on grounds that always favor democrats. When Republicans have attacked Democrats as "tax and spend liberals" in the past they screamed "Not Me!" and gave up the fight immediately, and tried to turn the debate toward some social issue instead that they thought they could win on instead. Bernie MAKES OUR CASE. He comes armed for bear on economic issues. Trump isn't running to the left of Hillary on trade in order to lose. He isn't promising to preserve Social Security the way it is, rather than recalculate COLA increases the way third way Democrats have proposed for years, because it's an unpopular position. Americans support progressive taxation in every poll taken - they think the rich should pay more. etc. etc. Democrats have feared red bating labels far too long. Economic issues are on our side.

[fun n serious]

43. That's not what I mean.

I mean republicans exist so Sanders has to over come his own party (Hillary supporters) and some republicans. Too much opposition for him. Though I am glad as I am not wanting to live in a socialist society. I believe in free trade and do not want to give up MY OWN power to thrive and succeed to the government.

[ljm2002]

50. And yet all of the polling shows...

...Bernie drawing in more Independents and Republicans than Hillary does. So I don't think your point really holds water.

The thing about Bernie is, he is able to get beyond the "socialist" (actually, democratic socialist) label. And by that I mean, not just that he himself gets beyond it, but he seems able to get people past it also. People do hear what he is saying about the various injustices and inequities in our current system, and people do respond to his honesty and how straightforward he is.

Furthermore, when it comes to Hillary vs. any Republican, they not only don't like her ideas, they hate her. So she is the one whose negatives on that score are overwhelming IMO.

Bernie is the one with crossover appeal, which is amusing since he is the left-est candidate out there.

As for your final comment, so-called "free" trade is not that. It is regulated largely for the benefit of the biggest companies, not for the little guys. And Bernie's style of DEMOCRATIC socialism would not give up anyone's power to thrive and succeed to the government. That is just propagandistic nonsense.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. If the point is to make arbitrary equations to Trump let's remember that Donald is the wealthy

front runner from New York getting traction based on years of high name recognition whose popularity comes hand in hand with contempt from a large portion of his own Party.
Similarities abound if we are talking sheer nonsense.

Populism that is 'less left' is what Trump does, it's basically right wing nationalism.

[salinsky]

28. I think Hillary is running a good, smart campaign ...

... and Bernie is just a much, much stronger candidate than anyone anticipated.

And yes, his message resonates powerfully, especially with white people aggrieved by their real or perceived loss of white privilege.

[thesquanderer]

35. Your last point is fiction.

re: "especially with white people aggrieved by their real or perceived loss of white privilege."

The fact that a majority of AA voters prefer Hillary does not mean that the people you describe are voting for Bernie. That's actually Trump's bailiwick.

[salinsky]

63. Both Trump and Sanders are running on somewhat radical populist messages ...

... Trump's is garnering the support of aggrieved white bigots, and Bernie is garnering the support of aggrieved white liberals.

Of course, the rigged economy is the reason that white voters are so receptive to these populist messages.

It was a bad choice of words on my part.

I just think that whites feel like the rug has been pulled from underneath them, while minorities know the game has been rigged all along.

[marions ghost]

47. Trump rally

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over that way....

Hurry. They need you.

[salinsky]

58. The coverage has made it clear that I wouldn't be welcome there.

[ljm2002]

51. What a shameful, nasty remark that is...

...implying that Bernie's supporters are motivated due to their "real or perceived loss of white privilege".

Not hard to figure out which candidate you support. Like attracts like, I guess.

[salinsky]

59. It wasn't meant to be nasty ...

... it's just an observation that Bernie's more radical (and I don't mean that as a criticism) message does not appear to resonate with minorities the way it does for white liberals.

There must be an underlying reason for that.

And, I'll be supporting the Democratic nominee, whoever that may turn out to be.

[ljm2002]

65. Nonsense.

You are being beyond dishonest here. Here is the objectionable sentence:

And yes, his message resonates powerfully, especially with white people aggrieved by their real or perceived loss of white privilege.

That statement is NASTY and DISGUSTING. Had you originally said what you say here, i.e. "does not appear to resonate with minorities the way it does for white liberals" I would not have commented. But you just had to go there, in the post I responded to, by claiming that our (white liberals') support for Bernie is BECAUSE we are "aggrieved by ... real or perceived loss of white privilege."

NASTY and DISGUSTING and typical Clintonite gaslighting tactics.

You should be ashamed of it, but instead you try and soften it, claiming you meant something much more innocuous. But guess what? YOUR WORDS ARE OUT THERE FOR ALL OF US TO SEE.

[salinsky]

70. It is what it is, man ...

... both Trump's and Sander's populist messages are resonating with white people because they're pissed and not without legitimate cause.

It doesn't resonate as much for minorities because they're not just now coming to the realization that the game is rigged.

For a "Clintonite gaslighter", I sure as hell got barred from participating in the Hillary Clinton group quick.

