Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Tuesday, January 23, 2018

“You can’t always get what you want.” — The Rolling Stones

A few words in defense of pragmatism.

That ideal has taken quite a beating lately, mostly at the hands of Bernie Sanders and his supporters. The Vermont senator faces a virtually impossible deficit in his battle with Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. Pragmatism would seem to suggest it’s time for him to pack it in.

But pragmatism don’t know Bernie. Or Bernie Nation.

If this weren’t clear before, it has been made abundantly so in the last two weeks, beginning with Sanders supporters in Las Vegas tearing open the Nevada Democratic convention in a protest so angrily chaotic it was shut down by security, fearing violence. But Sanders supporters weren’t done yet; they also sent death threats to party officials.

The proximate cause of this Trumpish behavior was a dispute over rules, a claim that, as Sanders’ campaign manager put it, the convention had been “hijacked” to award more delegates to Hillary Clinton. Politico rated that false.

Not that this has made much difference to Sanders, now locked in a battle with the party he ostensibly seeks to lead. His denunciation of the convention chaos was as tepid and belated as Donald Trump at his worst. He has blasted the party for being, as he sees it, in the pocket of the rich, and specifically denounced Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. In a Monday interview, Sanders told the Associated Press that this summer’s convention could be “messy,” though he later insisted that was not a tacit suggestion of violence.

Given the intensity of the emotions at play and the behavior of his supporters in Vegas, it’s hard to see how it could have been anything but. Which is disappointing. A few days ago, Sanders’ campaign seemed headed for an honorable legacy. But he has apparently decided instead upon a legacy of peevishness and sore losing, which is, as Frank Bruni noted a few weeks back in The New York Times, a hallmark of this political epoch.

Look: There is something to be said, under certain circumstances, for fighting to the last breath. Under certain circumstances, it is noble to stand one’s ground, come what may. Under certain circumstances, it might even be heroic to soldier on past the point of defeat.

These are not those circumstances. Trump awaits. And every second the left spends arguing with itself is a gift to the presumptive Republican nominee.

Let’s not get it twisted. For all that some people now seek to normalize him and his campaign, for all that they fool themselves into thinking he wouldn’t be so bad, for all that a party once appalled to find him its leader now coalesces behind him, Trump is still what he’s always been: a tire fire in an expensive suit.

Yes, Clinton is, putting it mildly, a flawed candidate, stiff at the lectern, shameless in her pandering and disliked for reasons both substantive (she sometimes seems to have only a nodding relationship with truth) and not. (Since when is it a sin — or a surprise — for a politician to be ambitious?) But she’s also intelligent and experienced. And compared to Trump, she’s a plate of Lincoln with a side of FDR.

As such, she might make a good president, might be a middling president, might even be a bad president, but at a minimum, she would be a president unlikely to hand out nuclear weapons like party favors or require customs agents to ask would-be visitors, “Are you now or have you ever been a Muslim?”

Clinton is, in other words, a good, pragmatic choice. And no, that’s not an inspiring battle cry.

But a reality show buffoon unburdened by knowledge, decency or dignity is closing in on the White House. We should probably take a little inspiration from that.

(Leonard Pitts is a columnist for The Miami Herald, 1 Herald Plaza, Miami, Fla., 33132. Readers may contact him via e-mail at lpitts@miamiherald.com.)

(c) 2016 THE MIAMI HERALD DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE CONTENT AGENCY, LLC.

Photo: U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is seen between poles of a football goalpost as he speaks in Santa Monica, California, U.S., May 23, 2016. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson 

429 Responses to Pragmatism Don’t Know Bernie

  1. I like many of the proposals advanced by Sen. Sanders, and I don’t have a problem with him remaining in the race to, at least, influence the content of the Democratic platform, but I think he has lost a lot of credibility the past few weeks. His failure to denounce the melee in Nevada to avoid displeasing his supporters was a huge mistake, and his unwillingness to engage in actions designed to unite the party, now that it is clear that he will not be our nominee, does not say much for his character or pragmatism.
    I still think that Hillary needs Bernie a lot more than Bernie needs Hillary, but unless Bernie starts exhibiting the maturity that many of us expected from him, he is likely to become a Trump-lite candidate.

    • He lacks pragmatism and he lacks loyalty to the progressive agenda. His only loyalty is to his already failed power grab for the highest office in the land.

      • I would not go that far. I think he is passionate about the things he says, and truly believes that social changes are needed to improve our judicial and financial systems, as well as improve our standard of living and ability to compete.

        • I thought that too, back at the start of the election cycle, and even up until a couple of months ago. I was actually undecided but leaning toward Bernie back at in February and March. I’m one of the independent voters to whom his progressive dreams appealed. Now, I think about listening to his rhetoric for all my life… and compare it to his avowed intent to force a contested convention, to deny the majority individual voters’ will… all those years of speaking for progressive issues have become, for me, just hollow rhetoric. He’s just another career politician spouting empty words and making empty campaign promises. I am thoroughly disillusioned by Sanders and completely put off by his acolytes.

    • Dominick, I think Hillary and Sanders equally need each other. Hillary needs Bernie supporters in order to win and Bernie needs Hillary if she is elected President to work together and implement some of issues he has been campaigning for. Otherwise, Sanders has wasted his energy, money and time for nothing in return. What a shame!

      • After 30 years I list my pension and benefits because my employer said they needed to earn billions in profits to remain competitive. We already have lost everything and Democrats like Hillary we just as guilty as Republicans in the greatest transfer of wealth from us to the rich that ever happened. You underestimate the anger that’s out there. Obviously the pain has not reached you yet.

        • The anger won’t reach you anywhere. You need to know how the problem will be solved. Letting Trump sit in the White House because of the anger will crash your hope to get problems solved.

          • That’s just it, most have given up hope, Bernie provides hope for some, Trump appeals to the anger in others. Let’s face it, even Obama has sold us out with his support of TPP.

    • There was no Bernie supporter induced melee in Nevada recently. You seemingly watch solely (or at least too much) only M$M like CNN. There was only one arrest, and it was a Clinton male supporter assaulting a Bernie female supporter. No chairs were thrown. Boxer did not fear for her life — instead she blew mocking kisses to Bernie supporters, and in at least one still photo of her moving off stage (it may have been photoshopped), she is shown giving the crowd the finger as she exits.

      The Nevada full State Caucus was rigged. Hillary supporters were asked to arrive early and gave the chairwoman full powers to do what she wanted, regardless of the previous intermediate caucus results. Is it any wonder Bernie supporters were unhappy, dismayed and booed her. Perfectly reasonably.

      Further, after summarily moving off the stage with her immoral (and likely illegal statements and judgments — I believe there will be litigation evolving from that day) … did you manage to see the pictures of brown shirted, security guards that were prearranged for and placed to guard the stage?? (interesting that the NV Dem. Party Hilary folks thought they were going to be necessary at the state level when there was little or no evidence from earlier rounds of NV caucusing that they would be required, don’t you think?).

      They ushered (as forcibly as needed) folks out of the room, almost as soon as the chairwoman left the stage — decisions tyrannically handed down, no discussions or motions allowed, the event is over, folks.

      OK, that’s the one side. I grant, what was not reasonable, and what Bernie publicly declared unreasonable, were the threats left on the NV chairwoman’s phone (guess you missed that statement — certainly wasn’t shown on CNN and M$M much ). I agree that was going too far, but compared to the numbers at the caucus it was a very small percentage of those involved that did that — but again the M$M played this aspect up to the max. .

      Also I can understand why — even while I would never condone it — some Bernie supporters who are in desperate economic circumstances might have done it. Again, it is blanket wrong, but I hope you have both the empathy and vision to understand, while not condoning, and give the story in a more balanced view.

      Bottom line, Bernie made no “huge mistake,” — his response was reasonable and strong considering all the special interests he has been obliged to take on at the same time — in this case both the Clinton machine and the M$M.

      But as fairly typical, both the Democratic Party leadership and most of the M$M have been consistently biased in favor of Clinton for various reasons which become obvious once a little research concerning money trails and conglomerate ownership is done, and some thinking is engaged in.

      As to uniting the Party, when I started volunteering for Bernie in Oct. of last year, while I believed him the better candidate, I was quite willing to vote for Hillary come this November and donate to her campaign during the general.

      That has all changed. Not only were there shenanigans at the NV state caucus, but it’s more than a little likely that Hillary’s people pulled other stunts to influence the results or eke out a win in Iowa, Mass., NY, Kentucky and perhaps others.

      Not only will I not be giving money to Hillary if she is the Dem. nominee, it is going to be exceedingly difficult for me to pull the lever for her in November.

      I just turned sixty and have voted for a presidential nominee (mostly Dem. — one or two IND.) every four years since I came of age. But the more I learned about both Bernie and Hillary over the past year … the more I came to respect and admire him (of course he’s not perfect – but he is head and shoulders above any currently serving politician in integrity and honesty) … and the more I came to question her judgment and morals (not her ego, thirst for power and ability to amass money, both personally and politically).

      For the first time in my life, I find myself in the position — if Bernie doesn’t win the nomination or run as an independent — that I may sit out voting for president in 2016. I can’t abide Trump. But seriously, at this point I don’t see Hillary as that much better … and neither do large swaths of the American people given the large polling negatives of these two leading candidates.

      Independents will decide this election. Some go for Trump, but the very large majority have consistently shown there desire to have Bernie as a Presidential nominee.

      Cheers! 🙂 🙂

      • Then you will do what most of you have done at mid terms. Sit out with an al-LIE-bi!! I am a democrat. Nothing pretentious about me. I can be liberal, conservative and moderate on varied issues, yet I do it under the umbrella of DEMOCRAT, period. We lost the house and the senate due to phony posturing, read: stayed at home. We cannot afford that now. I am 67 and I’ve voted since 1970 and missed none, even with not too palatable candidates like our recent Ohio gubernatorial election. Kasich v FitzGerald. Speak of none choices. Yet, I voted, just skipped the governor. Voted on the rest including much needed issues.

      • I understand why Bernie’s supporters are upset. I believe the primary process, especially the use of super delegates to influence or manipulate the outcome of the process, as well as the caucus system, antiquated voting system, and the influence of money in our political process are the anti-thesis of democracy, and an embarrassment. It does not matter that it has been in place for decades. It must be changed.
        As for the Nevada mess, my first reaction is that the “protesters”, and those who made death threats, were outsiders that infiltrated a Democratic party event to establish a parallel to what has been happening in so many Trump rallies. It now seems as if they were, indeed, dissatisfied Democrats who got carried away and acted as childishly as the Trumpeters do.

      • The solution may be to end the two party system monopoly, and create two more parties. One representing the far right, another the far left, one center right, and the other center left. In the interim, we must all vote. There is simply too much at stake this election year. We already have a SCOTUS vacancy, and there are likely to be at least two more Supreme Court vacancies within the next year or two. That alone, is enough reason to set aside our differences and vote for someone determine to ensure that sanity prevails, and all the progress we have made during the last half century is preserved.

        • Agreed. But, this is what it looks like to me, one of the independent voters who began the year leaning toward him until as late as March:

          I just no longer think Bernie is the person to achieve those goals.

          He doesn’t care about taking back Congress – that’s why he doesn’t bother to support the down ticket.

          He doesn’t care about the will of the independent voters – three million more have chosen her than him.

          He has no loyalty to the party he’s only using, but he expects the party to bow to him and hand him their loyalty – while doing NOTHING to earn that loyalty.

          He’s using the party – he continues to condemn – for his personal, last-ditch career effort.

          He doesn’t care about the progressive agenda; he’s willing to see it lost forever in his power grab for the highest office in the land by forcing a contested convention.

          We know that a contested convention means a victory for the other party. A #Trumpitler presidency, with a GOP-controlled Congress will be the end of progressivism FOREVER – worse, it will mean the death of our constitutional democratic republic of America.

          • What is a contested convention? My understanding is that no one is the official nominee until a vote is taken at the National convention. Although the pledged delegates are bound the Superdelegates are not. If she does not have enough pledged delegates to win the nomination then she cannot be the nominee until the Superdelegates actually vote. So I ask what do you mean by a contested convention? And as the presumptive nominee and leader of the party isn’t her responsibility to show some leadership and unite her own party. What has she done to unite the party? Is she so arrogant to think she does not need to anything to earn the votes of Bernie’s supporters or continue to forsake them and chase them away. And how do your comments help anything?

          • Historically, contested conventions give the victory to the opposing party. In this case, a contested convention is Sanders deciding that the three million more individual votes cast for her mean nothing. In this case, it means Sanders deciding that her substantial lead in pledged delegates is meaningless. In this case, it means Sanders cares more about his own self-aggrandizing power grab for the presidency than about taking back Congress or progressivism at all. It’s all hollow rhetoric – a forty year career politician’s empty campaign promises.

            Hillary Clinton has been supporting the down ticket from the very start. He has not. She has demonstrated loyalty to the party and to every DNC presumptive nominee all her adult life. Sanders simultaneously condemns the DNC and demands loyalty from the party. He is actively working to divide the party and destroy progressivism with it.

            If he steals the nomination, it won’t be democracy in action – it will be despotism. And, it will, at the very least, lose the down ticket, leaving a GOP-controlled Congress to continue dismantling our constitution in favor of religious and corporate extremism. It’s more likely to hand the victory to #Trumpitler too, which will be the end of our constitutional democratic republic. And, he’s be throwing every immigrant and Muslim and Middle Eastern family into the meat grinder of a Trump presidency.

          • Was in the party for many years. Don’t see them changing, if Bernie gets the nod I would probably rejoin, so for now it’s wait and see. I like most people in this country see the two party system like the Twix commercial where left Twix competes with right twix, for the consumer they are the same as much as they try and claim they are different, I think I’ll have an apple instead.

          • No that is not the truth. She is a Democrat and wants the nomination. Bernie was an Independent and now wants the Democratic Party to do his bidding without winning the nomination.

          • Yes and she feels she is entitled to that nomination. Look if you want the two party system to be two private parties then incorporate and have that organization pay taxes and their own expenses. Don’t run primaries that are paid with public money, don’t create party based titles (minority whip, majority whip etc) and pay them extra with our tax dollars etc etc. Hillary is so arrogant she foes not see the Presidency as a privilege, she thinks she is entitled to it. That comes across very clearly every time she speaks.

          • WHY IS SHE NOT ENTITLED WHEN SHE HAS THE MOST DELEGATES AND VOTES? If you don’t like the two party system join and promote the party that fits your needs. Quit complaining and get out their and follow your heart as others do. In California we have several. They lack power because they lack members. There is an existing Independent party that is national in scope.
            Subject: Re: Comment on Pragmatism Don’t Know Bernie

          • The process has not determined that yet, one in 7 people live in CA aND they have not voted. The only parties that have access to government facilities at taxpayers expense is the Republican and Democratic party. The system is biased.

          • Where have you been the last 150 years. Power breeds privilege. If all you complainers got involved in a party you could effectively change it. Coming in after the fact, after most of the voting for example, demanding they change to your position is a waste of everyone’s time. They will just go back to business as usual when they silence you. Look to the 70’s with McGovern and his followers.
            Subject: Re: Comment on Pragmatism Don’t Know Bernie

          • Doesn’t support down ticket candidates? That is a lie I have received seveal emails urging support for progressive candidates from Bernie.

      • Excellent post Richard. I’m five years behind you and feel the same way. The Clinton camp keeps making things up such as all Bernie support comes from Millenials, but here you are, here I am and even photos the Clinton camp uses to attack Bernie show middle aged people of either gender and minorities than college students. The establishment is more terrified of Bernie than they are of Trump, so they are balls to the wall for Hillary.

    • bernie has already been invited to the platform committee so he will have a say in the platform for the election. There is nothing more for him to do at this point.

    • He did denounce the behavior (there was no violence) at the convention in NV. When will the investigation of what took place where protocol may not been have been followed and rules broken be conducted. When does Hillary and the DNC step up start showing some leadership and make some attempt to unite the party. How does the constant barrage of hand grenades being thrown at Bernie and his supporters do anything to help the situation? Are they so drunk with their success that they fail to realize how important it is that Hillary taps into the enthusiasm of the movement. Do they really think they can win by foresaking these progressives in favor of moderate republicans they think will cross aisle. I do not get it. They should start by having DWS leave her role as the DNC chair. Considering that she was Hillary’s chief campaign advisor in 2008 and she has acted with such a heavy hand toward Bernie is outrageous. When do they adults in the room step up and save us from ourselves? What an opportunity to demonstrate some leadership. But as usual she blows it.

      • I don’t think it is a good idea to replace the Chair of the DNC at this late stage of the campaign, and at a time when she is facing robust opposition in her district.
        Hillary is trying to unite the party. Unfortunately, she has not been very effective, and Bernie has done almost nothing to achieve that goal.

        • Bernie has always maintained that he is not running as an independent because he does not want to split the progressive vote. He should be commended for that. He has also said repeatedly that no matter who the nominee is he will do whatever is necessary to make sure that Trump is not elected. What more do you want. What are seeing from Hillary that would indicate she is trying to unite the party. She is behaving very arrogantly and has self declared herself the nominee. She is infuriating the Bernie supporters on purpose.

    • Bernie should stop listening to his increasingly caustic handlers and have a long talk with Howard Dean to set him right. Dean talks about someone else calming him down when he was in the anger phase of his losing candidacy (can’t remember who – might have been Biden). Bernie has lost the nomination fair and square. What does he think he can accomplish by re canvassing KY? The best he could hope for is one more delegate (if that). He should have known the Democratic party rules before joining the party. The problem is that he supposed that the party should just fall in line with his demands even though he is going to be the loser.

      • No, Bernie has not “lost” the nomination, and constant repetition of this lie represents exactly the arrogance typical of Hillary’s campaign. Why should Bernie listen to Howard Dean, who sold out to the health insurance companies long ago and chose to lobby for them rather than fight them even though they are sucking the blood out of the American people? Dean didn’t get past Iowa while Bernie won 20 states. Furthermore, the primary process was anything but “fair and square.” State after state experienced voter suppression, voter fraud, and a variety of shenanigans that all somehow helped Hillary Clinton. It’s not just Kentucky that should be re-canvassed; it’s New York, Arizona, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Florida, and that’s just a start.

        • If anything should be reexamined it’s the highly undemocratic caucus system. In states with a straight vote, there were no problems. Contrary to popular belief, voter fraud almost does not exist these days. This is not the 1960 election where Kennedy’s father fixed the general election with lots of dead Chicagoans on the ballots. I think Bernie is being treated very fairly – note that he has 5 delegates on the platform committee. Hillary has 6 because she is the obvious winner. She is far ahead in CA and her numbers are moving up while Bernie’s are going the other way.

    • Oh, Bernie DOES need the evil caricature of Hillary and the Democratic party and the Grand Conspiracy that is the cause of his loss and martyrdom (at their hands), to keep and further his flattering, attention-providing position as Grand Revolutionary Leader.

      That is what all this nonsense he is indulging in now is all about. Why would he want to give up the adoration? And even if he ends up only attracting the sad and paranoid — they make a pretty reliable audience. Media stardom, if nothing else, awaits.

      Mr. “Never-Goes-Negative” indeed.

  2. Leonard – your position is short sighted, this is about racial, economic and environmental justice, HRC is the same as every leader over the last 50 years that got us into this trouble- this is a silly and crazily biased article especially when the alternative will be beaten by trump – losing Bernie is handing the election to Trump 🙂 – if they get rid of Bernie i am voting for the Green party so i can sleep at night!

    • You want the straight up truth, right? The truth is, HRC will win the Democratic nomination. She will because she has more votes than any other candidate. And if the Democratic Party unites behind her, we will defeat the worst offering of the Republican Right, at least since Harding. If we don’t unite, and vote the Green Party out of anger, or stay home out of protest, the buffoon wins. And all that stuff about racial, economic, and environmental justice? We can forgetaboutit!

        • It’s a good question, and one I believe she must answer after the California primaries, or at the latest, the convention as the official nominee. I call it this a “come to Jesus moment,” that most candidates must face and rise to the occasion with their respective Party, or lose.
          On the Right, it’s easier. Nixon said he was going to keep Checkers,
          Reagan told an aspirational fairy tale about a Shining City on a non-existent hill. Bush in ’04 with this deer in a headlights expression on his face, mumbled, “It’s hard, ” talking about his disaster of a blunder in Iraq. It was enough. Obama had to overcome systemic racism, and explain Rev. Wright. Hillary in her moment needs to convince a very skeptical Left, that she will not sell them out to the wealthy elite once she’s President. Like many on the Left Wing of the Party Burnie now owns, feel Obama did on National Healthcare, or by his support of the TTP trade agreement. I understand these misgivings, as I’ve had felt them myself. And if I were King of the forest, I’d put Burnie in the White House. But I’m not. No one is. And Democrats must either yield to those realities, or suffer a Trump Presidency, and all that comes with it. So, like it or not, this is the choice we must make, and the stakes involved. We cannot afford to turn away from them on mere principle.

          • Because we must wait. Because, that’s the system we have now. One that I can guarantee you will elect one of two persons, and a pre-designated number of people to serve in Congress this fall. And these officials will control the power to decide on any number of issues that will directly affect our lives. Those are the facts.

          • Thanks for your reply. But I do not understand. Why not begin the healing process now as opposed to beating up our own candidates and paving the way for a Trump presidency. This does not make any sense. Barring a criminal indictment it is clear that Hillary will be the nominee. Even Hillary has declared herself the winner. How does that unify us? What are we waiting for, again?

          • Hillary declaring herself the winner before the primary season is over is the essence of the problem. By doing this, she is arrogantly stating that the votes of those of us in states with June primaries do not count. If that isn’t divisive, I don’t know what is.

