A guide to the Bernie or Bust phenomenon.

[DanTex]

There are four general strains of BoB justifications going around. I believe it is useful to identify them:

Personal animosity. Some on the far left (and the right) hate Hillary at a personal, visceral level. They don't want her to have the personal success of becoming president, they want to see her fail humiliatingly. They want the schadenfreude.

And let's face it, personal feelings like this are human. Take Trump, for example. I want Trump to lose because he would be a disaster for the nation and the world, but there's definitely a part of me that simply wants to see his smug racist self cry like a baby during his concession speech. Conversely, I do not want to watch him have the gratification of becoming POTUS. Sure, it's petty, and obviously the damage he'd do is much more important than how much it would bug me personally to watch him get inaugurated, but it's there.

But for people to put these feelings of personal vengeance above the well being of millions of people is unconscionable.

Marxist crisis theory/accelerationism. Here the idea is that if we can't have a socialist utopia right now, it's actually better if the inequities and injustices of capitalism become more severe, because that will give rise to class consciousness and hasten the socialist revolution. So Trump would be preferable to Clinton, since all the human suffering he causes would "wake people up." In ol' Karl's words:

But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade.

Substitute "Trump" for "free trade" and you have the Bernie or Bust manifesto.

Blackmail. Many on the far left think that by throwing the election to Trump, they can blackmail the Democratic Party into embracing socialism in future elections. They argue that if the far left stays out and that causes Trump to win, the Dems will finally realize that socialism is the key to winning over voters. Is this dumb? Of course, but they really believe it.

There are similarities between this justification and the crisis theory, but they are distinct. Whereas the crisis theorists see the human suffering that Trump will bring on as an actual good thing, because it wakes people up, the blackmailers just don't care. Blackmail is precisely the reason that Nader helped W to the 2000 presidency. Of course it didn't work; people don't like being blackmailed, and Nader is now rightly considered a egomaniacal pariah by most Democrats.

Narcissism. The final major branch of BoB ideology is "my conscience". "My soul will be intact." This is pure narcissism. These BoBers would feel uncomfortable voting for Hillary, and they value their own psychological comfort more than the very real suffering of millions of their fellow humans.

Needless to say, none of the people who make this argument are going to be affected personally by Trump's policies. If it were the choice between having to check a box you don't feel thrilled about or having your family torn apart, losing your health coverage, or being forced into a back alley abortion, they'd all check the box. But when it's someone else's family, that's a different story.



Regardless of justification, what the people making any of these arguments have in common is that they are invariably not the ones that are going to to be suffering. Bernie or Bust is, above all, an expression of privilege.

[redstateblues]

1. The Bernie or Bust contingent is not a joyful bunch

[Cali_Democrat]

2. They are angry and hateful

and very privileged.

[NastyRiffraff]

58. Of course they're not joyful

They're losing.

[Electric Monk]

3. You forgot one. Hillary has far too much baggage, and I just can't in good conscience bring myself

to ever vote for her. Period.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1572498

[DanTex]

5. That was number 4.

[Electric Monk]

6. Nope. You only wish so. nt

[wildeyed]

4. The thing about revolutions,

if you look at them historically, they don't always turn out the way the people who engineered them hoped.

I am hoping that tempers subside after the heat of the primary is over and we all begin to recognize our shared goals and agendas again.

[KitSileya]

9. The thing about revolutions, is that they usually hurt Clinton voters.

People of color, women (especially women of color), the poor, people with disabilities. They're the ones doing the suffering and dying because some jerks want to end up with empty chairs at empty tables. Incrementalism works. Protests work. Peaceful protests work. It isn't sexy, but look at what the tea party has achieved through the ballot box. We can do the same if we co-operate. Unlike them, though, we actually need realistic suggestions, since we want to build and not obstruct.

[wildeyed]

105. I have seen it work too.

It does require a bit of patience and hard work, but what significant achievement doesn't?

And I also think people underestimate the evilness of the GOP agenda. They are very smart and play a long game too. We are every close to gaining the upper hand if we can snag the next couple of Supreme Court appointments. Between that and way demographics are trending, we can put ourselves at a significant advantage and soon. But only of we work together. They know that and are working overtime to sow discontent in our ranks. Divide and conquer is the oldest trick in the book.

[Chan790]

70. Do we have shared goals and agendae anymore?

I'm not sure we do.

