For all those who would refuse to vote for Hillary. The Supreme Court matters!

[HERVEPA]

Trump judges, different verdict today. I am a Bernie guy. but if you refuse to vote for Hillary, you are thumbing your nose at women, the poor, LGBTQ folks, and other minorities.
Act like a grown up. Refusing to vote for Hillary is not going to start a revolution, at least not the type you want.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

1. but i have to vote my conscience; fuck the gays, women, POC

and others who will get fucked over due to my ego (i mean conscience).

[MaggieD]

26. LOL! +1

[redStateBlueHeart]

36. +1

[randome]

2. Thinking only of yourself is no way to go through an election.

[J_J_]

3. B Clinton appointee just approved this BS

Sotomayor said the court’s ruling had essentially classified all Americans as inmates in the prison-industrial complex.

“By legitimizing the conduct that produces this double consciousness, this case tells everyone, white and black, guilty and innocent, that an officer can verify your legal status at any time,” Sotomayor wrote. “It says that your body is subject to invasion while courts excuse the violation of your rights. It implies that you are not a citizen of a democracy but the subject of a carceral state, just waiting to be cataloged.”

She said the court had ignored mountains of evidence that police routinely harass some Americans with unreasonable searches — and she warned that legitimizing those stops undermined democracy.

“We must not pretend that the countless people who are routinely targeted by police are ‘isolated,'” Sotomayor wrote. “They are the canaries in the coal mine whose deaths, civil and literal, warn us that no one can breathe in this atmosphere

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141495664

[still_one]

4. Are you suggesting that Supreme Court appointments Hillary would be the same as Trump appointments?

[HERVEPA]

5. Trump apponts judges, women's rights gone.

There is more than one issue! And do you pretend that having Trump will have a better outcome than Hillary?
It's a long way down from that high horse.

[still_one]

6. This latest SC ruling only highlights your point Herv

Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Abortion Law, Breathing New Life Into Roe v. Wade

"WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court struck as unconstitutional part of a restrictive Texas statute that threatened to shutter half of the state’s remaining abortion clinics and deny millions of women the right to a safe abortion.

The ruling in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt represents the most significant victory for abortion rights at the high court since the turn of the century, as states have scrambled to pass and defend similar laws across the country, seeking to chip away at the landmark Roe v. Wade."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/supreme-court-texas-abortion_us_57629378e4b05e4be860efe5

[TwilightZone]

8. Well, only if we actually listen to her.

[mcar]

11. Yes, we do

Because she's told us.

[HERVEPA]

13. Yes we do! She is liberal on social issues and you know it. They would be similar to Obams's

Which have basically worked out fine.

[mcar]

9. This is absolutely correct!

Thank you!

[DemonGoddess]

10. K&R!

[Orsino]

12. Yep.

With so much in the balance, even another President Clinton will have to be watched and lobbied carefully. Why the hell would we let a Trump anywhere near the job?

Vote as though your lives and livelihoods depend on it, because they do.

[HarmonyRockets]

16. What are you implying?

[skidoo]

17. Implying nothing. My post should have been clear.

[HarmonyRockets]

18. Have you decided who you are voting for yet?

[skidoo]

19. Vote? There's an election coming up?

[HarmonyRockets]

20. Yeah

We have a presidential election coming up in November. They happen every four years. (2004, 2008, 2012, 2016, etc.) If you ever forget or are not sure whether we're having one, just google it. This is what helps me remember: if we are having a summer Olympics, that should mean we are also electing a president that year. It's a neat little way to remember.

So anyways, the nominees look to be Hillary Clinton amd Donald Trump. Now that you know, care to reveal who you are leaning towards? I'm just curious.

[skidoo]

21. Thanks for the information.

[HarmonyRockets]

22. Yep

Let us know when you decide who you are supporting.

[skidoo]

23. "us?" How many people are you?

[HarmonyRockets]

30. Let DU know when you've decided.

I'm sure there are others here that would be interested to know who you support as well.

[840high]

32. Voting is a private matter.

[HarmonyRockets]

33. It just seems a little odd

why anyone would need to keep it private while posting anonymously on a message board specifically about politics, and one whose stated goal is to elect Democrats. And in a sub forum specifically for discussing the 2016 election. Why would anyone need to keep their vote private on here? We are all supporting Hillary Clinton, no?



I mean keep it secret if you want to. It just seems a tad bit suspicious.

[democrattotheend]

15. It depends where you live

If you live in a solidly blue state like I do, I don't think you could really accuse me of helping Trump get elected if I don't vote for Hillary. If Hillary is in danger of losing New York she is not going to win the election.

But for voters who live in swing states, I 100% agree.

I will almost definitely vote for her even though I don't have to, but if I disliked her as much as some of the Bernie supporters here I might not. But if I lived in a swing state I wouldn't even have to think about it.