          • Agreed. But I am attempting to heal the party and avoid a Trump presidency at all costs. I know you disagree.

          • Healing the party requires someone other than Hillary. The party might have a better chance of that by giving the nomination to Biden.

          • I refuse to yield. As the old saying goes, “People who tell you to accept “reality” generally want you to accept their version of it.”

        • I’m a democrat, and in my view, Hillary has already shown exceptional leadership. It’s not the principles that Bernie espouses that is the problem. The problem is, that those principles are standard fare for almost all democrats. We always wanted those principles. Bernie is a “messenger” for those principles, he’s no more able to make a reality of those principles than anyone else. A handful of Bernie supporters are acting as if, by denying Bernie the nomination, we’re also denying what he stood for. That’s idiotic. Democrats have always stood for the “ideas” Bernie is talking about. The reality is, that voters have decided that she’s the best candidate to stand for those principles. What the hell is the problem?

          • I appreciate your opinion but could you please elaborate on these exceptional leadership examples. Perhaps you could list some of her accomplishments over the last :0 years. Remember accomplishments are not titles. Reputations are not built on what you are going to do. The differences between the candidates policy positions are huge. Bernie is for a $15 an hour minimum wage. Hillary is not. Bernie is for single payer hc. Hillary is not. Bernie does not take Superpac, corporate or special interest money, Hillary is literally choking on it. Hillary is for more military intervention and regime change and Bernie is not.
            Bernie is against fracking and Hillary is for it. Hillary supported Nafta and Bernie voted against it. Hillary supported welfare reform and Bernie voted against it. Bernie voted against the war on Iraq and Hillary voted for it. Bernie main message is that our campaign finance system is corrupt which leads to a rigged economy where all of the wealth and income go to the top and Hillary is a beneficiary of this system. Where the hell did my Democratic Party go? your turn.

          • Hillary is not “against” a $15 minimum. Her plan is just closer to the realities of where business will go. She’s delighted with 15, in fact, she’s delighted with 20 an hour. Why didn’t Sanders support 20 an hour min.? Because he knows it won’t happen. Pretending that Hillary doesn’t want 20 an hr, or 15 an hr., is fatuous BS. Hillary fought for single payer when Sanders was still in the Senate wondering if he had a chance. She fought till there was absolutely zero chance. There still is zero chance, which will not change just because Sanders yells about how much he dislikes it. If you’re against Hillary in the first place, you say immature things such as that Hillary is choking on special interest cash. You sound like you’re choking on it. The reality is that Hillary is “getting” big money because she’s perceived to be worth it. But, when Sanders was asked point blank, in a debate, if he could name an instance where there was a quid pro quo, he was speechless, and changed the subject. Hillary is not in favor of fracking. Where do you get this rubbish? Shes in favor of fracking only ujnder sever restrictions. If a person would disallow fracking under 90% of circumstances, how can you say they “favor” it? Are you sure Hillary favored NAFTA? Your ignorance really shows when you accuse Hillary of “supporting” the war in Iraq. That’s pure BS, nothing less.
            Hillary explicitly opposed the war in Iraq, in her statement to the Senate, which can be read in its entirety at HillaryHQ. Tell me why Sanders would enter a “corrupt” campaign finance system? The man would have to be off his rocker, if he sought to win in a system he himself says is corrupt.
            Stop the hopeless attack on big money. We need laws that make such vast incomes impossible in the first place.
            You can go through your hate and temper tantrums against Hillary. You likely hang out in a large group that sees Hillary as a monster. Most people will see the incredible bias and unreality of your views.

          • Hillary voted in the senate to give Bush authorization to use military action in Iraq.

            Hillary supported Nafta

            Hillary takes in hundreds of millions in personal income and campaign contributions from corporations, Superpacs , special interest groups and dark money.

            She has taken big money from health insurers, big pharma, fossil fuels, private prisons, Monsanto, Wall St and that is just what we know about.

            Hillarycare are was not single payer but similar to Obamacare with all the healthcare going through for profit health insurers.

            Hillary supports a $12 minimum wage.

            Transcripts Please?
            Server Please?
            Accomplishments Please?
            Examples of Leadership Please?

          • Keep throwing dirt at Hillary. Continue to implicitly reveal your true political affiliations through your remarks, but never explicitly. A perfect example of the folly of your argument against her, is your use of the old political yarn, that Hillary voted “for” the war in Iraq. This is a cheap lie. If you don’t know that Hillary, explicitly voted against the war, what does it tell us about all the other less important issues you mention. She makes it abundantly clear, in her statement to the Senate, at the time, “that her vote should not be construed as a vote for war.” What does this tell us about all the other charges you’ve made?
            BTW, you can check the whole statement of Hillary’s, to the Senate at HillarHQ.

          • All that time in public service and no accomplishments? Oh wait she did become a multimillionaire. Your gal is on the take.

        • President is the only nationally elected office in government. And, I mean Democrats. Democrats must unite and lead the Nation, or remain divided, and so abdicate their responsibilities as citizens, to the good of the Country. And then the Nation suffers. One poster says, it’s good enough for America, if the people won’t back Burnie! Seriously? Look, it really is up to Democrats here. As the Republican Party is weak, taken over by an ignorant demagogue, and is not at all capable of deciding if it’s raining, or the sun is out.

          • Ok so in other words only Democrats and Republicans really matter. It’s their game and no one else can play.

          • That’s the reality, right now. What election do you suppose we’re talking about here? You can vote Libertarian, or Green Party, or Whig. Heck, write in Burnie Sander’s name if you want, or stay home, and enjoy that warm fuzzy feeling all the way to Trump’s inauguration ceremony.

    • Here we go. Use race when it suits you. Apparently we do not see it that way considering his lack of our votes. Who is his base? Now, look at that list of yours. No one gets rid of anyone. They lose. Period. I have come to the conclusion, given your demographics and ages, you are part of the me, me, me generation. Lord help us.

      • The whole corporate media promotion of Hillary as the candidate for African Americans, the suppression of the voice of very many prominent black progressives for Bernie (available only on internet, not TV or radio), and then throwing up white privilege against those opposing institutional racism – you have the nerve to say ‘Use race when it suits you? I’m in my 60s and I have seen enough of this crap that I’m done buying it. You (you, you, you) apparently haven’t learned yet.

        • I never said for whom I will cast my vote and frankly, it’s none of your damned business. Got it? You or no one else will tell me how to vote or for whom to vote. Are we clear? I am not questioning you. Who the hell do you people think you are? I think you all have lost your collective minds.

        • I do not care. They can vote how ever they please as I will. I am opposed to institutional racism, yes. In my case it actions. My four sisters and I have degrees. Two, who never married and not children have masters. We who married have seven children. 6 have degrees as of May 14 and her sister will graduate next year. Cleveland Public School kids all of us. I am 67. I do not look at Hillary as for black people. I just have no intentions of voting for a party, republican who is definitely against black anything. We’re not needy. Not on welfare. No gangs. No teen pregnancies. No drugs. Considering I watch cable like HBO or streaming, I wouldn’t know. Give me Game of Thrones any time.

  3. Far more important that Dems take control, than either Hill or Bern. Planet may not survive any more republican ‘influence’, aka anarchy.

    Sit down now, you two, and sort out a POTUS / VEEP ticket, we need you both.

    Don’t play the repugs silly games. Destroyed them, dinnit!

    • Right because the Democrats have done such a good job with all this right? I mean Isis Iran nukes Syria Russia and Ukraine not to mention what’s going on in the home front with mass chaos Americans pitted against Americans transgender blacklivesmatter all that garbage

      • I haven’t noticed any illegal 3 trillion dollar wars, or economic collapses lately, have you? Miss them do ya?

        • You mean the war that got congressional approval and Hillary voted for ???? Oh feel the Bern

          Powered by Cricket Wireless.

          ——– Original message ——–

          • In 2003, the Republicans held majorities in both Houses of Congress, and the White House, as we marched into a 3 trillion dollar boondoggle on false pretense. So at what point in your estimation does the Right ever take responsibility for it’s actions? When they occupy every seat in Congress? One Dem in there? Well, that’s why we’re not entirely to blame for the cluster fail? Come on!

          • All the Dems voted for it . What’s your problem you don’t like fact ? . At least he got Congressional approval unlike Obama in Libya Syria etc.

            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • Not true. Many Democrats spoke out strongly against even giving the power to Bush, and the Neocons to make credible their threat of invasion unless Saddam opened up all the sites. That was the issue Hillary voted in favor of, not invasion. But when has a lack of fact, or truth, stopped a Righty in defense of the indefensible?

          • Look they voted and authorized it so deal with it. . At least he got Congressional approval has Obama done that ???

            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • Exactly! Everyone was duped. Everyone thought Colin Powell could not possibly lie. He was held up as a paragon of virtue by almost everyone.

          • With complicit approval from the American people. As was the wire tapping they pretend they didn’t know about until after Obama got into office, really? I wrote every editor, called shows to voice my anger at that war and the wire tapping. I had more than one person call me anti American and unpatriotic. They never even got why the government paid for the digitizing of everything. To listen in on conversations via computers. I had me a told you so moment, though and the plain Dealer printed by letter and I did not pull punches, either. One of the people who discredited me and was for the war is on the Plain Dealer.

          • She DID NOT vote for the Iraq war., She explicitly voted against it. Go to HillaryHQ and see for yourself.

          • Go to Wikileaks and find the truth. She even admitted that it was her mistake to vote FOR the Iraq war. The truth is in her book!

      • Bike please have your morning coffee before you start commenting. Your incoherence is rattling my three working brain cells!

        • See Im providing a service . I woke up your brain cells

          Powered by Cricket Wireless.

          ——– Original message ——–

      • ISIL-created by Iraqi War, Iran caused by the over throw of a duly elected leader in 1956 and the installation of the Shahs. Syria is their problem. Russia has always been a problem with her neighbors. Black lives matter and transgender lives matter, too. Americans have been against Americans since the beginning. From the War of Independence through the Civil War, civil rights, women’s rights, your point? It’ll NEVER be the 50’s again, get over it.

        • ISIS created when Obama / Hillary did a total pullout in Iraq not by the war itself . It also had nothing to do with 1956 . Why didnt you just blame Bush like most of you do ? Syria is everyone’s problem now because it has caused fighting age Muslim males to flee to everywhere else . Did anyone say Black Lives or Trans Lives didn’t matter ? And this Country has not been this divided since the Civil War you mentioned . This time that division is being purposefully stoked by Obama and the left . Yes it’s not the 50’s get over it .
          Powered by Cricket Wireless.

          ——– Original message ——–

          • Typical. WRONG. ISIL started directly after Saddam’s army was dismissed. With no jobs and families to feed they did what they do best. IF they had not dismissed Saddam’s army, there would probably be no ISIL. Syria is NOT my problem, it’s theirs. Iran has to do with 1956, do you not read. WE caused that long running problem, also and made it worse when we gave asylum to the Shah and he was at the Cleveland Clinic, here in Cleveland. I said this country has been divided since the revolutionary war through Civil War, Civil Rights, etc. Obama stoked nothing. The lying right did. the lies told on him. the blatant insults, bigotry shown him by the right wing bigots in congress. My 10 year old granddaughter saw and understood this during his inauguration. She saw and understood the signs shown, words, ugly faces and to this day she remembers. EVERY bias we have received has been initiated by someone white. from a teacher calling me that word in the 6th grade. To some white cop harassing my college educated son walking into his home. Obama caused nothing but reawakened the bigotry simmering under the surface and gets blamed for it. 4 little black girls were blown up in a church and white folks said it was their fault. They blamed the death of all civil rights people and the three civil rights workers on them. I see you’re still at it. I am black, why in hell would I want 1956??

          • Please deal in facts in your posts and not your’s or someone elses “feelings ” . What you posted is totally a false rewrite of ISIS history . Bush handed Obama a stable Iraq . There was no ISIS running amok and if there were what kind of an idiot would Obama have to be to do a total pullout ??? Secondly to totally destroy that talking point Obama stated to the World how stable Iraq was and what a stunning success story it was to justify his pullout. Thirdly Bush warned way way back in 2007 that if there was a power vacuum a Radical Islamic Muslim Terrorist group would fill that void . It was for those very reasons that every Intel agency and the Pentagon warned Obama not to pullout but he did it anyway. No ISIS is in Obama and Hillary . You post a bunch of nonsense . What does 1956 have to do with giving the largest State sponsor of Muslim Terrorism an agreement that assures they will have Nukes ? Obama has set back race relations over 70 years. Of that there can be no debate or question. Examine his rhetoric for Godsakes . He has done that for his Party’s own gain and to the detrement of this Country. In so doing he has undone everything Dr. King worked for. Please deal in facts in your posts and not opinion or your feelings

            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • ISIL did not start in Iraq. The soldiers were gone, on their own. They became ISIS in 2006. Obama removed troops as part of Bush’s exit strategy. Those were HIS plans, not Obama’s or Clintons, He has undone nothing. He did not try to take my vote away. stop lying on this man, I am black I know what is and happened since he won TWICE. White people like you have lost your collective minds because a black man is above you. THAT you cannot stand and never will. He has had no rhetoric. I haven’t heard any!! Another white lie. You really cannot read? In 1956 Iran had a duly elected leader. America did not like him so they over threw him for the Shahs. The shahs were vicious rulers when it comes to human rights. The Ayatollah Khomeini and the Iran revolution happened because of that. The hostage taking and they would have let them go immediately for the Shah but we offered asylum and he came to Cleveland, Ohio to the Clinic. Have had bad relationship since. Another Obama lie. It’s a world effort. Not just America. The world but the black man was there so it is all his doing.

          • SOFA was never mentioned in Obama’s victory in pulling everyone out speech. It was only mentioned after ISIS was born AFTER that pullout. Also the President of Iraq was for us staying and even if he waant what were they going to do if we said …you know what we changed our minds we are going to leave a force behind ? You can’t be that naive to think they couldve stopped that right so why did you even being that talking point up ? What does your vote have to do with this other than when liberals can’t defend their positions and know it they automatically spin and deflect the topic to something else. By the way no one is trying to take your voting rights away . Also you always know you’ve won a debate with a Liberal when they have to resort to the race card . No rhetoric you say . Let’s see “the police acted stupidly ” after Professor Gates when they had not. ” if I had a son ” …How about telling the Ferguson protesters to “stay the course ” You are too afraid that the first 6% African President looks bad than examining facts and dealing with it. Look i understand you are invested in him but that doesn’t mean the facts change because you wish them to . Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • Talk about untruths. He Did NOT want American troops to remain. I heard that enough on every talk show including Diane Rehm. How is it you got it wrong. ISIS , 2006, look it up. Stop lying. They were able to attack in Iraq because the Iraqi troops we left, fully equipped and trained, ran and left the equipment. Really? You know absolutely nothing. As for Professor Gates, I am 100% with the president and him. WHY? My son, computer graphics engineer, college grad owned a home in a predominantly white neighborhood with his corporate trainer wife and he had to deal with this white cop stopping him going home up to three time a week to ID him and on occasion followed him home to ID him on his front porch. They’d been in the house over 10 years and were known and well respected in their neighborhood. That scenario is acted out too many time with black males to count. So stow your know nothing attitude. You never walked in our shoes and they ARE trying to take away our votes. The combination of the sorry supreme court and voting laws in North Carolina, I believe caused many to not be able to vote. One a 90+ black woman who had voted since the first day she could was not allowed to for lack of a BC. They wouldn’t even give her a provisional ballot which is law. Very few if any black people of that age in the south have BC. I know, my mom is from Louisiana and is 89 next month and she almost could not get her SS until a family Bible was found. My dad was a WWII navy vet and that helped him.

          • ISIS was not around in 2006 stop trying to rewrite history because of your inconvenient truth. You only make yourself sound ignorant of the facts but easily indoctrinated . And please please dont accuse me of lying because I don’t and I resent it. Just because you aren’t factual and chose to believe lies that fit your biased narrative doesn’t mean someone else is lying . Professor Gates made himself look like a racist idiot and so did Obama. Obama realized how he had stupidly offended Law Enforcement with his comment he held the beer summit to try to quell the feelings and backlash from law enforcement and every unbiased law abiding citizen of the United States including Liberals . You son should’ve gone to the shift commander at the Police Station of he felt he was being unduly harrased . And if I were black I would be offended and resent anyone who infered tha t people of my color or any minority was less capable than anyone else of getting an I’D . They are infering minorities are too lazy or stupid to get an I’D and here you are backing that. You should be ashamed of yourself.
            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • The woman was over 90 and had none. White folk did not allow them into hospitals back then. That’s not inferring anything. She had voted at every election up until this primary season and they refused to give her a provisional ballot. How is that lazy to go to a poll you have gone to for decades and refused the vote. There was even a man from India who had all ID and information. They made him spell his name and because they did not believe him while looking at his ID, he was refused the vote, also. All these horror stories came out after the primary on Diane rehm. Guests reporters, etc., verified it. My mom still doesn’t have one. From Louisiana, black, 1927? What planet are you on. You are delusional on every level. Gates was not being racist, he was reacting to his life’s story. what he has had to deal with most of his life, especially from the south, also. I registered to vote in 1970 and did not need one. As far as I am concerned, I do not now and vote by mail. You don’t get it and you never will on Gates or on voting. I fact checked about IsIs and ISIL. I listen to programs and read a lot. My information comes from listening to politicians and generals on Diane Rehm, etc. You have the problem, not I. Everything you’ve said is so bass-ackwards, its pathetic. As for my son, why not leave him alone when he is doing nothing. How hard is that. Especially walking into his home as Prof. Gates did. As for the officers, did they wear a sign? It not spare me. The one thing that sticks in my mind? 16 years old just getting back from Louisiana visiting my grandmother and other relatives as we did most summers. A cousin who had never been north returned with us to live his sister and family and try his luck. She’d done very well. We were unloading the car and this police car drove by. We paid not attention until they backed up, jumped out the car and grabbed my cousin and threw him on the hood of my parent’s station wagon. He looked like a suspect. He had never been north and never had a record anywhere. That stays with you and people like you will never get it but call us racist for our reactions. My dad was continually profiled, too. A successful business man, church leader, started a Christian basketball league and scholarship fund for at risk young males.

          • How is it lazy ? Look every State that has enacted voter ID has made provisions for poor people etc. You can’t tell me this last is 90 and has no ID . Also it isn’t I disrespecting minorities it is white liberals who infer that are somehow lazy or too stupid to get an I’D . With the massive vote fraud that occurred in the last election most of America wants a National Voter ID law . The rest of the stuff you posted is nonsense . Gates has been a noted race baiting activist for a long time . The Police did everything by the numbers that night. For your son to put up with that harrassment he should’ve filed a complaint . Your posts are not based on fact and you seem to hate white people. You have fun with that but it isn’t I infering your people are too stupid to get ID’s those people are Liberal Democrats. Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • No you seem to dislike anyone who tells you differently with proof. You have none but what the right wing has told you. Most are such blatant lies as to be laughable. All I have to do is Google and get the correct answer. I do not have to make up anything. Should have filed a complaint? Why, he had done nothing and should not have been bothered. I am in Ohio, they take up for police officers here. Get real. It never ceases to amaze me how white people like you say I have a bias because I do not fawn over your every word. That is because I fact check, period. The woman was in her 90’s. She had no birth certificate which is now required and was not before. How slow are you? She voted as I did from when ever she could and me, 1970 when I registered, needing no ID until the black man decided to run and the right wing Ohio legislature quickly got a voter ID law passed in Ohio for the 2008 election. In fact only 3 states had these laws. No one else. Now how many since Obama won. My mom, having worked for the polls and retired as a precinct judge as did my late father, never had a Birth Certificate, either. Still don’t . Using those specious standards, it would have prevented my mom from voting. My dad had his WWII navy service record. Having worked for the polls , she can vote. The black woman in NC, no. By law she was to be given a provisional ballot wasn’t. Others who had the correct requirements to vote, were questioned about the spelling of their names and denied the write to vote. No provisional ballots given them, also. these people called on radio programs to complain. at least 6 called into the Diane Rehm program. There were many more. When you have coulter, the leader of the young republicans and too many others say their first agenda was to restrict minority votes, on camera, tell it to the marines. My dad was in the navy. Google ‘restrict votes’ and see what comes up. I showed my state ID for the 2008 election, the last I voted in person. I vote by mail. I was insulted that in my black ward, these white people stood on the school stage glaring at us. They also prevented people from handing out flyers until my brother-in-law, a cop got on their case. They tried to restrict doors where people could enter. This was a school. Parents picked up children, also and this cop and my sister had two there. They tried to take over our school in our neighborhood. I knew I was going to knock someone on their ass, the next time it happened. Did not need one in 1970 and per right winged obstructionists, needed one 38 years later.

          • You haven’t offered any proof . Just feelings . As to the lady was she too stupid or lazy to get an I’D like Liberals think ? And yes your son should’ve complained . If I were being unfairly harrassed I would’ve . A lot of States had Voter ID laws before Obama and since then we’ve seen the massive vote fraud of the Democrat Party in the last two elections. I’m recent polls Americans favor a National Voter ID law by margins of 72 and 80 % respectively . We know Liberals and Democrats don’t like them because Obama didn’t win a single State where they have Voter ID. I would say you are slow and only rely on propaganda . Real slow and easily led .
            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • I have given you proof. all you have to do is go to the sites. google is simple. Only 3 had them before Obama. There was not voter fraud, only in the right’s mindless lunacy!! I am so sick of you liars. Our secretary of state John Husted, finally admitted there were none in Ohio worth mentioning just this week on FOX. 6 cases found and 3 were felons who thought their rights had been reinstated. In 2012 the GOP found 270 cases. Massive. I use their numbers and not your lying made up ones. In fact one of the worse cases of fraud occurred in Wisconsin by a republican Robert Monroe who voted 1 dozen times in 2011 and 2012. including 7 for Scott Walker using His name, His son’s name and his girlfriend’s son’s name. he voted in Shorewood, Wisconsin and Lebanon, Indians during the presidential elections, 2012. He claims he suffered from amnesia. he’s a health Executive. then we have Strategic Allied Consulting hired by NC for $333,267.50. They found conservatives and registered them at $11, $12, $13 a registration which is against the law and a misdemeanor but they also changed democratic registrations to republicans before they were filed. This not only happened in NC but other states using this firm, to the tune of over $2 million dollars paid to them until the s hit the fan. Now, who committed voter fraud?