[wildeyed]

102. Actual progressives?

Yes. We just disagree about the best way to accomplish those goals.

The swing voters and libertarians who like the new flavor of politician but don't want to do any work? Not so much. They are not much use anyway. This is a war against the GOP and we need soldiers. People who come with lots of demands, threatening not to vote and pissing all over the coalition members who historically do show up on election day are not real attractive team members in the first place, IMO.

[murielm99]

7. Privilege, yes.

It could not be more obvious.

Thank you for this thread.

[NurseJackie]

8. Outstanding post! These are observations and thoughts that have been ...

... rattling around inside my own brain, but whenever I tried to express them, I failed. You've done an excellent job of putting it all out there in a logical, organized and rational way. And for that, I thank you!

[DanTex]

14. Thanks NJ!

And thanks for the encouragement!

[Armstead]

10. If your goal is to convince them to vote for Clinton....

this sales pitch fails miserably.

If your goal is just shit stirring, congratulations. You succeeded.

[DanTex]

12. My goal is to lay out what I feel are the motivations of BoBers.

Do you agree with my assessment? Why or why not? What do you think is motivating self-described progressives to help Trump get elected president?

[Armstead]

19. I think people have a variety of motivations

There are people to whom Clinton and the current Centrist Democratic Party are as bad as the GOP, in a different way.So the choice is irrelevant.

There are people who have strong objections to Clinton for one reason or another, and the thought of voting for her is as repellent as voting for Trump would be.

There are people who are fed up with perpetual "lesser evil" choice posed by the democrats in almost every election, and this is the straw that breaks their former willingness to go along with it.

There are other variations.

I disagree with their decision not to do their part to keep the GOP out of the WH. But I understand their reasons, and if the prospect of the GOP were not so awful, might be tempted to join them.

[DanTex]

23. Fair enough. Let's take them one at a time.

There are people to whom Clinton and the current Centrist Democratic Party are as bad as the GOP, in a different way.So the choice is irrelevant.

Obviously those people are insane, agreed?

There are people who have strong objections to Clinton for one reason or another, and the thought of voting for her is as repellent as voting for Trump would be.

These people are either insane or narcissistic, as I explained in the OP, they care more about their discomfort checking a box than the real suffering of millions (likely billions, worldwide).

There are people who are fed up with perpetual "lesser evil" choice posed by the democrats in almost every election, and this is the straw that breaks their former willingness to go along with it.

This is either Marxist crisis theory or blackmail, both of which I addressed in the OP. Marxist crisis theory is garbage, and blackmail doesn't work, as proven by Nader.


Honestly, I don't know why you are sticking up for these people. We've tangled, and agreed (sometimes) and disagreed (more times), but you're an intelligent person, and it's at least possible that you think I am as well. You know what's at stake. And you know that BoB does nothing but help Trump win. What gives?

[Armstead]

30. Dan, Dan, Dan.....Insane and narcissitic is not the language in a discussion

It doesn't help to demonize people.

I disagree with hardcore conservatives too. But I have conservative Republican friends who are also intelligent and decent people.

(Yes I occasionally paint right wingers with a broad brush, but in general I try to remember that we're all just mortals struggling on earth and try to apply that, except for extremes like the KKK and Isis members.)

[DanTex]

35. It is when discussing insanity and narcissism.

You didn't respond to anything I said. Do you agree with me that BoBers are doing nothing but helping Trump?

Yeah, I have right-wing friends in real life, but when I meet them, I tell them how I feel (and they tell me). And if they posted on DU I wouldn't hold back, any more than I do with the BoBers. Should I not?

[TheSarcastinator]

32. yeah, no ad hominem there

I mean, it's clear to intelligent people that all Bernie supporters are either Marxists, narcissists, or just insane!

[DanTex]

36. Did I insult Armstead at all? No.

As far as Bernie or Busters, these are people who are trying to help Trump become president. No, I don't have anything good to say about them, any more than I do Republicans. I'm sure some of them are decent people, and yes, I have Republican friends, but this is a political forum.

[insta8er]

52. I don't agree with your post..and here is why...You are guilt tripping Bernie voters to go with your

Candidate because:

1. The poor will suffer.
2. The minorities will suffer.
3. The world will end.

You never however seem to taken into account the true face of your candidate and how it will bite those you are bringing up as potential sufferers....

So vote your candidate and get this.
1. Fracking.
2. Continuation of the same old boys network.
3. Corruption that favors the rich and not your so called poor and minorities.