[athena]

25. Even if you live in a blue state,

if you're a liberal, it's better to vote for Hillary because if she wins the popular vote by a large majority, she'll have a bigger mandate to push forward liberal issues.

The voting booth is not the place to hold a protest. If you want to protest, go out and protest for real. It annoys me that so many people who can't be bothered to participate in actual protests think that it is some kind of "protest" for a liberal to vote against the Democratic nominee.

[MaggieD]

28. Exactly

[democrattotheend]

31. There's a flip side to your argument though

Which is that, if Hillary were to somehow lose the popular vote while winning the electoral college, only 16 years after Bush v. Gore, there might finally be enough bipartisan support to get rid of the electoral college.

That aside, the only reasons I wouldn't vote for Hillary would be if she does or says something between now and then that I consider truly unforgiveable (not likely but could happen), or if I can convince another Bernie supporter in a swing state to trade votes. I was afraid to say the latter because I wasn't sure it was legal, but I looked it up and it is under federal law, because it's not considered something of monetary value. Plus, I think any attempt to stop vote-trading (vote for vote, that is) would probably run afoul of the First Amendment.

Just my speculation - THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.

[athena]

37. No, there isn't.

If Hillary wins the electoral vote and loses the popular vote, she will be considered an illegitimate president and have no political power. All you will achieve is four years of inaction and gridlock, followed probably by four years of a Republican president.

I really think it should be against DU rules to advocate for the Democratic nominee to win the electoral vote and lose the popular vote. Such thinking risks the Democratic nominee actually losing the election, and all of us being stuck with a right-wing nutcase.

As I said before, the voting booth is not the place to be holding a protest. If you are against the electoral college, organize. Write letters to the editor. Write letters to Congress. Go out and find other people who feel the same way, and work with them. Do something. It is incredibly naive to think that a vote for president is a vote for anything other than who should actually be president.

[democrattotheend]

38. Democrats are still pissed about Bush v. Gore

And the GOP would be mad if it happened in reverse. I think if it happened to both parties within 16 years it could be a catalyst for change.

Writing letters to Congress is not going to change the electoral college. We need another catalyzing event.

I agree with you about the GOP treating Hillary as illegitimate, to a point. However, Bush was still able to ram a lot through, even before 9/11, in spite of being viewed as illegitimate. And I doubt Hillary winning the popular vote would make them see her as legitimate anyway. Obama won in a landslide and the GOP still treated him as illegitimate. They treated Bill Clinton as illegitimate as well.

[athena]

39. So the electoral college is the only issue you care about.

To hell with women's issues, LGBT issues, civil rights, economic issues, the environment, world peace ... as long as there is a tiny, pretty much nonexistent, chance that the electoral college might eventually be abolished.

GWB was a white man. Hillary is a woman. Her overwhelming victory against Bernie is still being called a fraud. And you're telling me that Hillary will be seen as a legitimate president if she loses the popular vote?

I think this is what they call white male privilege. I also think it's an excuse for voting against Hillary and advocating, indirectly, that people vote against Hillary.

Go on. Continue posting this "argument" of yours, as I've seen you do before. I hope, and believe, that your efforts will be for naught, and Hillary will win both the electoral and popular votes overwhelmingly. Most people have enough sense to realize that the voting booth is not the place to be protesting the electoral college.

[democrattotheend]

40. No, it's not the only issue I care about

But I think that as long as tiny red states get a disproportionate influence over the presidential election process, it inhibits progressive change. Ditto with them being overrepresented in the Senate.

I am not advocating that people in blue states vote against Hillary. I have said many times that I will probably vote for her. The only reason I wouldn't is if either she takes a position that I find absolutely abominable or if I can convince a Bernie or Buster in a swing state to trade votes.

[The Second Stone]

24. In my opinion, who does the judging of disputes is as important

as who passes the laws. Judges say what laws mean, and without regard to what the plain language of the law says to a layperson. I've seen many a judge ignore all the facts and law to reach a conclusion they personally prefer. Today's decision is an example of how every court decision in the country is decided on a daily basis. Better appointees on Courts get real people better results. It's why the fascists are focused on it with laser like precision, and why they are willing to destroy the constitution and their credibility over delaying Judge Merrick's confirmation.

Hundreds of thousands of important legal decisions are made every year based on what the appellate courts will tolerate.

[glowing]

27. Yeah, that line is working... NOT.

[Rose Siding]

29. Hasn't everyone here already committed to vote for the Dem nominee?

Isn't that the whole new deal?

[HarmonyRockets]

34. Nope.

There are a few on here still that refuse to say that they will be voting for Clinton. I could give their usernames.

[raven mad]

35. I'm a Bernie fan myself -

But Hillary is pretty awesome in her own right. Damn right I'll vote for her.