2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHillary's core supporters do so not because of what she stands for, but because of who hates her.
Whether it be Republican politicians, conservative talk-show hosts, snarky coworkers, or even their spouses, so many have made fun of Hillary over the years, and have made her the butt of their jokes. I suspect most of Hillary's die-hardest supporters have an attachment that is unshakeable, because it's a reaction to the hatred and dislike that others have shown for her. Supporting Hillary is their way of throwing it back in their faces. Is has nothing to do with her policies. In fact, many of them secretly prefer Bernie's policies. But to turn away from Hillary now, when she's so close to proving all those Hillary-bashers wrong, why that's unthinkable! Again, they aren't voting for Hillary because she's any good at what she does, they're voting for her because it will prove all those people wrong, all those people they have come to hate over the years. It's not healthy, imo, but that is what is driving them.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)amiright?
brooklynite
(94,591 posts)I think their policies are close enough, and Hillary's got a better chance of winning to carry them out. Simple as that.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)uponit7771
(90,347 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)brooklynite
(94,591 posts)...All they tell me is that both candidates are broadly competitive. Then I have to look at fundraising ability, attack weaknesses, message to a GE audience, and tactical decision making. Sanders is weak in all areas.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)The polls indicate pretty consistently that Bernie would do better in a general election than Hillary. Might have to do with Hillary's 55% negative ratings, which her die-hard fans turn a blind eye to, because they are so driven towards getting back at everyone who has wronged their hero-victim.
onecaliberal
(32,863 posts)uponit7771
(90,347 posts)... seeing they voted for Bush twice.
regards
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Bernie is very unlikable- none of his colleagues support him-like Cruz.
tblue37
(65,395 posts)someone they trust to keep his word, even if they disagree with him. That makes him very different from most others who serve on the hill. Even people on their own side will stab a congressperson or a senator in the back if it serve their own purposes to do so:
His achievements include the bipartisan VA reform bill: "Frankly, without him, I don't think we would have gotten it done."
In the Senate, Bernie Sanders should be all alone.
Sanders is constantly ribbing Republicans in his trademark condescending Brooklyn-accented tone. He offers up legislation that's so far to the left that it couldn't get a vote even under Majority Leader Harry Reid. He's the curmudgeon in the Senate Democratic conference, rarely satisfied with how far his leadership will go to pursue progressive policies, and not afraid to vote 'nay' when his leaders come up short. And none of his Senate colleagues, on either side of the aisle, think he could ever be elected president of the United States; most of them even believe he shouldn't be.
But rather than earning the frustration and ire of his peers in the vein of other Senate hard-liners such as Sen. Ted Cruz, Sanders has managed to be respected even liked by much of the chamber, according to members on both sides of the aisle. The Vermont independent actually has much more in common with Sen. Tom Coburn, the now-retired "Dr. No," whose hard-line opposition killed many bills in the Senate but also earned him the respect of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
Sanders also has been able to work well with his colleagues. He's passed bipartisan legislation and forged strong relationships with members of both parties in nearly 25 years on Capitol Hill. But most of all, members say, even when Sanders is ideologically an outlier, he lets others know where he stands. He's not the type to suddenly stab a colleague in the back. And that's earned him respect both on and off the Hill <emphasis added>.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/bernie-sanders-is-a-loud-stubborn-socialist-republicans-like-him-anyway/450597/
pangaia
(24,324 posts)And again in November. .
renate
(13,776 posts)Comparisons with Cruz are beyond ridiculous.
dchill
(38,502 posts)Something you're good at.
Wilms
(26,795 posts)That's what I thought when I saw this image being used in sig lines.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)whose political philosophy comprises hatred of Republicans and very, very little else.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)enigmatic
(15,021 posts)hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)In study after study they've found many people are more likely to believe lies from their own group and less likely to believe truth from outside their own group. Blind bigotry shows up in many forms.