[ljm2002]

72. My god man...

...if you can't see what is objectionable about claiming that Bernie's supporters are largely motivated by an aggrieved sense they have lost their "white privilege"... no hope.

TTFN

[gordyfl]

33. Hillary Knows How to Win

Sanders Campaign Says This Photo Proves Clinton Broke Rules





http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sanders-campaign-says-this-photo-proves-clinton-broke-rules-during-univision-debate/

[fun n serious]

37. Oh c'mon. I have more damning evidence than that of Sanders and a better "source"

I won't post it where I am heavily censored for my freedom of speech though..

[ljm2002]

52. Please, present your evidence...

...if you have it.

Or is it one of those Joe McCarthy-type lists, where one continues to claim such a list exists, without ever actually producing one?

Put up or...

[JFKDem62]

38. People are ready for a female president, but rejecting establishment candidates.

Any one representing the oligarchy and engaging in destruction politics will not
prevail in November.

It will be Trump vs Sanders, Sanders will win.

[Utopian Leftist]

85. This is true, and a good point.

The other side is too smart to put up an oligarch, after watching Obama support the oligarchs for 8 years.

That's why Bush lost out so quickly. The CONs are mightily evil but they ain't downright stupid.

Under ordinary circumstances, an out-of-control egomaniac like DRump would be laughed at for aspiring to the Oval Office. These are no ordinary times.

Like it or not, Hillary is one of our primary symbols of oligarchy. Not a good time to run her as our candidate! I'd say she'd have a better chance in 8 years but I don't wish to give her any ideas....

[JFKDem62]

87. She only had one window to win.

And that was 8 yrs ago.

But Obama was such an exceptional, once in a lifetime candidate,
and superior in so many ways, that she really never had a chance.

This was the point in time when a woman president would have been acceptable
and ties to the oligarchy not a losing proposition.

Yes we are in the midst of a political revolution in our society on both sides.
Most people don't see it yet, but it is happening.

[IllinoisLabour]

90. Yep, all the party had to do was tag Elizabeth Warren for the job

That would have kept Sanders out of the race and would have still drawn all of his voters.

Instead, they couldn't stand up to Hillary when she and the rest of the GOP-lite wing of the party declared that it was "her turn."

[ibegurpard]

39. Or all of the above

[bigtree]

40. most Democrats are solid with either choice

...republicans are divided.

[Skwmom]

42. I'm continually amazed how people fail to see paradigm shifts. n/t

[fun n serious]

45. I agree. I can not be convinced.

I am set right where I will remain.

[Skwmom]

41. This is the year of the perfect storm and it was only a matter of time before it hit. n/t

[stupidicus]

44. bernie's success represents and is due to unsated needs and desires

on the part of lefties who only needed a leader like him to give voice to them at a time and under circumstances like an election where they couldn't be ignored. That he's able to do it against a prominent 3rdway usurper and thief of the democratic spirit and been able to compare and contrast the the diffs between what was, is, and could be for the future of the party and country it seeks to govern, has made it not unlike a "Network Moment" that has been long overdue.

As a longtime 3rdway and Clinton critic, in the last few years debating that type here on DU I've come to feel much less like the lone wolf, and more like part of the pack that will chew their asses off...lol

[fun n serious]

46. Well, I guess we will wait and see. nt.

[fbc]

48. It means that DINOs are dying off and the future belongs to progressives.

[Chicago1980]

49. Either way, whomever the candidate is, they're going to need the supporters

of the other to win.

I'm going to certainly work on my snakiness, because when I get irritated, I know that I can be a smart-ass when I post.

We'll all have to come together in the end.

[Skwmom]

53. It is a combo. Bernie is a strong candidate (can't be bought, honest) and his message is powerful.

[DownriverDem]

54. Powerful

I think Bernie's message is powerful, but I have my doubts of it being enacted.

[Amimnoch]

56. He's convincingly made promises he has to know he can't keep in traditional politician fashion.

and it's sold.

So, I'd say his message is Powerful is the main reason.

He has proven himself to be a VERY astute politician of the most traditional order.

[sadoldgirl]

57. We should not forget, what really started the tea baggers.

It was the bailout.Very quickly the Koch brothers redirected
that anger into the RW memes.

People are angry about it still, and see no change. They
also are upset about the rule money plays in politics, and
have felt that both parties did not listen to their concerns.

That is were Bernie's message does hit home for all sides
to a different degree. So, yes, I think it is mostly the
message. Of course, hie authenticity and integrity has
appeal as well, but without his message it would not work.

The problem with HRC is that she represents the same old,
which a lot of voters don't like. The lack of public trust in
her veracity is adding to her problem.

Neither candidate is very strong, but at this point I give
Bernie the advantage.

[gordyfl]

68. With Hillary as President...

we'll have more of this...

2008 Bailout

[Duval]

60. His message is powerful.

He's speaking for the Middle Class, as well as the poor. He's speaking for college students facing $30,000 in debt after college.
Actually, he's speaking to all of us and his message is resonating among all age spectrums.