          • Have fun trying to convince yourself that you are right. 80 % of Americans want verified elections. They have Voter ID in 3rd World Countries and you are telling me the formerly greatest Nation on Earth can’t do it. Next why do you keep spinning and deflecting this Off Topic ?

            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • So what. Let it be done from now on. I voted years without one and do not need it now. let it be tied to Birth certificates. In countries like London with their European proximities, the children automatically get pass ports, too as well as voter registration. In a so call great nation, why aren’t they as advances. As for formerly great, so was Great Britain, France, Italy, Spain Egypt, Rome, Benin, Dahomey, Ethiopia, Japan, China, Ottoman Empire, etc. Your point?? Egypt for over thousand years. How many, here??

          • SOFA was/is U.S. Law. And ended/replaced the UN mandate, which made legal the entire invasion. And was never authorized by the Congress nor any assembly to become an occupation of indefinite term. So ignore that, as I know you will. And consider that such an ongoing occupation was not funded. Nor was it about to be, in the middle of an economic crisis, as it happened. Where every facet of the economy was running deficits, and needing relief. Requiring all that deficit spending, that would become such a bugaboo, once the GOP regained control of the House.

          • Well, here’s one white guy who understands you. But please don’t confuse me with being white – I’m a Jew. We know what people like Trump are up to.

          • Why did Bush sign the status of forces agreement that required the complete removal off all American Combat forces in Iraq prior to the 2008 election. Are you saying that the Obama should have ignored that pullout agreement and subjected our boys to Sharia law. They would have been hung. Sorry we are not the stupid. This was Bush’s mess.

          • Yes Bush signed it and Iraq and their President would’ve ignored it if we chose to leave a force behind. Obama and the left never mentioned the SOFA stuff until the whole situation blew up and ISIS was birthed. Before that it was all about Obama puffing his chest that he had kept a Campaign promise and Liberals were gloating about how Obama brought everyone home .. Isn’t he wonderful they said ??? And then ISIS happened and it was all because of SOFA . Bullshit he could’ve done whatever he wanted to and if Iran even threatened one of our soldiers a real President wouldve said .. Try it . The fact of the matter is none of that was going to happen .

            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • You ignore the fact they never should have gone to justify keeping them there forever. In other words: Here’s my Gawd awful mess, Boy, now clean it up! No, not near good enough, boy. Boy, you’re so stupid! Am I gonna have to get a White boy in here to wipe up this puke? Well, that’s Liberal scum for ya! This is the crap you buy into. Sad.

          • Your post makes absolutely no sense . None . Did you even read it ?

            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • The nexus of the Syrian Revolution was the large numbers of Syrians who weren’t happy with their dictator for life. The expansion of the Civil War was due to the proxy-ism between Iran, and Saudi Arabia, that has tended to fuel every outbreak of violence, and war in the Mid east for the last 80 years. That, and the geo-political/oil interests of the U.S. and Soviet Union during the cold war. And yes, that’s all still in place today. With Russia protecting Assad, protecting it’s naval interests, as well as Iran protecting Assad, protecting it’s influence in the region, and access thru Syria to supply it’s proxies in Lebanon. ISIS is another story altogether. Directly due to the invasion of Iraq, the dismissing of the Iraqi Army under Paul Bremer, and the incompetent bungling of the Bush Adm. in the management of the military victory following the invasion. Which empowered Iran, putting an Iran friendly Shia dominated gov, in place, and arming them. But this is all Obama and Hillary’s doing. Is that so? Says who?

          • Yeah maybe if Obama would’ve even given some vocal support to “their ” Arab spring this would’ve been over in a month and not devolved into a Civil War . The fact you mention Iran in this proves you know what a threat they are in terms of spreading Muslim Terrorism so why is Obama giving them an agreement that assures they have Nukes and why aren’t Liberals speaking out against that ? Obama and Hillary are only responsible for their failed Foriegn Policy decisions and those are the issues I spoke on .

            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • Vocal support. Vocal support? Are you kidding? After Bush, any “vocal support,”from an American President would immediately damn any righteous Mid East Revolution worth it’s salt, as an Imperialists, Infidel plot. You are in the dark aren’t you?

          • These Hillary supporters are bad enough, we don’t need some RWNJ bringing the level of discourse even lower. Go away.

          • Just like a Liberal to try to bully someone off the page just because they don’t agree with that person . What I posted is factual deal with it .

            Powered by Cricket Wireless.

            ——– Original message ——–

          • Hillary didn’t lead the charge, control the information given to Congress, state the imperatives of a preemptive strike. No she didn’t. But just as important, Al Gore did not support the Iraq War, and said so. So, in the long run, who does history imply Americans would have been better off having as President? Al or George? That’s the record Americans should be considering. Trump, or Hillary? D. or R. That’s what we know.

          • In other words yes, she voted in favor of the war. I had less access to information than Congress but knew enough to be against it.

          • So, I take it you’re going to help elect Trump? Who was all for the war, who now lies to say that he always knew it was a mistake. In that case, the perfect candidate for President would be a liar, who’s never held public office, never had to make a single decision that in hindsight proved to be less than accurate. So, let’s elect Micky Mouse, or Daffy Duck as President, and see how that works out?

          • Help Trump? No, but I’m not voting for another billionaire owned politician. Hillary doesn’t get my vote just because Trump is worse. Look at Obama, I voted for him twice and his parting act after 8 years of support will be TPP. His FU to working people as he prepares for his next career collecting millions in speaking fees for Billionaires parties.

          • And you knew for absolutely certain Saddam Hussain did not have nuclear, or biological weapons, he might share with terrorists to kill hundreds of thousands of Americans, or American Allies? Then the directors of the CIA, and FBI, and Colin Powell, and Tony Blair, and the bulk of our NATO Allies in Europe could not refute these claims with the same certainty, and were also wrong by the same clear as day assessments? Good for you! You should run, and tell us the outcome of the current terrorist situation in Europe. How concerned should we be?

          • I knew that if he did have those weapons he would most likely have gotten them from us and used them on Iran, or on Alqueda in his own country. I knew he was no threat to us. We had no motive to go into Iraq other than the fact that they were dumping millions of gallons of oil into the market and keeping oil prices low. Of course all those other people knew these things as well, they all lied, and they all became much wealthier as a result of the war. Are you that naive to not realize that some people get very rich off death and destruction and are willing to lie and creat a pretense to initiate wars? How concerned should we be about the current terrorism situation in Europe? Not very, 80 people a day die in the US at the wrong end of a gun, more die from occupational illness and car accidents. You are more likely to die from Cancer than a terrorist act, maybe you should stop eating that government subsidized junk food before supporting killing hundreds of thousands of people in another country because of unfounded concerns about weapons you know we have and think they may have.

          • We never would have had this problem without the activist right wing leaning Supreme Court that took the election of Gore away from the people.

    • You are placing way too much importance on one person, even though the President will be a very important influence on which way the country turns. I feel that if the masses aren’t ready for someone like Bernie, then they aren’t ready for real change, because the change we need goes way beyond what Bernie Sanders stands for. It is “we the people” who must DEMAND change. Voting for Bernie Sanders is the best way to do so in this step-by-step process.

      This isn’t a sporting event, but if it was, I would say that the Democrats are playing the same game as the Republicans, so to me it doesn’t matter who wins if it isn’t BERNIE SANDERS.

  4. Very slanted take on what happened in Nevada. Hillary’s folks started the violence with a rigged (hijacked, if you prefer) NV State final caucus. The security guards weren’t called in. They were are hand and were sure to be deployed after the NV Dem. Party and it’s chairwoman summarily rendered their tyrannical decision … no reasonable democratic process was undertaken … so then you need thugs to clear the stage.

    • How was it rigged? Hillary effectively won the Caucus. All the convention was doing was appointing the convention delegates. Bernie’s folks took what they saw as an affront to their dignity (not that they ever expressed any) and used it to render violence to others attempting to exercise their rights in our democracy.

    • What happened in NV. needs to stay in NV. We have an election to win! And we think that was chaos, try Trump as President for the next 4 years. And besides, it wasn’t exactly the burning of the Reichtag, now was it?

    • Sorry with his actions, I feel HE has an ulterior motive. I am beginning to wonder if he IS shill after all. You go from making a point we all can agree with to denigrating in one fall swoop!! As a Pisces, my warning signals are up and I smell a none democrat turned independent rat.

  5. Unlike all of the other candidates running for POTUS, Sanders’ has boldly stated perfectly out loud, without innuendo, ambiguity, or dog whistle intimation what ails the mighty USA. He has unabashedly kick-started the national conversation about just how corrupt our political system has become by $$$MONEYED SPECIAL INTEREST, and he has given a voice to “we the people,” pointing the way to a political REVOLUTION that is breathing life into a flummoxed electorate that hasn’t figured out what the heck hit them over the past 35 years.
    But having said that, it looks like HRC will win the nomination. If so, it becomes a matter of uniting behind her. One can only hope that she adopts Bernie’s talking points and tailors a presidency that accomplishes his “Revolution!”

    • Exactly Mat! Well said, my friend. You know, there comes a time when Dems need to embrace the realities, that one, this is a big country. And not everyone is going to see this revolution/resolution, thing as being all that necessary to, “save the whatever.” If holding to that line, costs the Left the Presidency to a buffoon who will, whatever else he does, pick the next 3 judges on the Supreme Court. That will sit there appointed for life, deciding what kind of future our kids will have. Or Trump will sit in the Commander in Chief’s chair, control the military, and hold the nuclear codes. And the Nation’s deepest security secrets within a brain attached to that loose cannon of a mouth.

      • You speak as if there can only be two types of people in the process, Dems and Reps, both owned by the same rich people. The Tea Party just took over the Republican Party, you want independents to support the Democrats as the lesser of two evils, why not let Bernie have the Presidents spot so he and his followers can help you get back the houses? I know the answer because you are just as greedy as the Republicans.you want it all.

        • Well, no my very mistaken fellow Liberal. That is not the why of, “why not let,” Burnie have the President’s spot. If you check the numbers, Burnie is not winning the contest. It’s not close. You can gripe about the system, like a broke gambler complains about the dealer, or the House rules. But gripping, and complaining doesn’t win elections in this Country. Otherwise, the GOP would have wrapped up the whole shebang years ago. Wanting it all, and wanting it now, sounds a lot like what I’m hearing from Burnie’s crowd.

          • Gave up identifying as a Liberal around the same time I stopped registering as a Democrat. Shortly after reading the Ragged Trousered Philanthropists by Robert Tressell.

            CA has a lot, one in seven Americans is a Californian. If Hillary had it all sewn up then she and her supporters would just sit back, but they aren’t because CA could change everything.

            The GOP did wrap things up years ago, the Democratic Party started dining in 1980 and have become the left wing of the Republican Party. Both push the corporate agenda. The top issue in a Democracy should be campaign finance, but it’s not. Bernie and Elizabeth Warren are lonely voices, sure there are a few other Democrats but the fact is they take corporate money as eagerly as Republicans. The establishment, corporate America really doesn’t have any objection to things like gun Control, abortion, gay marriage etc, however it has the two parties they control use these issues to keep working people divided as the push through Union Busting laws, unfair trade deals that put US workers at a disadvantage and tax laws that favor the rich.

            Mr Tressel chronicals the same exact arguements we are hearing today and reveal the futility of choosing between Liberals and Conservatives because the fact is both of them are the rich mans party, and no rich man is going to vote in laws that block him from becoming even richer off the labor of others. His story was written 100 years ago but it’s alarming how similar it is to what we face today.

          • And, I agree with nearly 100% of your entire post! It’s spot on. But it still doesn’t change a dog gone thing about how things are going to go this fall. We didn’t get into this mess over night. A fair amount of conniving, and a ton of money went into the effort. And unraveling it will take some time, and a lot of grassroots effort. It won’t be easy. But I’m truly heartened by the response to Burnie’s campaign. As I said to another poster this AM. If I were King, I’d make him President! But right now it just isn’t in the cards. So we need to be willing to take what the circumstances, and current system will allow, and go forward toward making all those goals a reality. Does that make any sense?

          • I agree that unraveling it will take time, and it won’t be painless, that pain may or may not include a Trump Presidency but a Hillary Presidency will not be progress towards change. Hillarys goals are not mine. I support equal rights for all, including Gay Marriage. I support socialized medicine etc but to me the far bigger problem is the erosion to living standards that affect over 90% of the people due to bad labor laws and the systemic destruction of unions and an unfair tax structure. Hillary won’t even talk about that, the closest thing we get is that she will create more jobs, more crappy jobs. We have more than enough jobs what we need is better jobs so couples can afford to raise their own kids, retire and not have to work 80 hours a week to afford what we used to get with 40.

            I’ve been supporting the incremental approach for over 30 years, one step foward two steps back for overification 30 years. Gains in equal rights which didnt directly affect me were offset by losses to Workers rights which fid. It doesn’t work. Economically things have only gotten worse for most Ameticans, gay, straight, Black, White, male, female.

          • As a lot of what you say is true. You have obviously thought a lot about what you would like to see, if you were suddenly King? Then, have you considered what you would support that is within the realm of possibility? We all want justice, and equality, and we want it now. But in case now must be in the future. What would you support doing this year, that would be most helpful in getting us there? Since Hillary will be the nominee of one of the two Parties that will win the majority of elective offices. What is it you would need her to say, or prove, in order to get your vote and help the Country avoid a Trump Presidency? Or is that very real possibility something you see personally as a non sequitur?

      • Well maybe the DNC should have thought about that before rigging the primary for corporate hack loser Hillary Clinton.

    • Trump is a better gamble than Clinton, which is why I will vote for Bernie, even if I have to write his name on the ballot. If the US isn’t ready for Bernie, then they deserve whatever they get.

      • The Spoiled Child theory of voting. Have you found in your life that holding your breath until you turn blue gets you what you want?

        • No, it’s the Vote Your Conscience theory of voting. Votes have to be earned. No candidate is entitled to people’s votes. There is nothing “spoiled” about refusing to vote for a candidate who represents the opposite of everything one believes and holds dear.

          • That’s the attitude of Hillary and the DNC. They insist on nominating a candidate who cannot win against Trump, regardless of how many people will be hurt by that candidate’s commitment to continuing an unacceptable status quo. After all, they could never support Bernie, who would put an end to their gravy train of legalized bribery. If they continue to try to shove Hillary down our throats, they will have only themselves to blame when she goes down to defeat in November.

          • That’s right, St. Bernard, when he ascends to the presidency, will wave his magic wand and put an end to all bad things. Does that happen before or after everyone gets a pony? You have no clue how politics and government work in the real world.

          • Again with that “real” nonsense. You do not have a monopoly on determining what is “real.” Bernie’s election would be just the beginning; he acknowledges this. The next round is electing progressives to the House and Senate en masse this year and in 2018, and building a pipeline of future progressive candidates. Change will require activism and participation from all of us and will take time. No one is disputing that. But we have to take the first step, and that is making a U-turn against trickle down economics and a corrupt political establishment.

            I have a better understanding of how politics and government work than Hillary ever will because I am not beholden to big corporations that have bribed me.

        • Well, you might be making assumptions about my objective and you know what that makes you. See, if Bernie Sanders isn’t the next POTUS, I don’t think it matters who is. If he can’t win the nomination by a landslide that just means that the public is still playing the game and that they haven’t awakened to see that we need new rules – real reform. Though the POTUS has great influence and power, it’s really up to us, not one person.

          And you might also be assuming that I’m willing to throw the baby out with the bath water by not supporting the Democratic candidate, no matter who it is, because, well, they would be better than a Republican, but then you’d be wrong again. I think Trump is the better candidate over Hillary Clinton (he’s not really a Republican or a Democrat, he’s an Independent), because he isn’t owned by the very people who have destroyed the country. He is one of them, but I think he just might really want to satisfy his ego by making the country great again. He knows the game is rigged and he won’t be very effective, but he might not sell us out like Hillary Clinton will certainly do to repay her debts.

          Now this is just my thought on the matter, but in no way is my intention of voting for Bernie Sanders a spoiled child’s manipulative ploy to get my way. This is an educated adult’s way to send a message to the DNC and to exercise my democratic right to vote for the best candidate. Get it, smarty pants?

          • Wow, it’s the complete and utter caricature of the ill-informed, a-historical Bernie bot. Or, are you a Trump troll?

          • You are entitled to your opinion, but calling me names doesn’t make you look very intelligent, it just looks like you have no facts to back up your opinion. See, when you are able to step back and look at the big picture, it’s much easier to feel secure in your opinions without having to bash those who are less evolved.

            Believe me, I’m every bit as frustrated at people who don’t agree with me, but the difference between us is that I realize that this is a process of evolution. We’re all evolving, but not at the same pace, so those who are more enlightened just have to wait for everyone else to catch up. I can’t do anything but share information and trust that truth will eventually win.

            We suffered through Obama for 8 years (yes, I voted for him twice) and I learned my lesson. I wanted Clinton in 2008 before she was embedded in the establishment (which is why she didn’t win then), but I won’t throw my vote away again. Now this is my opinion, so feel free to call me names, but be sure that is a childish way of expressing your frustration. Facts are the better, more mature way of winning a debate of opinions.

            Believe me that I will be hating Trump if he wins and I will be criticizing him every step of the way, as I will Clinton and Sanders if he sells out. My loyalty is to humanity, not a political party. If it takes Trump or Clinton to awaken people, then so be it. All I know is that I will be proud of my vote. That’s how democracy works. If you don’t like it, there are plenty of other countries to pick from.

          • Look. The times are not right for a “revolution.” Revolutions happen when just about everyone is downtrodden and out of work (especially out of work young males). We have the highest employment numbers in a long time. Yes, there are people out of work – those who have no college degree or even a GED. The job of the Democratic party is to get these folks retrained because those grunt jobs are not ever coming back. It’s a new world and a global economy.

          • The times are right for a revolution. Unemployment is much more widespread than the official numbers tell. They stop counting after six months, when people’s unemployment benefits run out. And there are huge numbers of college-educated people who cannot find decent jobs because so many of those were shipped overseas under the so-called “free trade agreements” that Hillary supported. That “global economy” statement is nothing more than a justification for companies to outsource jobs to Third World countries, where they can rely on cheap and slave labor.

            Our middle class, like our infrastructure, is collapsing. People in the tens of thousands are awakening to this and speaking out against it for the first time. The revolution is already underway.

          • Good points, but high employment rates at low-paying jobs is not impressive. Neither you nor I get to decide when it’s time for a revolution, so I’ll stick with my plan.

      • That’s what frightens me as a black woman. If never ceases to surprise me how, a white man with 4 bankruptcies, 4 wives and as many or more side pieces, lies allll the time and it can be proven with out trying like how much he donated to veterans, he was against the Iraq War and EVERY thing he says today, there is visual evidence it’s a lie could even have this possibility to win over a woman who only has inference, half ass*d lies, innuendo, supposition and NO proof.

        • Are you aware of all the lies told by Hillary Clinton and her acceptance of her husband’s philandering? Are you aware of all the money she has taken from Wall St? If we don’t change the broken system and get back our economic power, those other social issues won’t matter.

          Trump is a clown and very transparent, while Clinton is a master of manipulation. They’re both dangerous, but you should know what you’re voting for.

          This expose by Abby Martin is enlightening for those who only read headlines.

          • I am a 67 year old woman who has voted and vetted over 40 years, since 1970. I do not need you or your information. If I wanted it, I would look it up myself. in other words, not to put to fine a point on it, I do not give a SH**!! Are we good? You people are more childish than my granddaughters. 10, 8 and 6!!

          • You criticized my opinion, I backed it up with facts and you’re calling me childish? All I ask of anyone is to be informed when they vote. Hillary Clinton is guilty of the very same things you said about Trump and more. I’m sorry if you don’t like hearing the truth. Who’s the childish one?

          • That’s the point, you assume I do not have facts. That I have voted since 1970 out of clear ignorance. You insult me. I do not need your information. I do not want it. I get my own. I fact check a tear drop and I need you for…what? Yes, it sounds like high school. did you know she had a hole in her socks??? I didn’t deal in 1967 and I do not deal now. I have vetted people like George Voinovich in person in Cleveland, Ohio. Who are you?

          • If you think voting for Hillary is any way to go forward, you haven’t learned much. The lesser of 2 evils, sky is falling appeal has been used against us too many times to keep supporting it.

          • Hey, I’m originally from Cleveland too. We are going to Canada for the Shaw Festival with some friends who still live there. They timed the trip to avoid the Republican slime party.

          • Actually, I’m no one of importance, except that I also get a vote. I have made no assumptions about your information. I’m here to share what I know and to listen to others’ fact-based opinions. I don’t think you fit in that category, so feel free to continue with your childish rants, but you’ve already shown your character.

            By the way, this is 2016. The world has changed. If you have a computer, there is no excuse for ignorance.

          • I am getting fed up with know it alls. I started no conversation with you and am tired of you already. I do no care what the year. I have given you no opinions, just told you not to give me yours and expect me to follow blindly. I have not told you for whom to vote or not to vote . I haven’t even told republicans this nor questioned any. Do the same. At 67 and black, childish rants are not in my nature. But white women? Oh, Lordy. whine someplace else. I have no cheese left. The worse part??? I haven’t a clue as to what your problem with me is and don’t give a sh**!!

