Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I like Bernie and many of his ideas and would vote for him. I'm no fan of Hillary. But if it comes down to Hillary versus Trump, yes, I'll vote for Hillary.
I'm pretty sure that it will energize minorities to vote in the general election for Hillary in order to defeat Trump. I have many black and asian friends. Without exception, every single one of them and their family members don't want to see Trump as the president and will vote for Hillary regardless of what they think of her. I'm in the liberal Pacific Northwest, however. My continued feeling is that nationwide, not only blacks but Asians and Hispanics as well will vote for Hillary despite Trump and his supporters claiming that hispanics love him. Asians are increasing in numbers in this country and there's a groundswell of opposition in many Asian communities to Trump and his xenophobic views.
I guess we will only see if the minority vote can defeat Trump in the general. Since Trump stirs xenophobia, many whites are now not bashful about coming out in support of those same values especially amongnst those "poorly educated" that he loves so much. Indeed, it will be interesting come November if it's Trump v Hillary since both have relatively high unfavorability ratings.
^What was the lesson? The establishment will put in whoever they want regardless of the people's vote/will?
"Establishment" is this year's buzz-word -- the way "Flip-flopper" was the buzz-word in 2004. While the term is applicable to the Republicans Party, which feeds its voters red meat to get them to the polls, and then turn around and pass laws that are designed for the upper elite, it means nothing to Democrats.
The Democratic Party's "establishment" believes in the same principles as its base -- a private-enterprise economy, but one in which society's wealthy are taxed to pay for a social safety net, which is morally superior to the capitalism red in tooth and claw we had before the New Deal. Both the leadership and the grass-roots of Democrats believe that it's only right for the affluent to help the less fortunate.
Ms. Clinton, if elected president, would defend Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA and the programs in place that help the poor and middle-class, against the reactionaries in the GOP that would have use eliminate or dilute these programs.
"Establishment" is this year's buzz-word -- the way "Flip-flopper" was the buzz-word in 2004. While the term is applicable to the Republicans Party, which feeds its voters red meat to get them to the polls, and then turn around and pass laws that are designed for the upper elite, it means nothing to Democrats.
The Democratic Party's "establishment" believes in the same principles as its base -- a private-enterprise economy, but one in which society's wealthy are taxed to pay for a social safety net, which is morally superior to the capitalism red in tooth and claw we had before the New Deal. Both the leadership and the grass-roots of Democrats believe that it's only right for the affluent to help the less fortunate.
Ms. Clinton, if elected president, would defend Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA and the programs in place that help the poor and middle-class, against the reactionaries in the GOP that would have use eliminate or dilute these programs.
The Clintons were responsible for dismantling New Deal programs with their "welfare reform" in the 90s. They are not New Dealers like Sanders. I'm sure Clinton if in office would "cut a deal" with McConnell and slash social security to "get stuff done". That's what Clinton's donors would like to see and they want a return on their investment.
The Clintons were responsible for dismantling New Deal programs with their "welfare reform" in the 90s. They are not New Dealers like Sanders. I'm sure Clinton if in office would "cut a deal" with McConnell and slash social security to "get stuff done". That's what Clinton's donors would like to see and they want a return on their investment.
Agreed, not to mention free trade deals like NAFTA and "NAFTA on steroids"-the TPP
The Clintons represent trans-national people and their nationless corporations-not Americans.
The Clintons were responsible for dismantling New Deal programs with their "welfare reform" in the 90s. They are not New Dealers like Sanders. I'm sure Clinton if in office would "cut a deal" with McConnell and slash social security to "get stuff done". That's what Clinton's donors would like to see and they want a return on their investment.
While Sanders certainly is more progressive with respect to social program I see no hint that Clinton will abandon the SSA or any other New Deal or Great Society program. There just is no benefit to her for doing so. She doesn't need to suck-up to Republican leaders.
While Sanders certainly is more progressive with respect to social program I see no hint that Clinton will abandon the SSA or any other New Deal or Great Society program. There just is no benefit to her for doing so. She doesn't need to suck-up to Republican leaders.
The Clintons already did it in the 90s with their "welfare reform" and she is running on a platform now to move the party to the right to get stuff done. Impossible to trust her. Especially as she is so soft on Wall Street whose endless greed caused trillions of dollars in extra debt which will most likely be paid on the backs of the disabled, the poor, teachers, the elderly and the vets. Wall Street executives who are rooting for Hillary in this campaign have already testified in Congress and said that this is what they want to see happen. With endless wars in the Middle East on the agenda in a potential Hillary administration as well, deals will definitely be cut to "get stuff done".
Of course I will vote for Clinton if Sanders loses. They agree on about 80-90% of policy positions. The Republicans are all insane except for Kasich, and he has no chance with the nutty GOP base.
Do you mean that if Hillary is the nominee you will vote for Trump?
Because the question was for supporters of Sen. Sanders.
Polotics has become the ours of the 2 evils... not who is the best candidate. the hell with political parties. what is best for the country,
If Hillary were Satin?? some call her that would you stand behind her and vote her in because she is a demo? we already get the devil running the country now we need to redo it in pink?
she got the digs on the super delegates and will win that aspect, but is is what the people want or what the c country needs?
Trump.. vs Hillary = Trump
Trump vs Sanders ?? I don't care about parties unless its at a club..
Of course I will vote for Clinton if Sanders loses. They agree on about 80-90% of policy positions. The Republicans are all insane except for Kasich, and he has no chance with the nutty GOP base.
They agree on virtually none of it. They disagree on Wall Street. On the wars. On Health care. On education. On the role of the police. Need I continue?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Indeed, it will be interesting come November if it's Trump v Hillary since both have relatively high unfavorability ratings.