Dems who hate repubs == repubs who hate dems. Not to mention the extreme hate around here and other "progressive" sites directed at Nader, despite his politics.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)IamMab
(1,359 posts)tularetom
(23,664 posts)the Clintons were giving the corporations that funded the VRWC everything they wanted. Welfare "reform", militarization of police, private prisons, repeal of Glass Stegall, media consolidation, all this happened while we were distracted by all the Clinton scandals.
I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to endure four more years of Clinton white trash drama while the Clintons give away whats left of the country to Wall Street and the .01%. As a wise man once said, "Fool me once, um, um, shame on you, fool me twice, er, um, um, uh, can't get fooled again!"
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Comparing them with the Clintons...
Let me tell you, if I was broke down on a lonely road at night and only one car was gonna come by I'd a whole lot sooner it be white trash than the Clintons, the white trash would be infinitely more likely to stop and offer me a ride.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)GusBob
(7,286 posts)Funny how that works.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)Zira
(1,054 posts)anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)in any given group, for that matter?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Mostly I hate absolutist statements.
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)It not the main reason, but I've always admired the Clintons for all they've endured. They are the most witch hunted lied about people in the world. It still goes on here.
Her tenacity will be valuable as the GOP tries to destroy her again.
BreakfastClub
(765 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)That's what really counts. This election shouldn't be a vanity contest for one individual.
beltanefauve
(1,784 posts)This is all about personal ambition and nothing more. I've defended the Clintons for years and years but I'm so over it now. It's actually quite freeing.
Response to reformist2 (Original post)
JTFrog This message was self-deleted by its author.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)that they are propping up a con artist
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)The REALITY is that we support Hillary because she's fought the good fight for decades - even while having to deal with the right wing (and now far left wing) bullshit. I'm not as liberal as many here but I'm still FAR more liberal than most in the country. Stop with the bullshit excuses as to why we're not voting Bernie in the primaries. He's simply not our preferred candidate and you don't know shit about any one of us. Stop pretending you do.
BainsBane
(53,035 posts)and then convey them all in one short paragraph. Of course you can't, but what you show is your lack of respect for your fellow citizens exercise of their democratic rights.
I'm supporting Hillary because she's competent and her opponent is woefully incompetent in every conceivable way. Her interview with the NY Daily News showed a masterful command of a wide array of issues facing the country and a clear set of policies to address them.
Sure, I don't like the right wing or the progressives who think and act just like them. And I'm more that happy to deal a blow to white male supremacy, but the fact is I want someone who has thoughtful policy positions to run the country. I don't want someone who doesn't even care enough about positions he has repeated thousands of times to look into how they could be implemented: eg. the legal statutes by which Wall Street execs might be prosecuted, or ongoing legal challenges to existing efforts to break up big financial corporations, like Met Life. That suggests an absence of commitment to those ideas and the failure to do any of the work necessary to convert them into actionable policy. Frankly, Bernie has disqualified himself.
Meanwhile, you feel yourself entitled to belittle the majority of the Democratic electorate, which I suppose helps you justify supporting someone whose campaign has expressed a determination to overturn the results of elections and install himself in power in violation of the electoral will of the people.
I don't have to like your vote to respect it, and if your candidate could win a majority of votes I would accept it because that is how electoral democracy works. Yet Bernie and his supporters express none of the same values. I submit that opposition to electoral democracy is something worth fighting against.
jfern
(5,204 posts)One was insisting that saying that Hillary was a hawk in Iraq and Syria was a right-wing criticism. There's nothing remotely right-wing about that criticism.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)An "armchair psychiatrist" is a person who is not trained in, and has no background knowledge of psychiatry, but will still continue to give advice concerning, and often attempt to diagnose, the mental health of others.
I believe that armchair psychology is a problem because the armchair psychiatrist is often under the impression that diagnosis of a person's mental state can be simplified down to a list of symptoms.
http://free-your-mind-campaign.blogspot.fr/2012/03/problem-with-armchair-psychology.html