          • I have told no one who they should vote for, but I have pointed out that perhaps your age is a factor in you praising Hillary Clinton for her accomplishments long ago, but ignoring her recent actions. What matters to me is that people are well-informed and not spouting propaganda that has been spoon fed to them via the corrupt media. It matters to me and it should matter to you.

    • I have heard that Jill Stein might be willing to offer the Green Party nomination to Bernie. The Green Party is on the ballot everywhere. If Bernie accepts and runs as the Green party candidate, we could win.

  6. There is a very good reason why one of the requirements running for president, one has to reach the age of 35 years. It was believed at this age the runner will have a mature thinking and know-how, analyse, understand, accept the result than those who are under this age. Am sorry, what am seeing now going on Dem presidential contest is not what matured people do.

  7. Hang in there Bernie! The indictment is coming down soon. The Dems want you out so they can implement Plan B which is a Biden/Warren ticket.

  8. When he stated out loud his agenda, I whole heartedly approved. As a child of the tumultuous 60’s. I got it. NOW, I see my 15 month old grandson when he does not get his way. Yell. Stomp his foot. THAT isn’t attractive at all on 70 year olds.

    • Screaming isn’t either, and I see Clinton doing a lot of that and declaring she is the nominee when she isn’t.

      • There you go. of course she screams and men yell. Wow, I thought we’d gotten over that bit of sexism. They all yelled to be heard regardless of mikes. That woman has never scream. Yelled until she was hoarse as has Bernie but no screaming.

        • Grasping for straws, never saw where the word scream was sexist, screeching maybe, but not scream. Seems the Hillary side is trying to use the only thing that Hillary has that’s better than what Bernie has, a vagina.Hilarys cozy relationship with Wall Street is what makes her a NO to me, I could care less what sex she is.

          • Just about every politician has one or else the fail would not have happened. This whole stupidity about her fees works my last nerves. none of your business. Get what you can. Did you ask the males who deal/dealt with WS which ARE the republicans, period, how much they received or to put out their speeches. its as bad as white people wanting this president’s grades from college but will believe anything a white man SAYS, sight unseen, a la Trump!! No difference at all. You gotta come up with something better than that for me. I DO NOT CARE!! E-MAILS? DITTO!!

          • To me the emails, Benghazzi, Whitewater, Monica etc etc are all BS, but accepting money via speeches is nothing less than legalized bribery, and yes I feel the same way when I see men accepting these so called fees and have been objecting to this practice for at least a decade. To try and spin this into a gender thing is pure BS, corruption is corruption. None of my business you say??? Wrong, even they seem to feel it is because they agreed to the law that requires them to disclose it, we have a right to know who we are voting for. “Get what you can” Where did you learn ethics-Tammany Hall? These people are supposed to be working for all of us, not just women, not just minorities, but all of us. Maybe you don’t care that Goldman Saks gives these sums of money to politicians, maybe you don’t care that our system has been corrupted by corporate money, but you should be unless you are on the receiving end of what these companies are really paying for.

          • You’re exactly right. The practice ought to be outlawed. And given Hillary’s grief, politically, if not legally, it may well be. And good riddance to bad rubbish. And to insiders feeling entitled to the spoils of power.

          • My point is, I haven’t seen this amount of indignation for anyone else. How much did any of the others get? Were they questioned? Why now? Why just her? Bernie talks a good game but how much has he received in the distant past? I don’t care for him, her, Mitt, little green men from outer space. If she had not run for anything would it matter? Why should it now. Most people who retire from politics of high powered place like Secretary of state, etc., get high fees for speeches. nothing new. That’s how a lot of them make their money. A comedian can get high fees for speeches. I’m not getting it. I do not begrudge them that. I have a Plain dealer editor who called President Obama arrogant? Out of everyone he speaks of who has won the presidency, only this president has this accusation. Why? I had to ask. He wrote because he published two books and he has had a hard on for him since then. Before he had run for anything, just wrote a couple of books. I want to publish. My 10 year old granddaughter was published at 6!! IF this pay for speech had not been the rule since forever, maybe. Now, uh, no!! Frankly, I would rather deal with that and make money than the fickle, feeble minded public as a politician.

          • Why now? Yes it’s been going on for a long time, and I’ve been bitching about it for a long time but the reason why now is because Bernie has been successful in bringing an awareness of this corruption to more people than ever before. It has nothing to do with gender, and sadly what I see is a lot of women out there are so desperate to have a female as President that they are willing to put in someone like Hillary. I say why not Elizabeth Warren as the first woman? Why does it have to be a woman now? We have had women run before but we have never had anyone like Bernie get this far before, not in the last 100 years or so. I’d vote for Elizabeth in a heartbeat. I live in NY but contributed to her election and it’s not like I have money to spare. I’m not saying that there are people out there who don’t hold double standards, but I hold everyone to the same standards. It sickened me to see the Republicans try and destroy Obama, clearly their attacks were driven more by race than party affiliation. They can accept a black man with a white name like Clarence Thomas but not a Barack Obama. But as I said I apply standards equally, and I will judge Barack as severely for passing TPP (if he does) as I did Bill Clinton for passing NAFTA. I’ve already written off at least 99% of Republicans so what they do is irrelevant.

          • Thank you. I though I was losing it. I had never heard it before and I pride myself on paying attention. I have since I was 14 during Civil rights. I watched all the conventions with equal interest and total boredom until the wonders of cable. 🙂 Now I skip check and it’s still a yawn fest. I’d rather read about it. Now, I will be a captive audience, here in Downtown Cleveland, Ohio!! I am on 9th street and Prospect and the convention is at the Q on Ontario. 9th street triple forks at Huron and Prospect. The Q is at the end of Huron and Ontario around 4th street.
            I’m on 9th and its on 4th and we do not no the no fly zone is yet. There are a ton of restaurants in the area starting with the Winking Lizard .

  9. I have a serious question about Sanders beating Trump by a wider margin than Hillary beats Trump. Which voter is changing to vote for “The Donald”? One answer is the person who can’t stand Hillary. While I can’t prove it, my contention is that it is the person that wants Sanders rather than Hillary to run against “The Donald” — not a serious Democrat.

    • Considering the REAL agenda of the Democratic Party for the past 80 years, the ONLY candidate who is a TRUE Democrat is Sanders, his campaign being supported by individuals, NOT corporations.

    • It’s a question of who won’t bother to vote at all. Bernie supporters are more likely to sit it out, that helps Trump.

          • No, not Donald Trump. If I wanted to vote for Trump, I would just do it. I’m voting for Bernie. If you think that’s a problem, take it up with the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who helped Clinton cheat her way through the primaries. I’m not voting for someone I find repulsive.

          • Again, in other words, you will put Donald Trump in the White House, if you can’t get your way. Politics doesn’t work the way you think it does.

          • Politics doesn’t work the way the DNC and Hillary think it does, namely that they can shove a candidate down our throats, and we will have no choice but to support her. I have a long history of being politically active as well as experience running for office as a Democrat, so don’t tell me I don’t know how things work.

            This isn’t about getting “my way.” It is about getting the way best for the 99 percent and our rapidly diminishing middle class. They deserve better than a DLC neocon who has spent 20+ years moving the Democratic Party to the right. She chose the millions; she chose to go with Wall Street and to abandon the poor and middle class. But she is not the only one who can exercise power. The many of us whose needs she does not represent also have power we can wield, and we do that by refusing to fall in line behind someone chosen by the establishment rather than by the people. It’s that establishment, which, by spending more than a year shoving Hillary down our throats and doing everything to sabotage Bernie Sanders, whose policies and world view represent the needs of the 99 percent, who will be putting Donald Trump into the White House. They are the ones insisting on nominating a corrupt Wall Street shill who is hugely disliked by the voting public.

          • Corrupt politics where the popular vote isn’t even legally binding, where the winner is not required to get the majority of votes, just more than any other, where two parties that receive millions from the same corporations get to normally pick who our choices will be.

  10. IF Democrats win the White House in the general election this fall, it must present the Party with a mandate that REQUIRES the establishment to deal with the issues that Sanders and his supporters have raised, NOT another Democratic presidency that has succumbed to big money and the undemocratic pressure of PACs. It has taken Obama seven years to struggle with TPP, and we STILL do not know if he supports it or not. Obama has allowed our arms trading with Vietnam to resume, even though we are STILL condemning that nation for its record on Civil Rights for their citizens. And are we YET sure of the fate of the Keystone Pipeline? Sanders is NOT beholden to the powers that are backing both Obama AND Clinton, and he has shown that REAL democracy can still work in this country.

  11. Excuse me but Clinton can’t lock it up either without super delegates. I vote we go with Sen Sanders who can actually beat clown Trump.

    • Absolutely correct. Hillary is lousy. She can’t even unite her own party. How does she unite the country?

        • BS. As the presumptive nominee it is her responsibility to unite the party much like Obama did and all of our successful nominees have done in the past. Other than existing what has Bernie to keep her from unifying the party? It appears she lacks the skill set, desire and leadership to rise to the occasion. As our leader when does she start leading and do what is necessary to demonstrate that she will represent all of the democrats as opposed to just her supporters. Has she offered any concessions of continues to act with arrogance declaring herself the winner. How about some humility? Why can’t she learn to win gracefully? All I see is finger pointing and excuses. She better wake up.

          • You have it backwards. 2008 was a very close nomination process. Hillary finally was the one who gave in to unite the party. She supported Obama 100%.

          • Gave in? She lost.

            And Bernie has been very clear that he will not run as an independent and will do everything he can to make sure Trump does not become President. What more do you want him to do?

      • Martians would be a better choice. This is the type of article that should appear on Hillary’s campaign site, not on a supposedly unbiased journalistic site.

        • That’s right, if a writer doesn’t support the Martyr of Montpelier, he or she must be biased. It appears that you do not know the difference between hard news and an opinion column. Or, are you just a troll?

          • I’m a long time progressive and potential 2020 primary challenger to Hillary IF she is elected president. I’m not asking for an article supporting Bernie, just something evenhanded. There is a difference.

          • Bernie bots are so damn sensitive, they start whining at anything less than full-throated praise of the Messiah.

          • Bernie supporters do not believe he is a messiah. We believe in the IDEAS he is advocating. That’s why one of Bernie’s slogans is, “Not me, Us.”

          • The problem here is, if it was the “IDEAS he is advocating,” you’re saying those IDEAS were what lost him the election. It wan’t the ideas. These ideas are commonplace in the liberal traditions of the dem party. It was Sanders himself, that lost him the election. He could not be viewed as a president, by a majority of the electorate.

        • No one said this site was unbiased and this particular writer is NOT un biased. He writes opinion pieces and has for years. Go to NR and the others for unbiased reporting. Ooops, my bad, NY Times, uh, no when it comes to Hillary. You’re in the wrong place, its who we are no matter who is running or what election cycle we’re in.

          • “my room mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet $98/hr”…..!kj407ytwo days ago grey MacLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 Dollars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over hourly. 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !kj407y:➽:➽:.➽.➽.➽.➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsMatterGetPay-Hour$98…. .★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★::::::!kj407y….,……

        • NM has always been biased. Conason is on the Clinton payroll. This is propaganda not journalism.

        • “my room mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet $98/hr”…..!kj407ytwo days ago grey MacLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 Dollars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over hourly. 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !kj407y:➽:➽:.➽.➽.➽.➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsMatterGetPay-Hour$98…. .★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★::::::!kj407y….,….

  12. If the founding fathers we pragmatic we would still be colony of England. If been pragmatic for 30 years and it just keeps getting worse.

    • I beg to differ on the Founding Fathers. We get this narrative nowadays on the Founders, where they were this fiery bunch of give me liberty, or give me death, no compromising zealots for freedom. When the facts are, that compromise, and the foundational realization that pragmatism, agreeing where possible, and setting aside those issues where it was not. That the prefect would not be permitted to be the enemy of the good. Today’s politicians, in todays rancorous political environment, could never launch a revolution much less agree on a Constitution, if given a million years to do so.

      • What could have been less progressive than denying women the vote and denying freedom to black folks? The founding fathers (except for Adams and sometimes Franklin) were not the angels we make them seem.

        • They were progressive for their time, sure. But still creations of it, as we all are.
          They have been made Gods, to serve a particular political agenda.

        • They were progressives, sure. But remained creations of their time, as we all are. They have been made into Gods, and unto men they never were, in order to serve a particular political agenda.

    • I suggest you read your history. The American revolution involved extensive wheeling, dealing, horse-trading, and compromise between the delegates from New England, Delaware and the Carolinas, who had widely differing views on nearly every aspect of politics and government. In short, it was a process St. Bernard, the Martyr of Montpelier, would have had nothing to do with because, you know, everyone but him would have been corrupt.

  13. Most of us wrong about Bernie’s approach into Democratic party. Lately however the true Bernie has come to light. In the past few months I blamed Bernie’s handlers for the aggressive stand Bernie has taken against Hillary Clinton and the DNC. I was wrong, its not Bernie’s managers/handlers to blame, its Bernie Sanders himself. The orders come from the very top. Bernie Sanders is out for Bernie himself. Threatening violence to disrupt the Democratic convention, threating the Democratic chairwoman herself, and refusing to accept the inevitable, tells me one thing, Bernie Sanders is a very dangerous man who can not be trusted. I thing the Democratic party should buy him a gold watch and send him home. Permanently.

    • Brilliant. That ought to unite Bernie’s supporters to come out in force for Hillary. Are you aware that DWS was Hillary’s chief campaign advisor in 2008? How impartial is that? No this primary isn’t rigged.

      • I’m an independent voter. I’m also smart enough and motivated enough to figure out what’s required to vote in the democratic primaries. If Bernie’s supporters didn’t get to vote in the primary it’s because they were too uninformed and/or too lazy to take the necessary steps to be able to do so.

        The rules were NOT new.

        The primaries were not surprise scheduled – they’d been on the calendar long before even the first candidate announced they were running.

        Bernie knew the rules when he decided to use the DNC for his power grab for the highest office in the land. He continues to refuse support for the down ticket, even condemns the party – then demands loyalty from them.

        Now, he expects the DNC to ignore the THREE MILLION more individual votes, and the nearly three hundred more pledged delegates she has and be bullied into handing him the nomination.

        That’s not democracy at work.

        That’s not how loyalty works. In fact, that’s despotism.

        • Care to show us any post in the past when you, a Southern Lady, supported the Yankee Jew from New York Bernie? I didn’t see any. Somehow your claim that you were once a Bernie supporter does not ring true to me. Sounds more lIke a Hillary supporter pretending that she one supported Bernie to make it seem lIke supporters are defecting. Democracy is not where if you get rich enough you can buy whatever rules you want. HILLARY is as dirty as they come. Do you really think her speeches are that good that corporations are willing to fork over several hundred thousands of dollars? Come on, no one can be that naive, these fees are simply a loophole to legalize bribery. HILLARY voted to bail out banks but supported throwing the poor under the bus. She accepts corporate funds bease that the only wa she cold stay in the race. Who do you think she will be working for if she gets in? Do you think she will have an epiphany and turn her back on her corporate benifactors once the coronation has taken place? It will be 1992 all over again.

        • I am not sure what this post has to do with our discussion regarding the role that Superdelegates play in the nominating process. The DNC and Superdelegates are seperate entities. The role of the DNC is ensure a fair and impartial nominating process where one candidate is not favored over another. So many of us take issue when DWS is is the chair of the DNC and also at one time on HRCs payroll as her chief campaign advisor in her failing bid in 2008. I found it telling that you failed to address that in your reply.

          When 450 Superdelegates committed to Hillary a year ago before any other challengers had announced their candidacies we were told that was perfectly acceptable since Superdelegates were not bound by the will of the people. They were independent and were in place to help the party pick the candidate that they felt was the most electable in the General. So they basically set up a firewall to discourage any other candidates from entering the race. Ok those are the rules. However I find it to be such a double standard that Bernie should not be allowed to even ask for the Superdelegates to consider supporting him in light of all of the evidence indicating he would destroy Trump in the general and Hillary would struggle. Are the Superdelegates subject to the will of the people or not? If they are subject to only going for the candidate that received the most raw votes then what is their purpose? It seems like the Clinton campaign feels the Superdelegates are not subject to the will of the people as long as the Super delegates are supporting Hillary. How democratic is that?

          • The superdelagates do not even matter before the convention. Right now, there are three million more voters – including independent voters like me, who chose her instead of him. There are nearly three hundred more pledged delegates for her because of those THREE MILLION MORE individual citizen voters. Bernie wants to take away the rights of all three million more individual citizen’s voters to vote for the candidate of their choosing in his despotic demand for the nomination he did not win.

          • Thanks for reply but you are not making any sense at all. Neither candidate will have enough pledged delegates. To win the nomination. Both would need the support of some super delegates to win a majority of the delegates and get to be the nominee. The rules are that the Superdelegates are in no way bound by the votes of the people. You can’t have it both ways.

          • But, what sense is there is denying the hard-cold numbers? She is undeniably in the lead even without the superdelegates. She will enter the convention with the overwhelming evidence of the popular vote and pledged delegate counts in her favor. To deny the will of three million MORE voters than voted for him, and try to strong arm the convention into choosing him is not democratic – it’s bullying despotism. That’s not a hopeful character trait going forward, now is it?

            In 2008, she stepped aside for the good of the party and worked tirelessly to get Obama elected. That’s loyalty to the party, and loyalty to progressivism. That’s the loyalty expected when you choose to run on the party ticket. Why is he not held to that standard?

            The superdelegates are loyal to the party. When he’s shown no such loyalty, why would they give him their loyalty?

          • She did not step aside until early June. The rules are the rules. Superdelegates are not bound by the raw votes in the primary. Everybody knew the rules before the contest and Hillary has taken advantage of those rules nicely. How democratic is it to deny the millions a chance to vote for the nominee of their choice since neither candidate has enough pledged delegates to win the nomination. You sound like a communist.

          • No one – not one single independent voter – was denied a chance to vote. The primaries were not surprise elections; every single independent voter had ample opportunity to change their affiliation to be sure they could vote in the closed primaries – they either didn’t figure that out or chose not to figure out the rules that would allow them to vote. That is NOT the fault of the rules nor the DNC.

          • Who said anyone has been denied the right to vote? The point is that neither candidate should leave the race until one candidate has a majority of delegates in order to be the nominee. And both candidates have the ability to to convince the Superdelegates that they would be a better choice than the other in the general. In my opinion Bernie should stay in the race and make his argument that he has the best chance of defeating Trump. And you have a right to disagree. What I take issue with is your argument that disenfranchises Bernie’s supporters from supporting him. That is not your choice. You also do not seem to understand the rules and how a candidate is officially nominated. Good day

          • But the Bernie supporters calling for her to drop out when she’s clearly in the lead is okay?

            Bernie’s supporters continue to cry foul and cheating every time an independent voter has been denied the chance to vote in a closed primary.

            Bernie himself has made similar claims, yet says it’s democracy in action when the same rules work for him.

            Bernie’s supporters have spent the entire election denigrating Hillary’s supporters on her pages, with age old, tired and repeatedly disproven GOP and FOXNews talking points. I have yet to go to one of his posts and comment negatively about him.

            Bernie supporters have repeatedly threatened to vote for Trump or not at all or to write Bernie in rather than vote for her. While her supporters have unanimously said they will vote for him if he wins the nomination.

            Bernie’s campaign actually said they want to hurt Clinton’s campaign – even if that means helping Trump!

            All to deny THREE MILLION MORE voters than Bernie can claim from their choice.

            Bernie and his acolytes are the ONLY ones on the left who are so despotic as to deny the majority their right to their candidate of choice.

            http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/5/19/1528489/-Sanders-campaign-admits-it-wants-to-hurt-Clinton-even-if-that-means-helping-Trump

          • I only speak for myself and do not speak for either Hillarys supporters or Bernie’s.
            Bernie has every right to attempt win the nomination. This is America and at this point it is Hillarys responsibility to demonstrate some leadership and unite the party. Barring an indictment (another reason for Bernie to stay in) this is Hillarys election to lose in November. Blaming Bernie now for her weaknesses as a Presidential nominee further demonstrates her lack of leadership and ability to rise the occasion. Good day.

          • Wait a minute. Hillary calls herself the “nominee,” which means every single voter in the states that vote in June gets no say in the matter and is effectively denied a chance to vote. That’s not just insulting; it’s dictatorial.

          • No. They’ll still get their chance to vote just like #Trumpitler’s #Trumpers are still getting to cast ballots for him even though no one is running against him in the GOP. She says she will be the nominee because the math demonstrates Sanders has no LEGITIMATE path to victory. The numbers are in her favor and the trends of the entire contest shows he cannot get the over 85% he would need to even catch up to her. He can only steal the nomination through bullying, divisiveness, and fear mongering, and destroy progressivism by handing the GOP the victory.

            It’s illogical and petty to have announced his campaign’s intent to harm Hillary and force a contested convention. He’s wrong.

          • Wrong, I was, they closed the registration back in the fall, September I believe. New York, If not for the closed Primary Bernie would have won New York. I see a lot more Bernie Bumper stickers out there than Hillary.

          • Not much closer when you measure pledged delegates. Bernie still has a lot delegates in good states for him coming up. My guess is that it will be nearly as close as in 2008.

          • Well, next time around, let’s get rid of both the super delegates and caucuses. That ought to fix the problem. Unfortunately, we are dealing with the present DNC rules which have been around for a very long time. Deal with it.

          • What does that have to do with my comment? With that being said I believe a conversation within the party regarding the role of Superdelegates , the DNC , closed primaries, caucuses, and the timing of the primaries would be healthy and help the party unite before November.