In fact your minorities have suffered at the hands of this power couple for decades and continue to suffer, they receive contributions from the very industries that like to have the status quo stay as it is...how will this change if your morally corrupt candidate gets chosen?

Please stop your hostage taking, I for one will sit this one out if the choice is bad..or worse.

[DanTex]

55. You do understand that whatever complaints you have with H, T will be (much) worse.

[insta8er]

57. At least I am not being sold on something that is not what it looks to be, like it or not but Trump

Is more transparent about who he is and all of the bad he stands for.

[DanTex]

59. You're not seriously arguing that Trump would be better than Hillary, are you?

[insta8er]

76. Comprehension....I didn't say that, I know you would like me to say that because it would

embolden the prejudice you have when it comes to people who favor Bernie over your candidate. The truth of the matter is, I said that Trump is a whole lot more honest about his intentions then your candidate, I don't like all of his hateful messaging and his neo conservatism and nepotism. But you know in the end you know what you got with this guy, something that cannot be said about the shape shifting when it is politically advantages by the candidate that you support.

[DanTex]

86. Wow. Trump more honest than Hillary.

[bobthedrummer]

16. +1 n/t

[Cary]

60. Ha!

I don't recall any of us trying to convert you. Mostly we talk about how we don't need you.

Who is trying to sell what to whom?

[Armstead]

65. I said I'm going to vote for Clinton if she's the candidate

I'd suggest you fucking read posts before responding to them

[Cary]

79. I read your post and it says nothing of.the sort.

If you're smart you will vote Democratic. If you're not smart you will do something else. But that is up to you.

[Armstead]

81. I hear it is possible to get very inexpensive tutoring in reading comprehension

"I disagree with their decision not to do their part to keep the GOP out of the WH. But I understand their reasons, and if the prospect of the GOP were not so awful, might be tempted to join them.

[Cary]

92. That isn't the post I replied to

A bit touchy today, eh?

[mcar]

11. Interesting analysis

[frylock]

13. A movement that is so insignificant that Dan has to post about every hour on the hour.

Getting nervous, Dan?

[DanTex]

15. I think it's an interesting intellectual exercise. So what do you think their motivations are?

[frylock]

17. I think you're intellect may want to get a gym membership.

[DanTex]

18. If I'm not mistaken, that was an ad hominem attack against moi. C'est vrai?

[TheSarcastinator]

25. after your own multiple ad hominem attacks on Bernie and his supporters

Straight from the Karl Rove playbook. Go Team Status Quo!

[frylock]

28. IKR.

Who, little ol' me?

[frylock]

26. Check out the big brain on Brad!

[CorkySt.Clair]

33. It's "your" in that context, Ace

[frylock]

37. Yeah, you got me there.

[revmclaren]

22. People who state facts are never nervous about what they believe.

People who post lies are always nervous. Distortion, hypocritical smears, created misinformation all are the tools of the habitual liar.

[frylock]

27. Yep. Like I said..

Getting nervous?

[revmclaren]

39. And as I stated...Im never nervous stating the truth.

And I stand by my statement, now and when Dan and I and the Democrats at DU are still here after Clinton gets the nomination.

And you will be.....?

[frylock]

40. Carrying on with my life?

[revmclaren]

43. Good for you.

Have a blessed and happy one. No sarcasm intended.

[frylock]

54. You as well.

[DanTex]

53. True that!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

20. Don't you vote your consciouos? If not, why not?

I don't have any "personal animosity" towards Hillary. I just think she's unfit to president. I think the same of any Republican.

I'm not a Marxist.

Blackmail: Threatening that anyone who doesn't vote for Hillary will get Trump.

[basselope]

21. They are people who weren't voting Clinton anyway.

I was never planning on voting for her no matter what, since I don't vote for republicans.

[OilemFirchen]

94. Then they should shut the fuck up.

Announcing that they're committed to doing what they've always been committed to doing?

Who gives a shit?

[basselope]

100. People who want positive change in this country.

Sorry, no, we won't "shut up". We will speak up loudly and proudly and make sure to say "I told you so" if you make the mistake of not heeding the warnings.

[redstateblues]

106. She was one the most liberal Senators in Congress. Hardly a Republican

Just a smear. You are no Democrat

[basselope]

107. LMAO.

Republicans voted for the war.

