"Anything (well known personality) says is shit because (s/he) supports (candidate a or b)."

[Armstead]

A little non-partisan observation.

[cyberswede]

1. ...and they're a crappy (whatever they do for a living) too!

[Armstead]

2. I never liked (him or her) anyway

[cloudbase]

3. I stand with (xyz)

because they support my candidate, regardless of what they might have said or done in the past.

[Armstead]

4. I have always admired (xwz). A true icon.

[Xyzse]

11. Why thank you... I'm not running but yes...

I appreciate it.

[SheilaT]

5. Yeah, people, at least here, tend to get very worked

up over celebrity endorsements.

I simply feel a bit pleased if someone whose work I admire endorse my preferred candidate, and just quietly shake my head if another candidate is endorsed. In any case, there's no endorsement out there that will change my mind.

[Armstead]

6. yeah...I admire George Clooney a lot even though I think he's off base in this campaign

But if Bruce Springsteen endorses Clinton.....Well that's End of Days

[SheilaT]

7. LOL!

I'm a science fiction person, hang out, so to speak, in the science fiction world. I know any number of s-f writers. I haven't yet paid much attention to who they might be talking about politically, but a very large number of them are very liberal. My best guess is that more of them are for Bernie than for Hillary, but of course I could be completely wrong.

[Armstead]

8. They're used to "thinking outside the box" so you might be right

[SheilaT]

9. Yes, they are.

There are a handful of real conservative/right wingers in s-f, but not very many.

Another near universal is that they understand science, have no respect for non-scientific thinking (other than as it belongs in s-f or fantasy), and are very good at pointing out what can go wrong if too much faith is placed in science as being the perfect answer to all things.

[VulgarPoet]

10. Celebrity endorsements, charity endorsements, political endorsements

To me, they're all steaming mounds of cow leavings. I vote policies; not labels, and not "he said she said".

[JoePhilly]

12. Do you think electing Trump will bring about the "revolution" Bernie supporters hope for?

Because that's what she said.

[SheilaT]

14. Do you think she speaks for all Bernie supporters?

And in case you answer yes, I'll tell you the correct answer is no.

[JoePhilly]

18. She appears to be saying something that many Bernie supporters ...

... on DU agree with.

Which is why I asked the OP explicitly whether he agreed with her or not.

What she said is nonsensical, regardless of which candidate one supports.

[Armstead]

16. There is more underlying what she said in a short interview

It's shorthand for much bigger issues and possibilities depending on the outcome of the election.

Clinton supporters may find themselves part of that "revolution" too.

[JoePhilly]

19. Is that a yes, or a no?

[Armstead]

22. That's a "It's not a simple answer and I haven't the time or inclination to get into it right now"

[JoePhilly]

23. It certainly seemed that she was saying ... electing Hillary was a terrible thing ...

... and that electing Trump would accelerate the coming of the revolution.

The premise being that once Trump took office, the people would finally rise up.

Seems pretty simple.

[Armstead]

28. Sigh...What she was saying (in shorter Readers Digest form) is...

The status quo is not sustainable on many levels The necessity for fundamental reform and change is inevitable. It's a matter of how and when.

If we ignore the necessity for change now and elect a Democrat who encourages complacency and the status qup, conditions will continue to get worse until the consequences build up pressure for change that are unavoidable -- and will take forms that will not be very pleasant.

Trump would be such a disaster that those pressures might build up more quickly and result in the unpleasant consequences and pushes for change sooner.

Bernie is trying to bring positive changes through the political system now, rather than sweeping the underlying problems under the rug. That offers hope for positive change without the awful consequences.

Obviously your mileage may vary, but that in a nutshell is what she was saying. And I agree with her.

[beam me up scottie]

17. No she said SOME PEOPLE think that, and they do, at least try to be honest.

[JoePhilly]

20. It certainly appeared that she believed it would happen.

[beam me up scottie]

21. Uh huh. Sure it did. To Hillary supporters who already hated her.

[JoePhilly]

24. So what revolution would electing Trump begin?

[beam me up scottie]

25. Ask her, all I did was clarify what she actually said.

[JoePhilly]

26. Did not see you clarify anything.

I watched the entire interview last night. She seemed very clear to me.

Now, if you think it would be crazy for her to have taken the position I think she took, then feel free to say me that.

That way, we would at least agree that it is crazy for anyone to argue that electing Trump would help usher in the "revolution" that Bernie supports claim they want.

[beam me up scottie]

29. "No she said SOME PEOPLE think that, and they do, at least try to be honest."

You misrepresented what she said and I corrected you.

Your interpretation of what she meant is irrelevant to this discussion.

You're welcome.

[JoePhilly]

30. So we agree ... those "Some people" hold an insane position ... yes?

[Skwmom]

13. Asinine stupid shit is still asinine stupid shit.

The absurdity of the arguments to support Clinton have reached an all time high.

Sarandon was commenting on her observations that the Clinton supporters do not want to hear.

[beam me up scottie]

15. X is dead to me, long live y!

[Jackie Wilson Said]

27. I like who she endorsed unless it wasnt my candidate.