          • I’m glad to hear that. I wish he’d done it much sooner. I hope this late change in support will matter and help the down ticket take back Congress.

          • Cheeky, meddlin’ busyolebody … Who does he think he is, anyway? And chances are not a single one of them is a democratic socialist.

          • It doesn’t matter what they call themselves. What matters is that they share a commitment to the issues Bernie values, such as single payer health care, anti-poverty programs, reinstating Glass-Steagall, getting money out of politics, breaking up big banks, free state college tuition, etc.

          • laurele, Thank you for your reply.

            We’ve had more than enough of the nominal over the functional. Consider RINOs and even Republicans as a whole for years, with commitment coming more to power than issues. As Alan Greenspan observed a number of years ago, “We (Republicans) have forfeited principle for attainment of power, and are likely to end up having neither.”

            And Democrats have not been immune from contamination.

          • I ignore facts? What facts do you mean? Would those facts be MATH. And, your despotic demand for me to “get lost” really goes a long way to convincing me to your perspective – NOT EVER!!!

            Oh yeah, he won caucuses – glorified pep rallies. She won the actual vote count primaries in the same states. Again, individual voters spoke and chose her by the ballot votes – the proven will of the people whose voting rights you choose to deny. Again, that’s pure despotism.

    • Cretin, you have bought the Party platform and are just another prisoner of the “system”. guess you can’t think outside the box. Bernie is “infiltrating” the Democratic Party and justifiably so. Guess you LOVE the see-saw this nation has been on for the last 200+ years.

    • The Clinton supporters that write on comment lines are vicious. They seem to think attacking us Bernie supporters, patronizing us,calling us names and threatening us will magically get us to support Hillary. It is not going to work. Just this morning Hillary’s use of private email server was found to be against policy. She may be indicted. The FBI is still looking at the consequences of her poor decision. I hope she is indicted.

    • He never threatened violence. He said the convention will be “messy,” which means there will be political contention. There is a huge difference, and pretending there is downright defamatory to him.

      • Assault whether physical or verbal is always unacceptable.

        Operating rooms are messy, but surgery is not violence.

        In my view, however we may regard Sanders’s opinions, attitudes, and positions, he has shown a decency, clarity, restraint, and precision others in the fray have not exceeded.

        There is a susceptibility of people who do not know peace to regard it, nonviolence, and whatever in which they are inexperienced, with fear, resentment, and suspicion, as their threatening opposites.

        War is sweet to those who haven’t partaken it, and peace bitter.

        So too I believe much of the xenophobic dismay at and antipathy toward Bernard Sanders.

          • Not to quibble, but violence is generally regarded as behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

            Surgery entails bloodshed, yes, but qualification as violence is less clear.

          • In technical terms , it is an ‘insult’ to the body as opposed to violence.

    • You are oh, so, correct! He changed along the way. He is nearly 75 and maybe the stress is getting to him. It is a rotten shame that he had to horn into the Dem Party and them smear the Dems with his lies and attitudes. He needs to just retire and go home. We need to vote DEMOCRATIC ALL UP AND DOWN THE BALLOT to keep Trump out and there is no time for Bernie’s bickering.
      GET OUT AND VOTE BEFORE WE LOSE THAT RIGHT TOO.

      ..

      • And Donald Trump’s, chronic? Pathological narcissism?

        Tony, with all due respect for your perceptions of Mr Sanders and your assertions of events, they do not correspond to my assessment of him or facts as I understand them.

    • I think he’s reverting to his roots, which was a ’60s radical. He’s going home, so to speak.

  14. The USA has lost its way. Whatever the outcome of the election I take some satisfaction with whatever sorrow that we will get no worse than we deserve, whatever we inflict on the rest of the world with howsomever much justice.

    Why doesn’t Sanders let it go? Why don’t Trump and Clinton give up their standing in the 1%?

    One difference is that Sanders, in my view, sees clearly that the race and its issues are a public trust, and he will not betray stewardship by forfeiting it.

    What a nuisance for ones perceiving, with varying degrees of ambuiguity, it as further personal entitlement!

      • Denise Dianaty, thank you for your reply, and setting me straight.

        I’ll take your word for it. From my level it’s hard to distinguish among higher ones.

        Anybody know in which percent Hillary in fact is?

        Can we even know in which Donald in fact is? How much would tax returns tell us? They show income, not net worth.

        Anybody remember, “The truth is … “?

          • Really? Based on what? She gets paid more for a speach to Wall Street than we through our tax dollars pay her in a tear, and you still think she is working for our interests?

  15. It’s NOT time for Bernie to leave, and this entire article is disgustingly biased. Bernie is NOT losing. He is doing well enough to assure that both Democratic candidates go to the convention short of the threshold of delegates needed to clinch the nomination. Your deliberate misinterpretation of his comment saying the convention will be “messy.” is a low blow. True democracy is messy. That doesn’t mean it is violent; it just means there is a lot of debating and back-and-forth proposals from groups with competing positions on issues. Messy means it won’t be a smoothly choreographed event with everything planned in advance. That is not a bad thing.

    Furthermore, it is discouraging to again read the repetition of the false claim that Sanders supporters were violent in Nevada. No violence took place there. All the controversy was verbal. Furthermore, there is no evidence that any death threats came from people involved with the Sanders campaign. Sanders is a man of peace who recognizes the difference between peaceful, non-violent protests and rioting.

    100,000 Sanders supporters have signed petitions saying they will not vote for Clinton in November, and I am one of them. Why should we vote for someone solely because the other candidate is worse? Furthermore, Clinton cheated her way through the primary process, is essentially indebted to Wall Street, and couldn’t even keep her word about holding a final debate in California.

    I’m voting for Bernie in November whether he is the nominee, or whether I have to write him in. You cannot force Clinton down our throats, no matter how much you try to whitewash her long record of unethical and borderline illegal activity. Bernie is staying in to fight for me, for us, for the 99 percent, and I applaud him for it. He is doing what all candidates do in a contested race. Clinton is not owed a free pass to the nomination, and her repeated claims that the race is over effectively disenfranchise those of us in states that haven’t voted yet.

    • Well said I agree with every word you said. The battle is not over yet but I really hope you really think about how you vote in November. Hopefully you will put the movement first and consider which President allows us the best opportunity to make that movement evolve into a revolution. In my opinion Trump will slow us down. What is really important is what we do as Progressives after this election. I do totally respect your final decision.

      • I’m not voting for Trump, but I will never, under any circumstances, vote for Hillary. You may not agree with me, but I believe Hillary would slow down the revolution just as much as Trump would. Long before Bernie entered the race, I knew I could never vote for her.

        • If the race is between Hillary and Trump and you do not vote for Hillary, you ARE voting for Trump and every bad thing he does will be partly because of you.

          • That’s called scapegoating, and it’s a sad method of bullying Hillary and her supporters are trying to use to get Bernie’s supporters to fall in line behind her. I don’t want either of those two one percenters, and I refuse to vote for either one. If Trump is elected, every bad thing he does will be on the heads of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz for forcing her on us and rigging the primary process against the more popular candidate. They all know what the polls show, but they fear Bernie because he would end their gravy train of legalized bribery. Blame them and their greed, not me and not those of us who cannot vote for either of these losers.

          • It’s a simple fact. Deal with it. And no, if Drumpf gets elected because you holier-than-thou purity types decide you just can’t sully yoursewrlves, I really don’t what to see you on any of the boards whinging about what happens to everything you believe in.

            This is not the important election, this is a breech election. Hillary is a transitional figure. It’s the ’20 election that counts, because THAT’S where the next gen starts to take over. Either you set it up for a smooth transition, or just as happened in ’68, the progressive movement gets set back for a generation.

            Look at Drumpf’s list of possible SCOTUS choices, and then ask yourself if you really want to deal with a SCOTUS dominated by the likes of them for the next 20 – 30 – 40 years.

          • It’s a simple fact that I’m not voting for Hillary, ever. If you really want a Democrat who can win, you should be contacting the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the superdelegates and urging them to support the one person who polls consistently show CAN beat Trump, and that is Bernie.

            Asking someone to vote for a candidate they find repulsive in every way is about as unrealistic as it gets. It’s not a matter of “sullying” myself or anyone; it’s a matter of there being no way I can vote for a one percenter who does not represent the ideas and policies I believe in any more than Trump does.

            How do you know this is not the important election? Many of us think it is just that. I don’t want Hillary entrenched for 8 years with no one being able to primary her in 2020 because that’s a cardinal sin according to the DNC.

            Don’t buy the mainstream media claim that this is about generations and a generational change. People of all generations support Bernie, not just millennials. The real issue is that all generations in this country have become more progressive as a result of the increasing income inequality of the last 30+ years.

          • The more you say, the more suspicious I become. No democrat could espouse such over-the-top notions about Hillary. Hillary is fighting for all of us, including you. You misrepresent Hillary’s intentions and efforts. Ask yourself why she endured so much vitriol and hatred when she fought for years, to give this country a better medical reality. The big insurance and medical giants fought her tooth and nail.until she had nothing left with which to fight. Well, she’s back with better tools, but with a smarter sense of what she’s up against. You don’t appear interested so much in telling us you won’t vote for Hillary, as you are interested in getting other people to not vote for her. Only a couple of young and vulnerable dems would fall for this nonsense. Anybody over the age of 35 knows that Hillary is the opposite of what you’re saying.

      • Bernie’s a social democrat running as a Democrat, as which he may be closer to the Democratic party’s heritage than is his rival, who is certainly closer to the GOP’s than is its presumptive.

        It may be a long walk to paddock and stable after the race.

        Whether he attains the Oval Office, don’t misestimate or disparage him. If not in it he’ll still be in the Senate.

        Like the Bourbons in France after the Revolution, both political parties in this country remember (or misremember) everything and have learned and are learning nothing.

        • That’s not why Bernie ran as a democrat. It was because he didn’t want to have happen to him, what happened to Ralph Nader. He’s gone as far as a candidate can go, by trying to convince them that social and economic justice are, in some mysterious way, associated with the name Bernie Sanders. But there is no such association. We all can continue to seek a thriving, progressive society without Bernie Sanders. There is the problem, that most people are content to live as happily as they can, and don’t want to constantly fight the establishment. But once every 4 years, someone like Bernie comes along, and like simpleminded children, we believe the messenger is more than a messenger. Bernie can “talk” about all the wonderful things he thinks we should have, but Hillary will actually try and will occasionally succeed in getting some of our noble goals achieved in the real world.

          • Thank you, johncp, for your reply.

            What why is the not why?

            In my view, however my vote, Bernard Sanders sees farther and more clearly through the fog than anyone else in contention. What he sees, whether we agree, is that ongoing skewing and imbalance of wealth distribution is a distortion and detriment of the economy with dire potential and actual effects and prospects for our society.

            Whether we can regard this as “thriving, progressive” however diligently sought, I can not regard it as healthful or sustainable.

            I agree with you “that most people are content to live as happily as they can, and don’t want to constantly fight the establishment.”

            It would be commendable and honorable of the establishment to reciprocate. It is the establishment which is bringing the fight to the people.

            Comparing the likes and supporters of Bernie Sanders to “simpleminded children” is ad hominem, condescending, inappropriately disparaging, and unworthy of the level of discourse of which you are capable.

          • My point about many Sanders supporters was very specific. What I meant was that these supporters made the all too human mistake of confusing the messenger with the message.
            Sanders is not presidential material just because he can provide us with a list of grievances. A 15 year old progressive poli sci student, could give us the same list.

          • Thank you again, johncp, and for clarification.

            Sanders, again whatever my vote, is presidential material not just for a list of grievances but for the same reason a good therapist — one who treats — is perforce a good diagnostician.

            I can not regard his experience municipal, legislative, and civic, and clarity of expression and conduct on the stump as any less presidentially qualifying than other contenders’, whether from positions, say, Secretary of State or White House resident, affording conventionally greater access to power.

            Size of symbol does not condition its meaning.

            Who is to say the emperor has no clothes?

            My concern is not so much who gives the list as to what it says and what its truth.

            Hillary is a virtuosa technician, very — even more than conventionally, well and hard earned — able and competent, but to what ends? I do not impugn her motives; I think she can do a good job driving whether it’s where we will do well, or even better, to go.

      • Absolutely! He was in congress for 44 years without a very impressive record and as an Independent. So he decided to run for President at 75 years old. Not such good judgment right there. Then he decided to push himself into the Democratic Party and then try to take it over. He trashes the Dem party and Dems. Wow, does he really think Dems are going to rush out and make this cranky, trouble-making, lying old man our President? Move on, Bernie. Retire and enjoy your grandchildren and leave the Dem party alone. I has been working fine for many, many years without you trying to destroy it now. Bye bye.

        ..

        • Move on, Hillary, go to prison and answer for your long history of quasi-legal and illegal activities.

          Ageism is just as much a form of bigotry as is sexism.

          The Democratic Party has been anything but fine for many years. For the last two-and-a-half decades, the party of FDR has been hijacked by DLC “Third Way” people like Hillary who have done everything possible to move it to the right. We never wanted this, and we won’t have it.

          • Excuse me laurele, you fooled me…When a person mentions prison in the same sentence it is ALWAYS A REPUBLICAN.

          • . Bernie supporters insist that Bernie has been good for Hillary, because he’s moved her to the Left. while you believe she’s moved as far right as she can. What universe are you in? Who is this “we” you’re talking about? “We never wanted this, and we won’t have it.” Hillary is being investigated because she’s a democrat, and the republicans are nervous about a variety of things, making it a certainty, that they will engage in anything to derail her efforts. Hillary is a Left winger, smart enough to give consideration to the political Middle, and even to the heart of the republican party. They’re a sizable part of our country. She will move the country leftward, at the fastest speed she can. But will not attack society, as it is, such as Sanders has done, hoping, pretending, absurdly, to achieve Nirvana tomorrow.

    • As I understand it, thanks to the Electoral College, to pull off writing in there must be electors committed to the written-in candidate, from the respective states.

      Messy indeed. Sic transit gloria democraciae.

    • Laurele, It makes me sad that you have not read the long expansive history of Hillary Clinton. I do wish you would give United states of America a free pass to elect our Lady Democrat. I want so much for each citizen. Everybody does not want any intelligent voter to help Dumb Trump to RUIN our nation.
      The Supreme court overlooked the voters in 2000 and gave us Bush and Cheney. Fortunately we have a energetic women in Florida that will secure Florida for the Democrats. When Wasserman-Schultz won in Florida she garnered 69% of the votes. Democrats NEED her.
      Again please reconsider in November to help Democrats and if not, you might
      as well not even go to the polls, just send for an absentee ballot and take it over to your garbage can. Results will be the same. Then turn on the TV and try to enjoy Trumps win. What an ugly thought. We want what is important to YOU!

      • Actually, I am quite familiar with the long history of Hillary Clinton, and I find it repulsive and downright criminal. No, I am not repeating right wing or Republican propaganda. These are my findings. I do not vote for someone based on their gender. The fact that Hillary continually defaults to the gender issue every time she is confronted with her past misdeeds only serves to turn me off. Obama never resorted to claiming “racism” when he was politically attacked for his record or position on an issue.

        Debbie Wasserman Schultz, not me, is the person setting the Democratic Party up for defeat. No one believes she is “neutral” in this race, as she claims. She has misused her position as DNC chair to do everything possible to tilt the playing field in favor of Hillary. She supports payday loans and consistently sides with the wealthy against the poor and middle class. And she has presided over more Democratic losses nationally than any other party chair. That is why she is going to lose her primary this year to Tim Canova, a real progressive. Democrats today do NOT need Schultz unless they are looking for a spectacular defeat.

        I will support those Democratic candidates for House and Senate who are genuine progressives. There are many of them running this year. However, I will not vote for Hillary, who is essentially a Democrat in name only. Her positions are largely Republican. I care far more about ideas and policies than about party loyalty. That’s why I’m joining more than 100,000 people writing Bernie in if he is denied the nomination.

        I long ago turned off the TV and refuse to turn it back on, as the mainstream media has been shoving Clinton down our throats for over a year.

        You want what is important to me? That would be a progressive president who supports single payer health care, makes fighting income inequality a top priority, wants to expand Social Security, supports reinstating Glass-Steagall, will break up big banks, will tax the wealthy, and will rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. If you really want what is important to me, you should be campaigning for Bernie.

        There is nothing anyone can say or do, not even Bernie, not even God, that could get me to vote for Hillary.

        • Again, laurele, if Trump gets elected, I hope you have the nuts to admit, it was because of you…

          Sorry you are bad at math, maybe you can take courses at your local community college…

        • Spoken like a true Republican. If you wanted a progressive candidate. you’re delusional. A “progressive” candidate can never win the nomination. But a right-wing loon like Trump, “can” win the presidency. That’s because like yourself, Clinton is hated by a well-concealed conservative owned media. DISCLOSURE by pundits, media reps, guests, news show hosts, etc. of their political affiliations. Just as they’re quick to point out that a guest is a “supporter” of Hillary, they themselves should let us know with what party they are associated. If you speak well or badly on TV, in media of any kind, of any candidate, you should tell the public what “your” favored political party is.

  16. As there are still numerous Americans who want Sanders as their candidate, numerous American who are not successfully represented by the DNC and for whom Clinton is not a viable candidate, I disagree with the author. The convention is just that, it is not a place for candidates to arrive fait accompli.Interesting that some feel so compelled to attempt to ignore the many who do not fir into the party-line mold. One other thing this author misrepresents is the actual violence,not threatened, but perpetrated, on both Sanders campaign headquarters and the actions of some actor who had the need to punch a woman with whom h disagreed.

  17. One area that Trump and Bernie agree on is that the US elections ARE INDEED RIGGED!! This entire list of stuff the Nevada Bernie rally attendees are accused of has NOT been verified by the literally hundreds of cameras. It is a media LIE by Conservatives who want to denigrate Bernie and maintain the Establishment that unfairly benefits them over the vast majority of the American People. They want Hilary because she (just like Bill) is an establishment shill, a billionaire’s puppet. She will continue to protect the 1% and be their advocate. Just like Bill signed the Republican Bill killing the 1930’s Glass Steigal Act (regulating the banks & wall street after the Great Depression) and sure enough, as a direct result we had (and still have effects of) the 2008 Great Recession. And just like Obama signed the Republican sponsored TransPacific Partnership (which Bernie opposed..and Hilary endorsed) which gives massive benefits to international corporations to move more jobs overseas and even protects them from being prosecuted for the pollution they know they are deliberately causing!! The Arizona Voter Fraud that resulted in AZ going for Hilary (announced early before all precincts had even reported) has now been acknowledged by the Arizona Secretary of State. People who had their classification changed (hacked) from Democrat to Independent or Undecided, were then given provisional ballots….which were not counted….Now there is going to be an investigation and those provisional ballots will be counted….Arizona’s corrupt election may be re-decided in Bernie’s favor!! Debbie Wasserman Schultz is also rigging the Democratic National Convention….the officials recommended by Sanders team has been ignored, and all the top slots are being filled with Hillary Supporters. Even if you are for Hillary, this is a terrible corruption of the American Democracy, which none of us should support nor tolerate. Please write a strong letter to your Democratic Congress person!! And especially please write to Debbie Wasserman Schultz condemming her for her morally illegal treachery.

      • I disagree. For someone ‘capable and competent’, she’s shown remarkably little in the way of achievements..

        • Siegfried Heydrich, thank you for your reply.

          I would regard Donald Trump as capable and competent too, but not for the US Presidency. The trains ran on time.

          Whatever her achievements, or lack thereof, toady or shill, I find her disappointing. She can do better than to be a protegee of HRC.

          Maybe loss to Tim Canova will give her opportunity.

          • No, the trains did NOT run on time. That was actually just propaganda. Trains in Italy NEVER ran on time.

            And I rather hope so. Let her become a registered lobbyist for Israel instead of being the Likud party representative in Congress. As both a House representative and as DNC chair, she’s been a total waste of space.

          • Siegfried Heydrich, thank you for your reply.

            Yup, irony …

            Donald Trump’s capability and competence is actually — we might even say allusively, really — just propaganda.

            Even if trains run on time, they are irrelevant going wrong places.

            Maybe Debbie Wasserman Schultz will eventually find a place of her own, apt for her talents, less disappointing for them.

    • Actually, further review of the extensive video footage of the events in Nevada, from different perspectives, do indicate that Sanders’ supporters, while being prevented from committing violence by a large number of security personnel, did threaten such violence — rushing the podium and Sen. Boxer while shouting obscenities, as Sen. Boxer has said. They didn’t breech the metal barriers to the stage because they were stopped by security. And while it may be an exaggeration to say “chairs,” plural, were thrown, one person can be seen lifting a chair and trying to rush the podium with it — he was stopped by two members of the convention staff, and in the melee, a woman was hit and knocked to the floor. Although it is unclear whether she was injured by the chair wielders rush to the podium or by the effort to stop him. The Daily Banter has the details, and footage, if you are interested. Admittedly, it is a website that has been skeptical of Bernie’s campaign, but I don’t think they went to the trouble to re-stage convention events and shoot false footage just to make the Sanders campaign look bad.

      Frankly, it IS understandable why people who were there did feel threatened and feel the Sanders crowd was threatening — even if the Sanders people aren’t able to see it themselves.

      If you are excited by conspiracy, nothing anyone can say, or show, will, of course, convince you of the more mundane reality that the Clinton campaign is NOT an all powerful conspiracy manipulating every political event across the nation.

      • ONE person raised a chair and put it down. ONE supporter arrested and it was a HILLARY supporter. Boxer TOLD Bernie supporters to boo her as they were known to boo. Boxer blew them all a kiss when she left the stage. It WAS all a setup by HRC and her cronies. It IS ALL on video. CHECK YOUR FACTS PLEASE!!!