She right of center.. aka ... A REPUBLICAN

[DanTex]

112. It's actually a fact. She was ranked 11th most liberal member of the senate.

Voted with Bernie over 90% of the time.

[basselope]

116. Yes.. i know there are many DINOS

Thats why they are called "the establishment".

Being the 11th most liberal democratic senator is meaningless... shes a republican.

[Iliyah]

24. K & R

Thanks DanTex!

[Meteor Man]

29. Categorization Error

Dan Tex overlooked the Paul Wellstone Democrats who oppose Hillary for principled reasons and used to call themselves the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.
There are also Anti-war Berniecrats [link:http://davidswanson.org/blog| who oppose regime change as an excuse for unjustified wars.
Gee. How about the Economic Progress Berniecrats who may generally agree with Dean Baker on his call for The End of Loser Liberalism as well as Joseph Stiglitz and his critiqes of neoliberalism and inequality.
There are multitudes of principled reasons Berniecrats have for supporting Bernie.

[DanTex]

31. We are all fortunate to be blessed by Meteor Man, who joined us 2 days ago.

[NurseJackie]

49. :-)

Perfect.

[Meteor Man]

66. Just Fell In

I was on my way home from the bar and wound up here. Anyone remember where I parked my car?

[Nay]

97. Yeah. Love the initial caps on random words -- classic.

[HumanityExperiment]

34. more troll bait from HRC supporters...

usual suspect(s) seeking attention through their trolling efforts...

[Betty Karlson]

38. When are you going to stop beating this dead horse from la-la-land?

I doubt your efforts will revive anything good.

[PufPuf23]

41. I support Sanders but would support just about any Democratic candidate over Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton was my #9 (least favored) D POTUS candidate in 2006.

IMO Hillary Clinton lacks the integrity and judgment to be POTUS.

Clinton would be a step backward from POTUS Obama and a step backward for the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party was purposefully infiltrated as a vehicle for power and money and is now led by these types of politicians and not by the New Deal/Great Society Democrats of FDR/JFK/LBJ.

The Democratic Party leadership are mostly neo-liberal in economic policy.

Clinton is also neo-conservative in foreign policy.

These are not empty labels but true divides in our party and the USA.

Clinton distances herself from "liberals" and is a war hawk.

Why should I support a politician that does not respect my vote nor hold my views?

I want Clinton and like pols out of the Democratic Party.

Folks that support her lies and cynical elitism should be ashamed.

I note that Clinton has long involvement with that treasonist sect "The Family".

The only reason I could see voting for Clinton is that if the general POTUS election was close to avoid a GOP nightmare.

If Clinton is elected POTUS, we are looking for at best 4 to 8 years of treading water and drifting ever backward into post-Democratic America.

I like Sanders and his proposed policies enough that I want to see the effort by the Democratic Party under his leadership even if it is a fail. If a fail, there is at least the basis for try and try again.

If it would bring the Democratic Party together, I am all for some sort of brokered convention to find a compromise candidate.

Clinton is the candidate of cynical privilege not Bernie Sanders. Clinton is the candidate of 1984-style double speak.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. Marxist crisis theory/accelerationism.

LMAO, this is fucking hilarious. The 1950s called, they would like their red baiting back

And you have no fucking clue about Marxism.

This one struck me as sheer comedy, Thanks, needed the laugh.

Oh and this will go a long way to convince folks to vote, let alone work, for your candidate NOT.

You got an A plus in shit stirring though,.

[DanTex]

44. Ooh, a NOT joke! Did they put you through this humor course in journo school?

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. Alas you are the one writing comedy, not me

[DanTex]

46. You can do better than that! Focus!

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. What write commedy? Or personal attacks. Dan that is your M.O

and you are so predictable it is not even funny. Now enough wasting of my time. But thanks for the joke. When reading Donald J Trump to explain his political philosophy, one needs a break from time to time. That is some dark material.

[revmclaren]

47. Trumps campaign is a very dark comedy

in which we may all become bit actors if we are not very, very careful. One on the scale of Dr. Strangelove.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. Funny that you should mention that

since the big boys will not look at Trumpism, I am... should finish the first article soon.

[Shandris]

51. I was going to explain why this simplistic, myopic, ignorant post was wrong...

...until it dawned on me that this poor individual is simply uninformed and knows literally nothing about anything involving this concept. Just as I don't get angry when my ferrets poo on the floor, I can't get angry when someone hurls metaphorical poo on the walls in a tantrum of self-righteous fervor. It's like getting mad at the 'fricking fricks' kid.