[daleanime]

61. or both....

or all three.

[George II]

69. I guess they're both "misunderstood"....

...since Clinton is leading Sanders by 58%-42% in pledged delegates and she has more than 20% more popular votes.

So, who are the weak and strong candidates?

[gordyfl]

71. Bernie Sanders Has Been Fighting the Middle Class for a Long Time

The only member of Congress mentioned in this video is "Bernie Sanders".

This animated video was posted (updated) in 2010.

Bernie is mentioned at the 5 minute mark of the video.

[Maedhros]

75. Hillary's candidacy is driven by the inertia of identity politics.

Sanders' candidacy is driven by the need to do a better job of governing.

[KPN]

89. Great observation!

Hopefully enough people are waking up to the difference.

[azretired]

76. Any democrat we select should win in November

I have been watching presidential elections since the first Eisenhower-Stevenson contest in 1952. While I may certainly be wrong on this, I don't think the GOP will win back the presidency no matter which of their current candidates wins the nomination. When the majority leader of the Senate says he will not support their currently leading candidate, not to mention dozens of other signs of disarray in the GOP, either HRC or BS will almost certainly win the presidency. No matter which current candidate of the GOP gets the nomination, there will be a huge split within the party. That assumes, of course, an enthusiastic response from democrats and a victory among independents, a group now larger than registered democrats or republicans.

[Dem2]

80. Hillary has never been a good candidate

She is good at a job once he gets it, but she is not great at the interview.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

81. Bottom line: Hillary is a Clinton and could make history vs Bernie Who?

From where?

Hillary's been prepping herself for this day for a quarter of a century. No one ever heard of Bernie. Bernie was pretty much called to run from Thom Hartmann listeners. And even then he said he'd only considerate if a Progressive didn't step forward to run against Hillary. That was when we were clamouring for Elizabeth to run. When it finally became clear that she wasn't going to run, he started to research the viability of a run.

His message is strong. One can only wonder whether, given time and in the absence of a Clinton, whether his message would resonate with southern blacks, too. Unfortunately, he didn't have time and he is running against a Clinton. Throw in a media black out and a run against a machine, and you begin to appreciate just how powerful his message is. The Primary is set up so that if you get out in front early, it's almost impossible to catch up.

And that's the bottom line.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

82. All of the above!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Gmak]

83. Whenever I hear that Hillary is a strong candidate, I have to resist the urge

to scream or beat my head against the wall. How can anyone with a memory write such a thing! She tried to get in the forefront of every important initiative when Bill was president, but now, when some of those same policies have turned out to be disastrous, we are reminded that it was his job. Can't have it both ways, my dear, or at least we peons can't.

I may get in trouble with DU admin over this post, but I don't care. I don't come here to speak my mind or argue my point of view, as you can see from my profile, usually just read the latest and greatest and enjoy others, but today I need to say this.

So we want this same pair being the face of the Democratic party for another 4 to 8 year?! What are we? A monarchy? I admit that I have a store of bile for the Clintons and it comes from living and suffering through the Reagan and Bush 1 years, watching my city lose almost all of their good-paying union jobs, high school kids not being able to find after school jobs as family men and women had to take them, IBM laying off for the 1st time in their history, by the thousands, watching all the young people leaving for greener pastures so that now, we are mainly a town of senior citizens, and service workers, and having so much hope that some of the damage they had inflicted on the innocent and suffering in our society would be mitigated at last, only to watch in horror as some of the meanest, cruelest measures in terms of those most in need were enacted, because it helped their personal agendas. How she keeps the support of a majority of black voters just speaks to the power of corporate media propaganda. Wanting to hide in shame at Bill's shenanigans and knowing there will be media salivating to find more disgraceful behavior on his part.

She was a terrible candidate in 2008, arrogant, entitled, using dirty tactics against Obama, and revealing that she will say anything just to get elected. How is 2016 any different? She was a bad Sec. of State, in that it has been shown that she pushed Obama to take a more hawkish approach several times, as another sign of her bad judgment, or was it because of Clinton Foundation donations? She's on record as calling the Egypt's dictator Mubarak family friends. As a Senator, she did not introduce a single bill of consequence. Yes, I know she co-sponsored some. She has fawned at Wall Street's feet for, lo these many years, and taken an obscene amount of money from the very people who crashed the economy and will do it again! How do you reconcile that playing well in an anti-establishment year while millions still try to get by on several part-time jobs and live in fear of any illness that can't be cured with over-the-counter meds?

Her judgment is flawed in so many ways. Not least in that she really believes we owe her the presidency for all she has suffered over the years. Her handlers have not allowed her to speak to the reporters who travel with her every day for over 2 months.

In conclusion, she is a celebrity, so we should vote for her. The Donald is a celebrity too, by the way. Do you want to gamble on which one wins the popularity contest?