        • ONE person raised a chair and started toward the podium but was physically STOPPED by convention staff — I have no idea who those two staffers supported, but, it was more than a polite encounter and one person, reportedly a woman (don’t know who she supported either) was knocked to the ground — either by the chair wielder or in the effort to stop him, as I wrote earlier.

          If you don’t understand why Boxer might blow a kiss to a obscenity yelling, threatening crowd (if she did so) while leaving the podium, without meaning it as approval of their behavior, you probably have no understanding of either irony — or, for that matter, courtesy. Do you think she should have shouted obscenities back?

          “It WAS all a setup by HRC.” I see no facts presented by you to support that conclusion. I’d be happy to consider them if you would provide them.

          By the way, did you bother to go to the website and look at the tape?

      • TPP hasn’t come up for a vote yet, and she’s not in the Senate. She can’t vote for anything at the moment.

        • You DO know when you work for the government, you have to express the views of the administration, and not your own?

          That is how government works, you support your boss, in fact, that is how most corporations work also.

          So, HRC as SoS, was SUPPOSED to support anything Obama wanted, that’s her job.

    • Hearing this from Trump is a true joke. Does he have any explanation why he was able to get so far, so that he’s poised to become the president? He keeps media off guard with these accusations of “rigging.” But for Sanders to make a similar charge of “rigging,” is preposterous. Why, then, did he run? Did he also expect to win, in a rigged system, rigged against people that would oppose “the establishment.” Did he know he would eventually lose, and continue for the sake of those ideas he espouses. Sorry, I just don’t buy it.
      Sanders is angry that “he” has been rejected by the people of this nation. He’s in a bind. Either he screwed up, or his philosophy was bad. The problem for Sanders, is that blaming himself is not an option, so he was left to make everyone and everything around him corrupt.
      Hillary is said to be a hated candidate, suffering with atrocious un-popularity numbers, etc. But if this were true it would be bad for Sanders, since, if she’s truly as unpopular as some polls tell us, we should’t hear the rubbish from Drumpf, that Hillary hasn’t been able to “put him (Bernie) away.” We should hear something quite different: we should hear that “Bernie couldn’t put HER away! Maybe what we’re hearing, from all sides, about her low popularity numbers,is BS. If she’s so unpopular and he’s so popular, someone is lying, otherwise why is she 3,000,000 votes ahead, has won many more States, is ahead in pledged delegates, and hopelessly ahead in super delegates. I think Hillary is vastly more popular than the establishment tells us she is, which has nothing to do with Sanders’ popularity. Sanders had an impossible task,. he had to sell a demo/socialist ideology to the voters. The fact is he failed to do it. Half of his failure was because of the near impossibility of making a socialist political philosophy palatable to the general electorate. But, the other half of his failure was due to “his” personal inadequacies. People couldn’t see him as a president.

  18. Remember, Bernie and Hillary are on the same side. They probably have more they agree with than disagree with. The worst thing that could happen to our country would be to elect Trump by default, by Dems staying home. All I know is that Hillary is hard working and has the ability to learn and process vast amounts of information. Sure she is measured and sometimes sounds stilted, but we don’t have to worry about making a fool out herself and our country. She is respected around the world as the former Sec. of State and I think would represent our country well. She has not always been a rich person, you know. I believe she has much more understanding of the marginal, struggling people in our society than Trump ever would.. People in Congress expected her to be some kind of primadonna when she entered the Sentate, but was anything but. She put her nose to the grindstone and learned the job. and worked across the aisle. Bernie is very passionate and has good iodeas, but I see very few of them getting through a Republican House that we are probably stuck with until 2022. She may be able to get things through by some compromising. I don’t see Bernie compromising, which makes him as intransigent a s the Tea Partiers on the other side. Let’s break the gridlock already. I’m sick of it.
    Do not allow Trump to be elected. He knows NOTHING.

    • “I believe she has much more understanding of the marginal, struggling people in our society than Trump ever would..”

      Let’s also remember that she didn’t skedaddle off to the white liberal enclave in the North after college to pontificate about revolution. She went instead to one of the poorest, racially divided states in the union and worked, as an activist private citizen and then First Lady, on progressive issues of access to legal representation and access to health care and education for the state’s urban and rural poor.

      She also represented poor clients as a law student at Yale. And right out of school, represented the interests of the poor, vulnerable and marginalized as staff lawyer for The Children’s Defense Fund. Her experience working with issues affecting the poorest Americans led to her appointment, by Jimmy Carter in 1977, as a board member and then head of the Legal Services Corporation, a government agency that provides representation to the poor in civil matters, such as evictions, repossessions, denial of benefits, and much more. Clinton is recognized as one of the agency’s most effective heads — greatly expanding the number of lawyers on staff and the number of clients provided with representation — in the agency’s history.

      I don’t see anything in Sanders’ history, professional or private, that indicates any direct experience with these extremely important issues impacting the lives of “marginal, struggling people in our society.”.

      • Then you haven’t looked very hard, nor seen the picture of him being dragged and arrested by the police in a northern university for protesting the inequality of the poor and African Americans while he was in college.

        😉 🙂

        • That’s right, he did stage and participate in some protests in college. So did Hillary — a student strike demanding increased minority hiring of staff and recruitment and acceptance of minority students.

          But what did Bernie do after that? Show up at the great celebration of hope and peace that was the March on Washington? Which was apparently his last effort in the cause? I was there too, as a cosseted 17 year old with my church group.

          I would NEVER, as Bernie has, say that meant I was someone who “marched with Martin Luther King.”

          Bernie did not march, or work, or attempt to register voters in the places where doing so got you beaten, jailed and murdered.

          And he should STOP implying that he did.

          Getting arrested, by breaking laws that would get you arrested, was the point of passive resistance. Nothing happened to Bernie that didn’t happen to other people outside the South who asked to be arrested by blocking traffic or making themselves nuisances in other ways that they knew the police would have to respond to — his life and future was not in danger in Chicago. The point was attention. (As, apparently, it often is with Bernie.) Undoubtedly, the Chicago police were jerks — but I haven’t heard Sanders claim he ever participated in any of the major, later protests, against the war that did get a lot more dangerous, in terms of police over-reaction.

          • I see, so if you didn’t protest enough times or in physically dangerous locations, that gets someone nearly entirely discounted in your view??

            Bernie is a politician and he spins, but much less and much less extreme than most of them.

            What about Hillary claiming she was under fire when she was in the general region of a war zone? … which has been fairly conclusively shown to be her spin (lie?)

          • As far as I am concerned, it almost certainly still makes a lie. Her long track record of retracting statements, when she has/had to, when called on her assertions, is a pattern that is fairly obvious to see over the course of her public career, even granting that her opponents have flung much undeserved (and sometimes deserved) mud at both her and Bill.

          • He didn’t WORK on these issues. And he tried to take much GREATER credit for his participation than he deserved by what he said about Dr. King.

            It was in very poor taste.

            If Bernie is a Civil Rights leader, honey, so am I.

          • Actually what you are saying is he didn’t work on “these issues” to your satisfaction. Fine! If you read between my typed lines, dearie, I already implicitly conceded that point based on your first comment, Bernie probably spun somewhat. Poor taste? Immoral to some level? Yep!! I see Hillary as much worse on many more issues.

            And Bernie’s worked on many other progressive issues — just as important, if not more so (global climate change comes to mind, income inequality and oligarchy, or crony capitalism, also) since his youth to greater effect than Hillary ever did. Hillary has bought much more into a corrupt system.

            As far as I know, you can be a Civil Rights leader, whether you claim it or no. I’d have to hear the long, complicated, nuanced personal story to render my determination. 😉 🙂 Please note, I am not requesting that you tell me.

            If being in physical danger is a major part of your ethical evaluation system for what makes a truly committed person to a cause, then I am an anti-war activist and hero … because ….

            Both my parents repeated threatened me with bodily harm throughout my childhood, and each, once each, actually tried to liquidate/murder me when I was a young teenager.

            Mom apologized for her actions, although she continued after a short hiatus to lob heavy crystal ashtrays at my head (lucky I had quick reaction times back then ) and to break wooden yard sticks across my back and thought it a funny story to tell to friends of charming family relations, thereafter. .

            Dad never apologized. He is buried in Arlington National Cemetery due to his Purple Heart and a whole host of other medals. He was interred with an 18 Gun Salute, just one notch under the maximum 21.

            My/this country honesty honored my dad for his battlefield services during wartime, not to mention (oops I did…) his volunteering to go over to Germany right after WW2 when he was relegated to the Civil Service and performed unexploded bomb demolition work — I have some very interested photo of him doing this.

            Yet, for all that, he was the nastiest, most uncompromising, autocratic, fearsome and half crazy male it was ever my sad luck to encounter.

            Cheers !! 😉 🙂

          • There is no reasoning with you. That’s something I used to say to Teabaggers. You should feel shame for being counted among that type of person. You are not liberal. You are not progressive. You only read and listen to what you want to believe, which is as bad as any Fox News viewer. I sincerely hope you are still capable of introspection.

          • Synthmatrix, take your pop diagnosis and shove it. You are the one who ought to feel red-faced for what you’ve just written. I am, and have been for decades, capable of more “introspection” than I believe you can imagine.

            Just because you may (stressing may) not be capable of integrating many diverse facts and coming to a reasonable conclusion, does not make it my obligation to come to a similar conclusion to one you have reached, whatever it may be. Say, you’re not one of those $hillbots are you??

            Cheers!!

          • Is that all you’ve got, against Hillary? That claim of being under fire, was a good deal more nuanced than you think. But it’s clear, you’re one of the Hillary haters, looking for “substance” for your hatred. But it’s not there. There is no substance to the hatred felt for Hillary. Just media and republican hate-mongering masquerading as “the Truth,” but, upon investigation turns out to be garbage.

          • Johncp, you know nothing about me. Your response is garbage – not even close to anything I feel, or why I feel it.

            Is that all you got, unwarranted assumptions?!?!? And the fiction in your head that you know anything about me beyond one-thousandth of 1% of who and what I am is laughable …., and that mere iota you think you know — by something I wrote that triggered your unhealthy emotions — you got virtually 100% wrong, better than 99.9999+% for sure !! roflmao …..

            You really need to see your therapist more, or at least seriously consider starting to see one. The voices in your head that support your ego, and tell you, your are a rational and reasonable thinking person are badly in need of repair. Ta-Ta ….

            …. and cheers !!

        • Remember people’s asking what a community organizer was and saying because Obama had been one he’d never accomplished anything?

          Now George W. Bush — he really accomplished something, drilling dry holes, owning a baseball team, and who knows what else. We’re still figuring out his military service. What a guy!

          • Forgot? I never learned it.

            It seems an extensive curriculum.

            I take it you refer to GWB rather than BHO. Some dolce fa niente is more acceptable in some than in others.

        • Neither did I see it, I doubt it even happened. There was a picture that may or may not have been of him standing around in a room with some other people. That is it.

          ..

          • Rep. John Lewis who was brutally beaten when he marched with MLK, has no recollection of seeing Sanders at this march, in which Sanders “says” he was involved. Show me evidence that Sanders was “dragged and arrested” by the police. Even if true being arrested means nothing, if you’re assured you’ll go home afterwards.

          • Then you didn’t look. Just type in Bernie getting arrested and it will bring you to a Time Magazine Article with pictures.

      • I’m trying my best not to become one of those “marginal people” but Hillary isn’t even talking about helping working class stay middle class. I think rich people like having their poor “hobbies” to make them feel good about themselves. Hillary was never poor, she was always rich. Now she accepts $300,000 “Fees” from bankers for what we are told is delivering a speech.

        • What do you mean? Have you even bothered to look at her proposals? For government financial support for expanding union apprenticeships, and other support for private sector “re-unionization.”* As well as expanding the community college system and making it free. Programs to provide free college beyond community college for the poor and working class. For investment in infrastructure and research, and an ambitious renewable energy proposal. For increasing the minimum wage, college debt relief, regulating pharmaceutical cost and allowing the government to negotiate for lower costs, expansion of the ACA, including support for a public option that will provide a way forward to a publicly supported system of care, expanded financial regulation especially of the shadow banking and dark money aspects of the market that were the real corporates in the 2007 collapse and would NOT be regulated by the re-instating of the depression era Glass-Steagall Act. Paid family;y leave, publicly supporter pre-school and child care to aid working families and relieve them of the huge burden of child care costs that working mothers face. Today, child care costs average about 50% of a working woman’s salary. Clinton’s program would limit any working mother’s cost to no more than 20%. And so much more.

          What is it that you are looking for? What is it you are afraid of?

          Both Bernie and Trumps’s supporters, according to exit polls, have higher incomes than average, and higher levels of education than average. They are middle class, not poor or working poor. Clinton actually wins the most voters in the under $50,000 a year category. I think that is because these people know more about her decades of work on issues of importance to them.

          For the poor and working class, the problems in the economy that the middle class is just waking up to — the things that are now frightening them — are decades old news. These are things the middle class, especially the educated middle class, didn’t pay attention to until, for the first time, in the great recession, the results of decades of conservative governance, with only brief and quickly reversed periods when Democrats have had the power to do much, affected them too. Affecting the value of their homes and other assets, including their retirement accounts, and, perhaps most important, ending their decades long expectation that a college degree, no matter how much debt they took on to accomplish it, would lead immediately to a good middle class salary and in many cases perhaps a 6 figure salary right out of school. It also made them aware of how much they had been depending on personal debt to fuel lifestyle expectations, debt they now realized might not be so easily erased by the always rising equity in their home that they had expected.

          If Bernie is leading a revolution, it ids a middle class one — of people who simply weren’t really paying attention. Now they are terrified. And Clinton has been targeted, for some strange reason, as the symbol for everything that has happened in the economy, in a way that is both unfair, and, frank;y, nonsensical.

          During Bill Clinton’s administration he put an emphasis on creating jobs with programs that spurred small, domestic business creation — especially, but not entirely, in working class communities that had been hit hard by the deindustrialization, out-sourcing and automation of the previous decades, and poor urban and rural communities, with quite some success. My husband and I and the employees who have been with us over the years all benefitted from one of those programs. Programs that, of course, the Bush administration eliminated immediately upon taking office — just as Trump will eliminate any of the many things Obama has managed to accomplish if he takes office.

          I lived through the 90s, my husband and I were some of the people who saw our jobs and the businesses we worked for disappear in the recession that ended the 80s and the Reagan/Bush years. I KNOW both Clintons care about people like us.

          Also, contrary to legend, the last Clinton administration DID NOT kill the unions or union jobs — union membership overall was as low as it had been in the years before the great depression and private sector membership was lower, because before the great depression public sector unions were insignificant in terms of membership BEFORE he ever took office — by 1989 only about half the meager number of union jobs were private sector jobs; the union movement was dead.

          Reagan and, unfortunately, supposedly sainted Jimmy Carter — who believed the unions were too corrupt and in deregulating the transportation and communications industries struck an intended blow against the unions, transportation unions especially, at the cost of many good, domestic union jobs — were the politicians most hostile to unions and responsible for the things government did in the 70s and 80s that contributed to their troubles. But another culprit was workers themselves, who voted for conservative Republican social policies at a cost to their own economic interests. And younger union members who took the protections of unions for granted, resented dues, and simply failed to participate in their unions — while older members who still showed up to vote on union issues and in union elections voted in their own interests as soon to be retirees rather than the interest of the generations coming up behind them.

          The American middle class turned against unions too; they saw higher education as the most or only legitimate way into the middle class, for themselves and their children, and enjoyed the lower cost of consumer goods brought to them at the expense of working class wages and domestic jobs — until eventually, when the housing market collapsed, SOME people — who had turned their backs to unions earlier — began to realize that what had happened to the working class could happen to the middle class too.

          As someone from a union family, the daughter of a skilled craftsman who had been a union organizer in Chicago during the dangerous years of the great depression, I’ve paid attention to what has been happening to the working class since the 60s, at least. As a marketing professional in the 80s, I saw the eventual writing on the wall for the middle class, as the economy changed from a production economy to a debt and financial services economy. But people — the American middle class — wanted to believe they were all going to get rich, rather than see that what was happening to the working class would, eventually, have an impact on their own well-being.

          That can’t be blamed on one politician — especially not one who had no national power in the decades when the real mistakes were being made.

          • You seem to be very informed on the activities of the Clintons. How do you think Hillary plans to pay back her debts to Wall St? Do you understand how politics of today work?

          • I know how paranoid Sanders supporters think it works. Bernie uses McCarthyit guilt by association nonsense to imply something there is nothing in her record to support. And his followers swallow it. That is a matter of faith in their Guru and belief in things not see.

          • You might want to read up on your candidate’s recent activities, not from 20 years ago. It’s dangerous for any of us to have blind faith in our “Guru” or political candidate.

          • You might want to show actual evidence of corruption – otherwise it is just Mccarthyite tactics to get elected or blind trust in your candidate and weird hatred of the other. Bernie has accused EVERYONE he has run against of corruption. You might want to learn a little more about your candidate. Check out the campaign he ran against Vermont ‘s then sitting Governor — also a woman. (He lost.)

          • If you don’t think an entity that donates hundred$ of thousand$ to a political campaign doesn’t expect something in return, then there is no conversation to be had. Turn off the television and educate yourself.

            What was wrong with Bernie Sanders’ campaign against Madeleine Kunin? He ran as an Independent and lost. What’s surprising about that? She’s a woman and he stated that no one should vote for her JUST BECAUSE she’s a woman. Do you disagree?

            I’m a huge supporter of women’s rights and I think we need more intelligent women to get involved in business and politics. However, I’m not blind to truths because of that belief. Being a woman is not enough for me, candidates must also have integrity.

            I see everyone as an individual, regardless of race, sexual orientation or gender. As far as I’m concerned, Bernie Sanders is the only candidate that I will vote for in this upcoming Presidential election, simply because he took NO money from Wall St. and Donald Trump is my second choice (though I will not vote for him) for the same reason.

          • If what you say about Hillary, in your first paragraph, is true, then why was Sanders, your chief accuser against her, when asked on stage at a debate, if he would mention one case where Hillary was embroiled in a quid pro quo, his reaction was a classic. He looked shocked, then showed clear hesitation for a moment, then changed the subject. If he couldn’t “put up,” why are you able to?
            BTW, if Bernie took money from many people that worked for
            Wall St. owned companies, no matter how far removed, or from any corporate owned company he’s just as guilty of taking money from those financial giants as was Hillary, for the contributions she received. Only suckers think there’s any such thing as “clean money.” Money is “always” more or less dirty.

          • Not one liberal intellectual supports Hillary Clinton for President, because they understand the political game that she has played. Noam Chomsky, Ralph Nader, Yanis Varoufakis, Naomi Klein, Naomi Wolf, Professor Richard D Wolff, Thom Hartmann, Amy Goodman, etc. all think Bernie Sanders is the better candidate, because they are looking at the big picture and because they know Hillary is a dangerous woman. Go to opensecrets.org to see where her money comes from. You look like a fool defending her on this.

          • It’s not guilt by association when you see millions of dollars flow into their bank accounts from corporations who reaped huge rewards from laws they helped put in place. If they were police officers they would be in jail, but it’s legal for them to accept these bribes. Only a fool would not be able to see it for what it is.

          • Where do you see that? They have their financial records on line – back to 1992. Find the proof for what you wrote or stop writing it.

          • The Clintons are worth $111 000 000 dollars. She may have inherited some but Bill didnt. And he sure didn’t make that money from public service, other than reaping in the spoils through speaking fees has he ever worked in the private sector? Do you need a link? You could just type it in yourself.

          • Where do you “see” that?

            Are you confusing money donated to the campaign, which is being use for campaign expenses – travel, communications, staff salaries, etc. for Hillary herself and also being used to build a campaign structure in all 50 states that will support both her presidential run and the races of down ticket races, with her personal earnings and accounts. Or confusing donations to the Clinton Foundation, 89% of which are used for direct charitable programs that are taking global warming, food deserts, HIV and other problems on a global level, while another 6% is spent providing grants to other charities? None of those funds go into their personal accounts.

          • Are you one of the ones being paid to support Hillary Clinton on the Internet? your knowledge seems a little too specific and narrow to be so clueless.

          • I am an informed voter, sweetheart. I grew up in a union family and was taught that democracy is self-government — we the people ARE the government. That means we have responsibilities as well as rights; the very first of those responsibilities is to be very well informed.

            That’s why I have followed candidates and issues all my life. Not just the ones I like, or the party or faction I think I belong to — I keep myself informed, and try to understand even the people and candidates and ideologies and parties I don’t agree with.

            Also, I am 70 years old — I lived through the history that Sanders and Republicans now want to cherry pick, distort and rewrite.

            I hate seeing so much distortion of who Clinton is and what she has done. Her campaign is a progressive revolution of another kind. As Shirley Chisholm, who I cast my first presidential vote for in the California primary in 1972, once said, progressive goals will not be realized until women have much more power in government.

            I think the last 50 years have demonstrated the truth of that. It is progressive women, (the gender gap) who put progressives in office, who take the lead, when they themselves are in office on progressive social issues, etc. Clinton may have had to, over this very conservative era, compromise, as Bernie has to, with Republicans, and also has suffered from the things that make it impossible for a female politician to break barriers without jumping through some hoops created by sexist in power — in the media and the party. But her record of working on progressive issues, her proposals, etc., say she is a progressive and will ALSO try for the most progressive wins that are possible given the reality that progressives aren’t the only ones with power.

            For that reason I try to tell people what I know — because I want them to care about that OTHER revolution, the one that has been working over the last 150 years against endless obstacles.