Speaking of which...

[hellofromreddit]

56. What a lousy guide

Many Bernie voters are people who would not otherwise support a democrat. If Sanders gets knocked out of the running, those voters will naturally go back to where they came from. It is not because they're evil/narcissistic/stupid.

And hating/shaming them won't change their minds. All this talk of "privilege" appears to come from people who have the time/resources to hurl insults on a website all day long--a.k.a privilege. It does not lend credence to your opinion.

OTOH, a compelling argument to convince them to support Hillary could change some minds. I cannot wait to hear it!

[Cary]

61. So what?

[DanTex]

62. Hello from Reddit! You've been here a week and seem to know your way around...

Yes, I get that Bernie or Busters are so privileged that they can afford to "go back where they came from" (Berkeley? Burlington?) and don't need to worry about the harm that Trump would cause. And also that they are so selfish that they couldn't care less about other people who don't want to be deported "back where they came from" simply because a bunch of BoBs needed to feel better about themselves.

That was my point.

[hellofromreddit]

87. The Bernie or Bust types I know are Trump voters that I've talked into supporting Bernie

Here is their perspective, to help you understand their thinking: they are watching everything get more expensive and they've had to roll back on luxuries, vacations, big investments, etc. Some have fallen into poverty. And they can't build a better life for their own kids. They can tell that their lives are falling apart and the people who are supposed to care about fixing that--our leaders--don't. The Iraq war didn't get them prestige in the world, but the ACA didn't get them healthcare either. All these taxes and nothing in return.

Not what I'd consider privileged people by any stretch.

To them, they want change. So they look for the candidate promising to break the whole broken system wide open and replace it with something--anything else. Trump and Sanders are the two candidates promising that. It just happens that only one means it while the other is a TV character.

Hillary has geared her campaign towards emphasizing continuity with Obama's leadership. That's great for voters who like Obama's leadership, but to people watching their lives fall apart today, promising to stay the course sounds pretty bad. While she has made some efforts to address these problems, she always rolls back to emphasizing continuity, so she's not wining those folks over.

They aren't all the stupid, vindictive, narcissistic man-children you describe them as. They're people who want change and are willing to take a chance on the leaders who advocate it.

[DanTex]

89. Fair enough. Here's the thing.

I get that there are voters that see something in Trump for one reason or another. I know my fair share of right-wingers and many of them are decent people, and no, they're not all one-percenters. In fact, one of the interesting things is to hear people struggling economically argue that we need more tax cuts for the wealthy and other policies that would directly hurt them economically.

But I can respect these people as humans without respecting their political beliefs. I feel the same way about BoBs. Sure, I can respect that some of them are struggling and want change. But I cannot respect their political ideology, since Trumpisim is implicit in it.

More to the point, the people you are talking about aren't Bernie or Busters. They aren't liberals. They are disaffected working class whites. They don't claim to be liberals, and they're not sitting out the election to soothe "their soul." The BoBs posting articles on the lefty internet (e.g. HA Goodman) are in fact privileged people who want to see others suffer for their "revolution."

[hellofromreddit]

115. FWIW

Many of the voters I was describing actually were former democrats. One couple flat-out told as much. They showed me where they pulled the Obama sticker off their car after they felt that he abandoned them. They consider themselves liberals, and talking about issues with them made it clear that it's an appropriate claim. They do believe in education, unions, and a social safety net. They do not believe in interventionist wars, the ever-growing MIC, or invasive anti-abortion laws. Yeah, like I said, they're wrong about Trump actually being aligned with those ideas, but that's not the same thing as them being opposed to those ideas--it's a different problem.

So like it or not, they exist. And they're more common than any of the caricatures your guide described.

You can respect their political beliefs while still adamantly disagreeing. And you'll get much further with a perspective that allows you to have a discussion with them than you will by stamping demeaning labels on them.

[Cary]

63. k&r

And they have it backwards. They need mainstream Democrats, not the other way around.

[NastyRiffraff]

64. Excellent, Dan, thanks!

Personally I think the majority of BoBs follow your last point: Narcissism. Before this primary, it was hard to imagine that people in any numbers would actually be so conceited as to think THEIR ideological "conscience" is more important than the good of their country.