            If they don’t care, if they close their eyes and ears and refuse to vote for Hillary in the general, because Bernie, a very able politician, has convinced them she is evil, they may help put Trump in office. And doing so, I believe, could put the progressive agenda back again, for another half century.

          • “Specific” and “narrow” does not mean informed.

            Your age explains everything. Living in the past.

          • Your ageism explains everything. Narrow minded, living in bigoted stereotypes.

            What have you done? I participated in civil rights and anti-war protests, worked on the political campaigns of progressives, including progressive women, worked to put a health care reformer in office as insurance commissioner in my state. I came from a working class family and worked my way through school on my own, I had a successful 25 year career in marketing and advertising working with clients across the economy — manufacturers, agricultural commission, growers and food producers, high tech, transportation, banking and other forms of financial services, health insurers and providers, defense contractors, etc., etc.. Positions that gave me access to research and information about what was happening in the economy that the media didn’t cover, as we were changing from a production economy to a service economy — positions in which I was most often the only and first woman. In the early 90s I started a business from scratch with my husband. I have been both an employer and an employee and understand many important issues from both sides. I am a lifelong liberal and supporter of unions and broadening participation in our democracy.

            Given you silly agism, I doubt you have had much experience of the world yet.

          • This is 2016. We have the Internet now, so there is no excuse for ignorance. You’re living in the past.

          • It’s one thing to try and bring jobs to your constituency and other to advocate using those weapons on Human beings for offensive purposes. Bernie tried to bring work to Vermont, Hillary supported invading a sovereign country that did nothing to us, Hillary has the blood of thousands of innocents on her hands, yes she has a lot of company but Bernie isn’t among them. It’s great that you participated in progressive causes, no doubt there was some self interest there as you admit you have done well, perhaps you would not have done as well if things didn’t change. From your posts I gather that you possibly are a black female, Ok, now what have you done to improve the situation of people who are not like you, say white, Latin or Asian males? Thanks in part to the Clintons a lot of them are hurting as well or are you of the opinion that by being born of a certain complexion automatically puts us on third base like Mr Trump? I support progressive changes based on economic standing, not race. Blacks still are disproportionately poor, but assistance should not be based on the fact they are Black, but rather they are poor. The objective should be based on changing what can be changed, they can become middle class or wealthy, but they can’t change from being black. Hillary gives her speaches about reforming the Prison System but then accepts money from the Prison Lobby ($133,000 according to the Huffington Post 2-9-16, as much as Rubio per the article). Are you aware that in many states these people lose their right to vote for life even after they have served their time? This disproportionately disenfranchises Blacks, and Hillary is cashing in.
            Like I said earlier, I look for where the money comes from, that’s who this person really will be serving, and a lot of Hillarys money comes from anti-progressive sources. Goldman Saks no doubt is willing to ignore Hillarys position on Gay Marriage, Abortion etc as long as she votes against true bank reform, free tuition and stays quiet about busting up “too big to fail”. Bernie gets his money from people like me, and I don’t send much, but there are a lot more individuals contributing to Bernie than to Hillary. Doesn’t that mean anything to you? Yes Hillary is a woman, so is Sarah Palin, and neither will get my vote to be President because they will both work against my interests.

          • Hillary was quite clear that she did NOT support invading Iraq at the time of that vote — read what she said at the time. Bush said that it wasn’t a vote for invading but only leverage to get Saddam to let the inspectors back in. As a Senator from New York, the state that only recently had endured the 9/11 attack, she may have believed her constituents wanted that assurance that Iraq didn’t have the nuclear weapons that Condi Rice and others in the Bush administration were claiming they had. But, as a lapse in judgement in terms of trusting George W, Bush, I don’t think you can fairly say it was a bigger lapse in judgement than when Bernie voted for the Iraqi Liberation Act, which specifically authorized any president to invade Iraq in order to remove Saddam from power. I don’t know what the Republicans told him in order to get his vote, but I would not be surprised if it wasn’t something like Bush’s false assurance that it wouldn’t actually lead to war.

            The money comes from PEOPLE. Not corporations. Corporations and Labor Unions can’t make direct contributions to campaigns. When you make a donation to a campaign you are asked about the source of your livelihood. When these donations are reported, they are reported by the industry the donor, large or small, says they work in. For instance, my husband and I have small business — we design and market parts for car hobbyist. That makes us part of the “automotive industry.” But, we do not share the politics of, or any major interest in common with, the heads of the Big 3. Clinton is a former Senator from New York, a state in which the financial services industry is a very large employer. Some of those donors may be wealthy individuals who work in that industry, but they have to respect the same funding limits as everyone else — and the vast majority of those financial services contributors are simply middle class people who work in the industry. They could be secretaries and bank clerks, and VPs and middle Managers — but few are likely to be billionaires.

            When Bernie excepts big contributions from “Big Sugar” an especially odious industry with a bad history of worker exploitation and environmental damage, which he has done on several occasions, he too is receiving money from the employees of that industry – the people who have been exploited more than the exploiters.

            How in the world will a president Trump support your interests? If you are truly a progressive?

            As for the figure you quoted as the Clintons income, it is many multiples more than they actually earned per year over the last 10 years. They are millionaires with about 6 published books and many big book deals between them. In most years Bill is the one who receives the major part of their income — he is one of the most in-demand speakers world-wide and also lends his services as an apparently very well-paid consultant to governments around the world. Look it up. All their financial info is available on the internet. Their real combined income over the last decade has been between $7 million in one year and $28 million in their biggest earning year — for an average of about $17 million per year. A very hefty income but not the $111,000,000 per year you quoted, from somewhere, in an earlier post.

          • My comment on her age is absolutely pertinent. She is living in the past, not the present. You must realize that by now after her responses to you.

          • She can’t change her age, so why go that route? The problem with that approach is it alienates and insults other readers of age who may be sympathetic to your main arguement.

          • Her age is important, because she is boasting HRC’s accomplishments of 20 – 30 years ago. If she were to examine Clinton’s recent record, she might have a clue as to why a vote for Clinton is a vote for the status quo. Baby boomers voted their way to nice pensions and high-paying jobs, now they want to act like it’s 1990 and vote the same way. Seniors need to wake up and realize that it’s a new world and if they’re going to vote, then they must educate themselves.

            A comment to an ignorant old lady about her out-dated opinions won’t influence others in that age bracket who know that I’m speaking the truth. People’s opinions are formed from their own education, experiences and knowledge, not my statements about a past generation’s selfishness and ignorance, unless they’re willing to look in the mirror and accept responsibility. The “I got mine, you must be lazy” rhetoric of corporate-sponsored politicians is over.

            If someone criticized a poster for being a clueless female, if she is telling others to vote for Clinton because she’s a woman, I’d have to take the same position. The poster’s judgment is clouded because of being a woman, with nothing else to back it up. Would that alienate other women? It shouldn’t, if they have a brain.

          • So, you believe that Hillary would go through what she has already endured, what she endured in her last match-up with Obama, and the 20 years of abuse she’s gotten, just so she could be a “status quo” candidate? Step back missy, and take a look at your comment from a less biased position. What you say is beyond ridiculous.

          • Hillary wants to be President. She has groveled at Obama’s feet, taken corporate money and sold her soul to do it. Do you honestly believe that those million$ she has taken from bankers, big business and Wall St. don’t make her accountable to them? Do you really think that she wants to be President, so she can make a difference in our lives and that it has nothing to do with her wanting to be in the history books?

            I’m not at all biased; I used to love Hillary. I have no personal preference for who is the next President and I honestly don’t think it will matter much. I have no emotional attachment to any of the candidates. I don’t care if a woman is President (though it would be nice), I care that “the people” awaken. We’re doing everything wrong and it’s going to take a mass awakening to realize that IGNORANCE is the biggest hurdle.

            The older generation made this mess, so now it’s time to step aside and let the youth of the nation create their own futures. Baby boomers had their chance and now I think they need to take their selfish, clueless attitudes to Florida to retire.

          • Sorry missy, your very first sentence makes zero sense. Does Hillary have less a right to be president than Bernie or O’Malley?
            The second sentence is nothing more than rightwing republican BS and hatred. Hillary does not grovel at anyone’s feet, does not take (she’s GIVEN corporate money, and it’s juvenile to talk about her “selling her soul to it.”

            In fact, you’re sounding more and more like a republican.

          • You’re so right baby boomers had their chance and if their numb nuts younger generation had followed through, things would have been better. I live in Cleveland, Ohio. Under baby boomers, our city needed no tax levies. Our schools were sound and needed no levies. There was not state taxes. WHY? Baby boomers who had well paying jobs with great benefits. They put their children through college with no debt as my parents did us because my dad and mom owned a business. PLUS, they had technical skills as barber and beautician. We were raised an upper middle class black family. My husband worked a great foundry job as did other members of my family. We all had great jobs. Now, most of it is your generation’s idea of a job. Service industry jobs trying not to pay a decent wage and whining about raising the minimum/ The biggest job provider here, now is Cleveland Clinic and they are always moaning about needing a tax break. US Steel, GM, Ford, LTV Steel NEVER did. They paid their part. Now with you know everything not voting in mid terms, not my words but all information out there, have allowed the right to take over and they are running it into the ground. Yet, uh, no, we will not follow the party elect, you will whine and cry while sucking your thumb and holding your my little pony. I would say like my granddaughters, 10, 8, 6, 4 but the oldest has been published and holds a better conversation on politics. Yes, she is keeping up, too.

          • The financial mess we have today began 30 years ago, Einstein, and it will take another 30 years to clean it up.

          • At 67 that would have made me 37 and just returning to the job market. I was a housewife for the first 14 years of my marriage. The economic downturn, here, in Cleveland occurred not long after our youngest was born in 1980. HIS job moved over night, just as we were going to buy our first home. It took roughly 4 years of low paying jobs and my getting into the work force to get back to that point. Wages have diminished drastically. When I got my job, first as a temp and then hired, I could get 10% raises for performance, attendance, etc. I never received under 8%. Today it is 2.5% period. NOT my generation. The generation of the ultra conservatives since Reagan. Busting unions, lowering wages and benefits, you name it. Not a generation but an ideology. Know the difference, please!! I.E. When Bush bailed out the banks, they loaned nothing and hired no one and when they did hire, it was for the same jobs for much less the wage and benefit. When Obama LOANED to the auto industry, they hired right away and have been humming along ever since. Union jobs. Ideology. MY ideology is when I was hired here at $11.00/hr., using common sense, I should be making more than$60k a year.

          • How did Reagan get elected? How did unions get dismantled? Who let corporations get too big to fail? Who didn’t fight when jobs were shipped overseas? Which generation took the nice pensions and health insurance benefits, enjoyed low prices and high wages and now collect social security and run up the huge Medicare bills? The seniors who sit on their computers telling the younger generation that they’re lazy and need to work harder. You got yours, now get out of the way and let the youth of today determine their own futures.

          • The same people who voted in every republican. He played the race card, he blamed the unions and disbanded the air traffic controllers just for wanting more employees because they were over worked. He used black criminals. Look at what is going on with the airports and the long lines. NSA employees get good benefits and great pay but now republicans are complaining it should be outsourced. Read. minimum wage and no or low benefits. I am sick of rant on unions and the pension bit, too. They/ we pay into them. OUR money. Plus, if referring to government workers, its their Social Security. They do not get it nor does the government have 401K’s for them. In the private sector, the only ones getting great pensions back then were in union jobs in manufacturing and they paid into them, also. When they were losing jobs and money, they successfully negotiated terms to protect their employees pensions. Government sector is just trying to screw teachers and other workers out of their duly earned pensions(Public Social Security). THAT’s what age does. experience and knowledge. Oh, I still work at 67 because they keep raising the age of retirement. When in high school, graduated in 1967, the guys in my class would get jobs at the mills and car plants for summer job. They salted away money for college, bought cars and their clothing. Had no debt, either. Some got permanent jobs, went to college, bought homes and put their kids through college. My parents owned their business, had barber and beauticians licenses. They put five, my sisters and I, through school and we had no debt. We have put 6/7 of our children through school, no debt. the last graduates next year. The one this year graduated Magna Cum laude. We are a black family.

          • Again, what’s your point? I agree with you that without union representation, workers have lost their rights and their wages, but unions also became corrupt. The baby boomers took advantage of the good times, but now they expect the youth to make all of the sacrifices. Personally, I think we should lower the retirement age to let the youth get jobs, raise social security payments, provide universal health care and implement policies that require wages to be attached to profits. The ones who do the work should also reap the rewards.

            I don’t think we need anyone over 60 years old to be working. We have so much automation that it’s just not necessary. When the Industrial Age came along we put an end to child labor and 12-14 hour work days. It’s time to do the same in the Technical Age – shorten the work day/week. We could do it, but corporations won’t let that happen. The TPP is the final nail in the coffin, which Hillary Clinton used to call “the gold standard” in trade. Be informed when you vote, because if you don’t know what you’re voting for you’re hurting all of us.

          • it isn’t just my generation, though speaking for my self, I whole heartedly agree. I had this very discussion with my two daughters, 42 and 35 and they were up in arms with the minimum wages proposal. I was flabbergasted. I asked why and they were goose stepping right with the anti wage hike people. I had to break it down into it’s LCD. Living expenses. I told them how much mil costs , 30 years ago. then compare it to today’s prices. Sugar, flour, toothpaste. Then I asked them if people were making $6.00 30 years ago, how are they to survive on it today. Plus, did those businesses keep the same prices? Did their materials, supplies, etc., stay the same price? Did they pass their raises on to the employees. Only then did they see the actual reasoning.

          • It’s a tough battle to fight not only the power big business has over our economy, but all of the misinformation and misunderstanding.

          • One more thing…

            Congratulations to your family for working so hard and for becoming such a success. It pains me to hear that you’re working at 67, unless you really love your job. Life shouldn’t be so hard for some and so easy for others. It doesn’t have to be this way. I’m a believer that we grow from our adversities, but I also think we could be spending our time in better ways than serving corporate masters, barely getting by, working two jobs, always on the go and nurturing a society that praises those who live off the back of others, big business.

            I’ve seen extreme poverty, but I’ve mostly lived among the privileged in Los Angeles. It sickens me to watch a man drive around in his Mercedes “making deals” while on the way to a golf game or a power lunch and then call it a hard day of work, justifying his million dollar bonus.

            These are the same people who give us lectures and draw in large crowds to hear them speak of how successful you can be, if you’re willing to work hard. These are the people we see on the covers of magazines who claim that a service worker doesn’t deserve more than minimum wage without a college education. These are the same people whose family gave them every valuable connection, the best education money can buy and financial support all along the way. And these are the same people who sit around conference tables with their kind discussing how they can trim the budget a little more by cutting hours, lowering wages and eliminating benefits of the people who actually do the work.

            Know what you’re voting for. Hillary Clinton works for these people, not you or I.

          • By the way, it started immediately after WWII. Here in Cleveland, we reached our economic peak in 1950’s and started to slowly spiral down. we had over 1 million people. No school levy. No city or state income tax. No other taxes. When manufacturing started to ship over seas, the downward turned speeded up with the oil embargo and companies moved due to high fuel costs. I watched strawberries go from .59 quart to over $3.00 in the 80’s. Now, we have less than 400k population and mostly low paying service jobs with little or no benefits. Cleveland Clinic now the main employer instead of Ford, GM, LTV, US Steel, Alcoa, etc. They paid their fair share in taxes with no whining unlike the Clinic. They were in our neighborhoods for block parties, community meetings, etc. This included our utility companies, also. Illuminating Company and East Ohio Gas.

          • You mentioned the financial problems started 30 years ago. I’m letting you know it started in the industrial rust belt right after WWII. Very slowly.

          • I was speaking of the policies that caused our current economy and corporate take-over. In your terms we could go back as far as the depression or even before then when child labor and 12 hour work days were acceptable.

          • So I guess you would vote for Sarah Palin because after all you believe “progressive goals will not be realized until women have much more power in government.” She may be a woman but HILLARY IS NOT A PROGRESSIVE!!!!!! Somewhat to the left of Palin but much further to the right than Elizabeth Warren (or Shirley Chisholm) BTW just received an Email with a list of more corporate Democrats half are Female Debbie Wasserman who is fighting Elizabeth Warren on behalf of the banks and Lois F (can’t remember) . My Mom is 77, she lived through all that as well, voted twice for Obama and would love to see a woman as President, just not that woman, because she cares more about the country, and her four sons to put the wrong woman in there. Reverse gender bias is just as wrong you know. Women can be just as bad as men.

          • I made it clear I was talking about “progressive” women. Although the quote from Chisholm did not specifically say “progressive” women, she was speaking in the context to the fact that women are much more likely to be liberal or progressive than men. The fact is, while not all women in politics are liberal or progressive, there are many MORE women on the liberal side of the aisle than on the conservative side.

            Sara Palin has nothing to do with what I, or Chisholm, was talking about. It is silly to bring her up and act as if she represents the typical woman, much less the majority of women, in politics. She doesn’t. Nor does she speak for the majority of women in the Senate and House or the issues they most represent.

            Clinton’s not as progressive as Chisholm? Well, she has long supported most of Chisholm’s agenda — equal pay, strong workplace protections, paid family leave, universal health care, public early childhood education and public childcare, access to quality education including higher education for all American, etc.

            Is Clinton less progressive than Warren? I don’t believe you can say that. They both have been progressive activists with an emphasis in totally different areas. They agree on progressive goals but aren’t always in agreement about specific policy. They both, for instance, believe in and have supported greater regulation of the financial system, but they have not always agreed on means. I don’t think you can fairly characterize one position as more “progressive” than the other. They are in agreement on many other progressive goals but may have had minor differences on methods. They have had careers with emphasis on very different things. Warren has been an academic and her activism has centered on consumer rights — she has been an advocate in, and is recognized as an expert in, the area of financial services reform. Clinton, on the other hand, has been a progressive activist in the area of women and children’s rights, and access to legal services, health care and education for the indigent and vulnerable, both in government — as head of the Legal Services Corporation, appointed by Jimmy Carter for, instance — and in a private, non-profit setting, working, for instance, for the Children’s Defense Fund, a civil rights organization that advocates for children and the disabled that made important contributions on the issue of early childhood education for the poor (Head Start) and was central to securing legislation that requires public schools to provide educational resources for the disable while she was on staff. She also helped found two organizations in Arkansas to do on the state level what these organizations do on a national level. These agencies still exist, doing important work, today. As first Lady in Arkansas she also worked on programs to bring quality, affordable medical services to the rural poor, and reformed the Arkansas educational system — at the time when it was one of the worse in the nation, in one of the poorest states in the nation.

            As a Senator, she represented the many complex constituencies in her state — middle class workers and the poor as well as the states important business interests and employers and continued to lead on progressive issues related to women and families. She initiated, with other sponsors, legislation or paid family leave and the Lily Ledbetter Paycheck Fairness Act, which Pres. Obama signed after taking office. As Secretary of State she continued to advocate for women, families and he poor on a worldwide level.

            The policies she is running on in this campaign are very progressive — they include further financial services regulation, a public healthcare option and other expansions of the ACA to get us to universal health care, regulation of the pharmaceutical industry, support for unions and expansion of union apprentice programs, large investments in infrastructure, research and renewable energy, and on and on.

            Internet email are often ridiculously incorrect. Check out all the emails about Clinton that have been revealed to be fraudulent by Snopes. They may not have investigated this latest one yet, but they have investigated many like it, and invariably they are false. The Clintons are some of the most lied about people in the world. Why? Because they are just what Clinton specifically says she is — progressives who get things done.

            I’m sorry your mom doesn’t like Clinton, She is a wonk and a bit stiff before the cameras — but what she lacks in charisma she has usually made up for with very hard work, intelligence, attention to detail, and, most important, an amazing ability to stand up to the ugliest, endless Republican attacks and win. I think the first woman to be elected president will have to have all those virtues — especially the ability to stand up to endless and most often unfair criticism and sometimes very ugly, outright sexism of the kind someone like Trump is willing to dish out endlessly, without a second thought. I think the Democratic women in the House and Senate were very aware of that strength — that persistence in the face of overwhelming opposition — too when a year before Clinton decided to run again, they wrote and all signed — including Elizabeth Warren — a letter asking her to please run for the presidency again.

          • Ok not one thing you mentioned that Hillary supported helps me or my peers, or the hundreds of millions of people who go to work each day, by the way white Males are now the minority where I work. We have every race and every gender. The women here get the same as the men, not because of Ledbetter, they did before Ledbetter. We are all equally screwed.

            Every issue you mentioned is benign to the corporate agenda. Nothing that Clinton advocates helps prevent people from slipping into the services she helps put in place or costs corporate America anything. Sometimes I think Liberals like having the poor around as projects to make them feel good about themselves. Hillary doesn’t do anything to stop corporate excess.

            I agree about the attacks from Republicans about nonsense, Emails, Benghazzi etc but again, her relationship with Wall Street is toxic to the people she claims to want to represent.

            You obviously have achieved financial security, mine like many others has been severely compromised by Wall Street greed and the crooked politicians who make rules to suit corporations. I work for American Airlines. AA could not get the concessions they wanted through the RLA, not needed but wanted. So they filed for C11 with over $5 billion in cash. In court they never had to claim that their demands were necessary for their survival but instead in order for them to have “competitive “earnings to attract investment capital (they had just secured funding for over 500 new airplanes they ordered months before filing), which turned out to be in their opinion at least $3billion a year. Needless to say AA got everything they wanted from its workers, and there was nothing we could do about it as the courts decided that unlike every other creditor, and every other Union we could not go on strike. I lost around $20000 a year off my pension, Paid Holidays, Paid vacation, Retiree medical that we cofunded, sick time and a list too long to repeat here. All said in real terms my compensation is at least 50% lower than it was 15 years ago. Now you know where my anger comes from.

            There are many others who have gone through this process across this country (everyone in the airline and auto industry) so you have to understand why which bathroom people use and forcing companies to pay their female managers as much as their male managers are not things that get us very excited. My gay coworkers would rather see better paychecks and restored health benefits than a marriage certificate with their name on it. Wall Street was thrilled with AAs trip through C-11, they all made out, even the shareholders were spared and every other creditor (besides labor) made out 100% whole or better. The ONLY ones who got screwed were the workers, on top of that the courts say airline workers can’t strike, every other worker can. Who made these laws? Both the Democrats like Hillary and Bill (who as I said earlier intervened on the company’s behalf back in 2007) and the Republicans. Democratic appointed Judges were no better than Republican ones.

            So to me corporate Democrats like Hillary are about the same Republicans on the issues that matter to me most. Sure I support Equal rights for all but our equal rights are limited to gender, race, age and sexual preference, not class. To me the most important issues are Workers Rights and protecting Democracy from corporate corruption. We are among the worst in the world on both counts and Hillary is part of the club. According to the ILO it really doesn’t matter who the President is, Clinton, Obama, Bush, Reagan, it’s the United States that consistently vetoes referendums on improving workers rights. When it comes to workers rights we are closer to Afghanistan than Germany. And why do US Representatives to the ILO consistently vote against these referendums? Because they are owned by corporations who dictate what they want, just like NAFTA and the TPP. So yea its nice that there is some compassion for the person who was born with the wrong parts who can now use the bathroom that’s for people with the parts they thought they should have but that’s little comfort when I lose my home and realize I have to work till I die because the price for that progress was that people like Hillary had to help those corporations take everything away from us. You say we are making progress, when I voted for Obama, I had a pension, now I don’t. I’ve already been sent back to the Hoover days, now I see him and Hillary trying to send more jobs overseas with TPP, hey but don’t fret, we are making Progress, Gays can get married now, we need to stay the course, don’t want to put all that at risk now do ya!!

          • There is no such thing as security in a capitalist economy, or in any economy. (Successful socialist economies like Norway and Sweden aren’t any more secure — in some ways the scandinavian economies are more “free market” than our own — the difference is they have a taxpayer supported safety net that makes it easier for working people to deal with the basic insecurity.)

            The one economic advantage I’ve had is that I was taught that as a child. And unlike most of my baby boomer peers I never expected it –never expected security. My father came of age in the worse years of the Great Depression, was a union organizer in the 30s and became a master welder, pipe fitter, boilermaker who worked on pipelines and major energy products all over the globe.

            He told me that nobody can promise you a job. In a capitalist system things change, constantly. No businesses last forever. No job lasts forever. That’s why you need unions and a strong government social safety net. Your union can’t promise you a job or secure you a job but it can provide you with a voice in the political conversation as well as a voice in the workplace. Workers need representation both in the workplace and their government, much more representation than they can get with their vote alone. Representation that can win them the wages and benefits that you need to deal with the instability of the job market — both in terms of dealing with employers and in terms of influencing policy.

            I’ve NEVER had security. My Dad’s union traveling card was the most important economic tool he had, and the fact that he was very, very unusually good at his job. As a result, we lived all over the country, I attended 39 schools in 32 states — before I even entered high school.

            I worked at very low wage clerical jobs in my 20s — the only kind of jobs available to working class women then — and tried to get an education, while the economy was going crazy with inflation, and I was also working to help my husband, a decorated vet, start a business and deal with PTST. Shortly after our son was born both my parents became ill with terminal cancers — they died 6 weeks apart, before my son turned two. The stress of dealing with all of this, and a recession that threatened the business, sent my husband into an alcoholic tail spin. By the time I turned 30 I had no family I could turn to, no husband, and a small child to support. What I had going for me was the fact that I had always worked hard and worked beyond my job title — I had a lot of skills that I was using, but not getting paid for. I realized that no employer was going give me a raise when they knew I could, for instance, do work way above my pay grade, while only being paid a clerical workers salary. I realized I had to learn every valuable skill a company had to teach and then take my skills elsewhere to another business where I could get paid for doing what I leaned. In other words, I didn’t expect an employer to be loyal to me, and I never believed I, in turn, owed an employer loyalty. I was a good writer, and I had studied art direction, so I was able to put together an illustrated portfolio that was more sophisticated than most writers portfolios, and, while I hadn’t ever, yet, had the job title and pay of “writer” I had stepped up and worked on advertising /marketing projects without ever having the title or the pay — so I had good experience and samples I could show. I was able to get hired by an agency — the first female they’d ever had in their history. So, unlike most working class women of my generation, I was able to work my way into a chance to earn the kind of middle class salary that could support me and my son. But, in a very insecure industry, Fortunately, I was able to deal with that kind of insecurity — I didn’t take on debt. I always lived modestly. I knew, had learned from my dad, and from the industry in which I worked, that you are always a freelancer. Always. (Unless you have a government job. And those are a lot less secure than they had been for earlier generations. Later, I remarried, my husband was a very talented illustrator — a free lancer. We married in the middle of the 1989 recession. In that recession, I worked for THREE businesses in 2 years that, one after another closed their doors — getting in trouble not because they didn’t have customers, but because, as many businesses did in the go-go 80s, they took on too much high interest debt. So while they had business, they couldn’t keep up with the loans. At the same time, computers were having a disastrous affect on illustrators like my husband, who worked in oils and pastels. Now you had to compete with faster cheaper computer generated illustrations — the deadlines were getting shorter while the pay was becoming ridiculously cheapen Worse, my husband got a huge project, for a client back in New York that involved more than 30 pieces of art — several large oils, and many smaller pastel and pencils pieces. It was half a years worth of work. Shortly after it was completed and sent to the client, they got into financial trouble, went bankrupt, and he never got paid for what was a half year’s work. That recession was a very tough time for us. It ate up our savings, we both, at the same time, knew we had to make major career changes. Etc., etc. We started a little business, that arose from my husband’s hobby, part time out of our home, It took off, Clinton was elected, he introduced programs that were very helpful to small business start ups, the economy improved for awhile, our business grew.

            We are not rich, we are not secure — no small business is — but we are not bitter and we feel, rightly or wrongly, that we will be able to deal with whatever inevitable changes are ahead. Because we have been doing that all our lives.

            So believe me, I know about financial insecurity. My one advantage has been that I never expected anything else. I’ve been willing to take chances because I understood that there is no way to avoid is risk in an economy like ours — it’s not just investors who take risks in a capitalist economy. And we need government policies that are made with an awareness of that reality. With respect for labor; II think our culture stopped valuing work over the last several decades — with very bad consequences for workers and eventually almost everyone else. It’s why I am and have always been a liberal. It’s why I have always understood that a strong safety net, a health care system that doesn’t make workers dependent on an employer, easy access to affordable education and training — and retraining — is absolutely necessary to make capitalism work for most people. I also believe, although I never worked in an industry where unions were available, that workers must organize. Voting for someone to figure it out for you isn’t enough. Working people have to be their own leaders, and thy have to be willing to work together to have the leverage to get what they need from government and employers. They have to be willing to take the chances involved in organizing.

            The fact is, while the political sector started taking the needs of Labor less seriously in the 70s, workers too, and certainly the middle class in general, did the same. Younger workers resented paying dues and were much less likely to participate in their unions than older generations, older members started focusing on saving their benefits, selling younger workers down the river. And, worse of all, union members as well as workers in general, started voting for Republicans on the basis of social issues — the “culture war” — and against their own economic interests.

            I’ve told you more than you wanted to know about me, and more than I should have told you probably.

            But I thank you for being honest about what this is about.

            The Independents who are supporting Bernie are largely white and most likely male and middle class people who know the Republicans don’t serve their economic interests. But they also think the Democratic party has, in representing and giving increasing power to women and minorities, they are no longer serving their interest.

            I don’t believe that is true. I think the only way working and middle class people can prevail is by understanding that they must work together. And stop being fearful that if one group that has always been on the outside gets more, some other people have to get less. That’s only true if people aren’t willing to stand together. As a working class woman I never felt there was a time when I didn’t have to work. The economy changed more for women of my generation than for anyone else over the last 40 years — although it may be hard for men to see that. I don’t have any friends who haven’t had to work their entire adult lives — while raising children and being care takers in all the traditional ways — for parents and partners, and sometimes siblings and other family members. I’ve worked all my life, I didn’t “choose” a “career” I worked to meet my responsibilities to the people I loved and most especially to my child. I was ambitious to earn more, to learn more, to do more because I NEEDED to be. I needed to make a real salary. My paycheck has been important to and made more things possible for my family– helping pay for my son’s education, helping my husband put his talents to work to build a successful business, helping make my parent’s final months a little more comfortable, etc.

            Like Clinton, I see the programs that help women meet those kind of responsibilities — to support themselves and contribute to the support of their families — as being benefits for everyone. Working families today are two earner families. That’s the reality. But our workplaces don’t recognize this, and it creates big problems for family life.

            Doing those things don’t take anything a way from men, but of course there are other things that have to be done to make sure that we have a domestic economy that is dynamic and is growing new businesses and good paying jobs for everyone who who wants and needs one. I, frankly, think Clinton has a better chance of doing that because she has a better understanding of how and why the economy changed than Sanders, and much more familiarity with our modern economy — the ways in which it works, and the ways in which it doesn’t. We are never going to bring back the economy that the middle class hadn’t noticed was lost until the Great Recession (it actually ended in the very deep recession of the early 80s). And we have spent much too little time over the last 35 years talking about how we make the economy we have now work for everybody and not just a few people at the top.

            Bernie reflects the anger people have at what was lost. But he really has no idea how and what we need to do to go forward. It has nothing to do with hanging the bankers.

          • Obama didn’t take away your pension. Conservative judges who always rule for business did. But who appointed those conservative judges? The Republican presidents and senators who appointed and confirmed the very conservative pro-business majority on the Supreme Court and in the federal system more broadly. Are you going to vote for more of the same because gays can get married? Because the genuinely pro-union, pro-pension protection, presidential candidate in this race is a woman?

            There always has been money in politics, and there always have been politicians who served the best interests of business because ideologically they believed that served the country. And because their ideology didn’t care much about workers except their fear that their demands for decent wages would spark inflation.

            But big business doesn’t have the votes to put those conservative politicians in office. The only people with the power to do that is the American middle and working class. And since Jimmy Carter that is mostly what they have been doing.

            Out of the last 24 years Democrats have only held both the presidency and the house for 4 YEARS TOTAL. That means that Democratic presidents have been obstructed in almost everything they wanted to do and have had to compromise to get any of the many necessary things that need to be done done at all.

            NOW members of the middle class, who have been voting for tax cuts, mostly for other people, and little else over the last 40 plus years, have realized that what happened to working people much earlier could happen to them. That’s not Obamas fault.

            Or Clinton’s.

            Jimmy Carter is the one who deregulated the transportation industry — knowing that it would be a blow against the transportation unions (that he believed were corrupt).

            And then Reagan, with the aid of conservative Southern Democrats in the House and Senate finished them off.

            None of that had anything to do with Clinton, or Obama or trade agreements. America was already exporting jobs overseas in the 1970s. American businesses started building factories just across the border with Mexico in the 1960s. All of that accelerated in the 80s. None of it had anything to do with NAFTA or any other trade deals. Those trade deals weren’t protective enough of American jobs, it is true, but they weren’t the cause of out-sourcing — they were attempts to protect American business from unfair competition from other businesses in other countries whose governments were breaking the rules in ways that were harmful to fair competition.

            Whether they were successful or not is debatable. Because the sad fact is that by the 1990s. the world economy was already globalized in a way that was harmful to our domestic economy.

            I don’t think Bernie, or Trump, understand any of that well enough to figure out where we go from here. We can’t go backward.

          • How many times do I have to say it? To me gender is not an issue. I have no problem voting for a woman, I’ve voted for women many times and I did so because of where they stood , with a track record to prove it,on issues that were important to me. Hillary is owned by corporate America.

            Last time I looked Carter was a Democrat, so you reinforced what I said about them being as bad as Republicans.

            Nafta did more than protect American businesses, it damaged American workers by subsidizing and underwriting overseas expansion for American corporations. So not only did Americans lose their jobs but their tax dollars were used to subsidize and underwrite the whole thing. TPP will do the same. You skirted my comment on the ILO. It’s the US that veto labor rights, why does our government protect US based corporations but not US citizens? You know why but I’ll say it anyway. Because the people who need the protections are not paying the politicians $300k to read a speach.

            Save the spin about ideology, there have always been greedy politicians that hide behind bs economic theory yo justify their greed.

          • I know Carter was a democrat. My point is the problems you are complaining about started long ago and have nothing to do with Clinton. Or even NAFTA.

          • The question isn’t whether or not they are guilty of all of it but rather any of it. Whether or not the person we pick will help fix what has gone wrong or continue on. Bill and Hillary had similar plans back in 1990, before they won that election, once they got into office the platform was given just enough effort to say they tried, then they went and cut taxes for the rich, deregulated banks,passed Nafta, intervened on behalf of corporations in labor disputes (APA vs AA 1997) and presided over the biggest transfer of wealth upwards ever. Was it ALL their fault? No, but they had a big part in it and they benefitted from it.

          • Why would you be so stupid to think that? I never voted for a Bush, but trying to justify Hillary accepting these bribes by saying that the Bushes took them doesn’t make it right, it makes her as corrupt as them. I would never vote for them, any of them that are so blatant and shameless to accept these bribes and then to spin it around and say look they are doing it too.

          • You miss the point. My question is, why do you fault Hillary, when the Bush clan are at least as blameworthy? No one is trying to justify anything, because there’s nothing to justify. Your accusations against Hillary are cheap distortions. Your use of the word “bribes” is putting the cart before the horse. Why do you assume a bribe?

          • Just because they construct labrynths to hide their dirty deals doesn’t change anything. Did Hillary support throwing people off welfare ? Yes. Did she later support welfare for banks and other large corporations? Yes. Did she later go on and keep company with these people and accept huge fees for at best an hours worth of effort? Yes, something stinks here, only a moron who not be alarmed. There is blood all over them. Just because they hid the body well that does not make them innocent. These people wont pay their employees fair wages, if they gave Hillary or Bush or Bill etc these huge sums, more than they pay most of their employees for a years worth of labor they certianly got something of value in return other than an oration. Who says I don’t fault the Bushs? I think they are criminals but they are not running for office, the debate here is about Hillary and Bernie, not whether or not others are crooks as well. What we are determining here is should we trust Hillary with OUR country? It’s a huge privilege and the fact that she accepts these monies make her unworthy as far as I’m concerned. This is not a court of law, the evidence is there to justify withholding our support.

    • Sanders, if you don’t already know, is known as the Amendment King in the Congress. He has gotten more amendments out of committees he’s been on and voted positively upon by both the House and Senate than any other member of Congress over the course of his career. And I’m talking about working with GOP members in the majority many of those years, where by amendments, he would attempt and often succeed in ameliorating some of the worst aspects of many Republican bills.

      In 2016 and perhaps 2018, neither Hillary nor Bernie will get much of any significant passed by Congress. However, as opposed to the incremental and backsliding “improvements” often made by the Clintons while in office — remember the revocation of Glass-Stegall, and opening up the prison system to for profit corporations which now has the unjustifiable large, and minor offense prisoner population, etc. issues — Bernie will indeed not compromise on core middle and lower class principles.

      Instead, if elected, he will call out the oligarchs and money beholden in Congress (while simultaneously continuing to work with the saner and more reasonable members of Congress who are only looking for someone with his type of leadership abilities) and continue to grow his movement… AND begin to oust the worst of the Tea Parties and otherwise extreme intransigents.in Congress for the 2018 and 2020 election cycles. 😉 🙂

      Cheers !!

      • Like Avis in the old days, when you’re number two you have to try harder.

        Similarly when you’re an independent in Congress, and all the more credit to Sanders that he’s accomplished as much as he, in fact, has.

        And then there’s the Senatorial AyatoMcConnellah, institutional anarchist who commandeers machinery of power in order to keep it from running at all.

        To do nothing oneself in position of power takes real talent, but to keep others from doing anything as well, now that’s a prodigious tour de force.

        What a guy!

    • Same side? Not really it depends on the issues. Issues that are of no consequence to corporate America such as Abortion, Gay Rights, Gun Control, well yes they are on the same side, but real issues that affect most Americans directly such as workers rights, Labor laws, Trade agreements, Taxation , anything with lots of Money, then no, they are not on the same side, Hillary is more aligned with the Republican Party on issues that put money in our pockets instead of the rich. Remember that Hillary supported throwing mothers and children off welfare but supported giving welfare to the banks and the auto industry instead.

  19. Hilary should be pragmatic enough to know she will need to pick Bernie sanders as running mate to win in te fall.

    • No, she should offer him the Chair of the SEC if she REALLY wants to win. VP is a ceremonial job, for the most part. Offer to put him in charge of the SEC with a mandate to clean out that cesspool, and believe me, he’ll campaign like you can’t believe.

      • Brilliant proposal, irrespective of its prospects!

        What will be engaging will be Sanders’s attaining the Presidency (with someone besides the Hillary as VP) and then offering her Chair of the SEC.

        Engage that social conscience for the economically disadvantaged, indeed!

        How much would she squirm whether to accept or decline?

        • Only a republican would seek to see Hillary “squirm.”
          Obviously, I can’t be absolutely sure you’re a republican. Democrats that are worthy of the name, would never wish to see a true, and uniquely brilliant person such as Hillary Clinton, squirm.

          • Thank you again, johncp, for another reply.

            Hillary has a social conscience. Incidentally, she wrote her honors thesis, for bachelor’s at Wellesley, on Saul Alinsky. (My understanding is that the school has pulled it from public access.)

            Asking “how much … squirm” is not wish or objective, but more empathy. Whether, or not at all, is satisfactory to the question. Publ9ic service is not without its ambiguities and agonies.

            I am no respecter of persons, least of all myself, for exemption from accountability, whatever qualifications.

            Incidentally again, I voted in the Republican primary of my state.

            Don’t think it easy these days. If you are so inclined, there’s a lot of slack you can cut me.
            ,

      • Hilary can’t fire her vice potus , once Bernie is in, he is free to do what he want to promote his revolution from the inside. Hilary shouldn’t mind as long as she become the president and on the outside chance,if impeached, she’ll need potus Sanders to pardon her.

  20. Personally, I don’t like the idea of a “revolution”. To me that smacks of just extremism. No better than the Tea party on the other side, and all the did was obstruct an keep any PROGRESS from happening. The word revolution, to me, connotes violence of some sort. Correct me if I’m wrong, but since Obama’s first campaign, violence was always an undercurrent once Palin got in. We don’t have coups or overthrow the government in this country. Get a grip everyone. We need to be noisy and let the people who care and will be representing us know where we stand, but we have to change the system with out violent rhetoric. Take note of Trump.

    • If you’ve followed Bernie’s campaign and statements consistently and carefully, you’ll have noted he always talks about a peaceful revolution, wherein millions of average America get involved in the political process, which is the only method he’s seriously, continuously suggested as the way to make real and positive change. Sorry, if the word “revolution” in a campaign slogan has induced negative feelings. Truly sorry, we all (including myself) have our somewhat emotional triggers. Cheers !!

  21. Give it up, bots!

    If Bernie were to win ALL remaining delegates, he would STILL need 100 Superdelegates to reach the delegate count of 2382.

    The chance of BS winning ALL remaining delegates is even LOWER than the chance of him winning 100 Superdelegates.

    Math, it’s a b**ch!

    • NO, we won’t. Neither candidate will get enough pledged delegates to reach the 2,383 threshold. That’s why it will be a contested convention.

      Why, in a heated race, should one candidate step aside just to give the other one a clear, uncontested path? That’s not democracy; it’s dictatorship.

      • Yes, laurele, you are bad at math and so is Bernie.

        With only 2 people in the race, one, HRC, WILL have a majority by the convention. It is not heated, it is over. Bernie and you apparently don’t believe in math, or don’t understand simple addition.

        If Bernie can’t understand math, if he (and you) don’t realize MILLIONS more people voted for HRC, DEMOCRATICALLY, and therefore WON the primary, He, Bernie is the one trying to be the dictator.

          • Well, the SC can always steal the election, but since it is currently a 8 member court, that might not work this time! 😉

          • Does Hillary have a leaflead? Yes. Does she have enough to be declared ty he winner? No. The contest is on. The fact is this contest is not the election and not everyone gets to vote, its one where the party has to decide which candidate offers more, an outsider who can bring in additional voters to the polls and perhaps help the party take back Congress as well or the candidate that is clearly disliked and will likely either drive away some Democrats from yhe polls or can only win by the use of fear of Trump?

  22. “my room mate Mary Is getting paid on the internet $98/hr”…..!kj406ytwo days ago grey MacLaren. P1 I bought after earning 18,512 Dollars..it was my previous month’s payout..just a little over.17k Dollars Last month..3-5 hours job a day…with weekly payouts..it’s realy the simplest. job I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months. ago. and now making over hourly. 87 Dollars…Learn. More right Here !kj406y:➽:➽:.➽.➽.➽.➽ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsMatterGetPay-Hour$98…. .★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★::::::!kj406y….,…..ca

  23. Leonard, Bernie is also a flawed candidate with good reasons not to like him. And believe me some people don’t like him either. He obviously showed his true colors recently and was caught in lies. No candidate is perfect. Yet it seems you leave these points out and spend more time reminding everyone how unlikeable Hillary is.

    • Fference is Bernie supporters generally give irrutable examples to support their attacks, while the Clinton side uses Fox News tactics .

    • Why not state the lies, with links to the proof? The purpose of these conversations should be to share factual information, not just unsubstantiated opinions.

Leave a reply