[DanTex]

67. Thanks. To be honest, I think #1: personal animosity is pretty big.

There's a lot of outright hatred, and they just don't want to see Hillary standing there with a big smile making history. But there are different types. It's an interesting psychological phenomenon, because I do believe most of them have some liberal views (maybe), but they are acting in direct opposition to their professed political beliefs.

[MellowDem]

68. If the only people that can be principled...

are those with privilege, because either way, they won't suffer, what's Hillary's excuse?

And do you think that some people oppose Clinton because they are currently suffering and will continue to suffer with her in power?

I think you need to check your privilege, only someone unaware of their own privilege could have the luxury of reading the minds of a whole group of people and dividing them into four neat boxes that fit all their own prejudices just fine.

[DanTex]

72. Most everyone would suffer more under Trump, do you disagree?

People who are currently struggling don't want to struggle more. The BoBers are not struggling, and they won't be struggling even under Trump. That's why they are willing to let others suffer in order to help their "consciences" or forward their long term political goals.

[MellowDem]

74. If I had to read minds...

I'm guessing most people who say that already think Clinton will win quite easily against Trump. I vote the lesser of two evils always, but that's me, and I don't blame people that vote or don't vote based on their principles, I blame the candidate and party that nominates someone that would be unacceptable to many people. That's where the blame lies, not to mention the vast majority of power and privilege.

A vote against Clinton is a vote against privilege. She really is a moderate conservative. She was a bigot when it suited her and will throw people under the bus when it suits her. Well, I vote for a moderate conservative when it suits me I guess. My worldview allows me to vote for her nonetheless, but I'm pissed that this is the "choice" I get. Railing against the "privileged" voters who are doing it on principle doesn't address that you and I are voting to maintain privilege while they are not, all in the belief that we're right that we're avoiding something worse.

That's not a healthy democracy. If we had a parliamentary system with proportional representation, it wouldn't be seen as a "privilege" to be able to vote for someone who you respected and who you agreed with on the issues. Blaming the people in such a fucked up system just seems so damn... Privileged.

[DanTex]

84. I don't see how you justify voting against Clinton when so much is at stake.

I'm sure it makes some people feel better about themselves, but you must acknowledge that those feelings of self-esteem come at the cost of very real potential harm to millions of others. The cost of a Trump presidency isn't "clouded consciences". It's families torn apart, jobs lost, healthcare lost, and back alley abortions. This is the effing presidency of the United States, and whatever you think of Clinton, the differences between her and Trump are enormous.

I get that you are pissed at the choices. But you still realize what the right choice is. Not realizing that requires an immense amount of privilege and narcissism. Have BoBs never had to make a tough decision in their lives?

PS, I totally agree with a parliamentary, proportional representation system. There are so many problems with our system. The house is gerrymandered and subject to demographic distortions. They senate gives people in Wyoming 50x per capita representation versus people in California. The whole thing is illogical.

But at the end of the day, this is the reality. I can't fiat a parliamentary system into existence.

[Bread and Circus]

69. Racists, mysogenists, hatemongers, Marxists, Extortionists, and Narcissists....

These are the names you and your campaign supporters call fellow liberals and progressives?

And you wonder why people aren't happy with you and your candidate?

Get a clue.

[DanTex]

73. BoBs are not progressives. A progressive would not help Trump get elected.

[Bread and Circus]

75. You and other posters love to call people names but then some of you get caught on other websites...

saying outright anti-Semitic things and other hateful non-constructive statements. Usually it's the ones that constantly throw around labels that are the most guilty. Maybe it's just projection, I don't know.

But what I'd like to know is who died and put you in charge to judge other people and be the master of labels? Where do you get the temerity to call people mysogenists, racists, narcissists, and extortionists?

Stop and look in a mirror for a moment.

[DanTex]

85. Please don't insinuate that I'm anti-Semitic. That's low, even for you.

[Bread and Circus]

93. I am insinuating it's people like you who cast the most labels are often the most guilty.

And what I cited is poignant example.

[DanTex]

95. "People like me." Please.

[ThePhilosopher04]

71. Dan the Gatlin Gun strikes again. Churning out anti-Bernie propaganda at a dizzying rate.

[RepubliCON-Watch]

77. Damn Dan back at it again...

With the red-baiting!

[CanadaexPat]

78. You have a narrow view of privilege.

You're privileged not to have US bombs falling on your head.

[Kalidurga]

80. Bernie or Bust is, above all, an expression of privilege.

And there it is. That idea that voting is a privilege and not a right. Of course the idea of voting being a privilege and not an actual right is enshrouded in law in that felons can lose the right to vote and RepubliCONS and other CONservatives work hard at making voting as difficult as possible.

[Gothmog]

82. The concept of not supporting the nominee of the party is foreign to me

[Politicalboi]

83. Bernie or Bust

It's principle NOT privilege. We have principles, we don't like what we see in Hillary. They suppress our votes and expect support?

[ky_dem]

88. Can we be honest about the fact that unless you live in 1 of 7 states your vote does not matter

Unless you live in Ohio, Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Virginia, or Florida (let's potentially throw in New Mexico, Colorado, Wisconsin, Michigan and North Carolina - though I think these are less likely) your vote in the presidential race literally does not matter due to the Electoral College. I have the 'privilege' of being inconsequential this fall beyond what volunteering I do out-of-state (which I'll be honest - I can't see knocking on doors for H. Clinton because part of being an effective campaigner is actually believing in your candidate).

So the idea that the majority of us have to consider the 'broader implications' of our vote is nonsense. I refuse to give H. Clinton a vote in the general that will boost her popular vote total and imply some kind of mandate unless some real promises are made about things like 1) reinstating Glass-Steagall, 2) overturning Citizens United, and 3) including a Public Option.

I will vote my down-ticket races no matter how unlikely (go Jim Gray!)

If you do live in one of the above states, then yes, it's a factor to consider (I would argue one of many) - but I would hope we could all agree that it is still up to the individual voter to exercise their right as they choose.

I also find this 'privilege' argument to be a gross simplification, many of the Bernie-supporters I speak to are interested in the long-term direction of the Democratic party and see it as well worth sending a message to the 'third way' wing of the party. I believe my party can be better - I will be voting that way.

[Lisa D]

90. K&R

[jillan]

91. Or it could be something as simple as she is not the person that we want for President?

[DanTex]

98. You want Trump?

[UtahLib]

96. K&R

[treestar]

99. It's crazy as there is nothing to blackmail with

When one's own circumstances would be worse (R President) as the outcome of flexing the muscles for the blackmail.

[Walk away]

101. Sounds like garden variety sore losers.

I don't think we need them.

[Trust Buster]

103. A classic OP DanTex, thanks. They just can't see it.

[HassleCat]

104. Number 5

Fatigue. 30 years of the Third Way have worn down many of us. We're tired of belonging to a party that blames Ralph Nader for its defeat when the party couldn't hang on to registered Democrats and they voted Republican. We're tired of candidates who speak about progressive issues and ideas in the primaries, and then tack quickly to the right when the nomination is secure. We're tired of hoping our loyalty and support will be rewarded by candidates who reflect traditional Democratic values. That's just a short list. We're tired of that and much more. Probably most of us will suck it up and cast our votes for the party nominees, as we usually do, and I'm not taking just about the presidential contest. One more time we will listen to the gloating victory speeches, knowing it means little for us.

[redstateblues]

108. Damn you DanTex- Stop making people think!

It is obviously something that annoys some posters especially the Bernie or Busters. Not a lot of thinking about consequences of a Republican Presidency.

[Laser102]

109. Well said DanTex! Thank you.

[Cha]

110. Zing! Mahalo, DanTex~

[Jamaal510]

111. K&R

[whatchamacallit]

113. Oh noes

https://m.

[DemonGoddess]

114. K&R!

[DanTex]

117. Little did I know that Susan Sarandon would come around and give such an exquisite validation

of this OP.

[Time for change]

118. What about those who have serious and sincere doubts about

Hillary's fitness to be President?

She is funded by the financial industry, which has cheated U.S. citizens out of trillions of dollars, while their CEOs walk away with multi-million dollar bonuses.

Do you think that she is going to represent those who funded her campaign, or the vast majority of her constituents?

[DanTex]

119. Anyone who has doubts about whether she's better than Trump is insane.

[Time for change]

121. You didn't answer my question

[Time for change]

120. What about those who have serious and sincere doubts about

Hillary's fitness to be President?

She is funded by the financial industry, which has cheated U.S. citizens out of trillions of dollars, while their CEOs walk away with multi-million dollar salaries. This is based on the theory that these institutions are too big to fail or be prosecuted.

Do you think that Hillary will represent as President those who funded her campaign or the vast majority of her constituents?