... that I don't care about women's rights, or abortion rights, and that I am a misogenistic hater of all women.

that's ridiculous...i've been wanting and waiting all my life for a woman president, but HRC is NOT it!

Warren would be perfect and so is Bernie (man that he is)

that actually said they would keep pushing the meme that Bernie "doesn't connect" with LGBTQ. poc, and female voters(andalso, implicitly, that they would keep spreading the slur that Bernie supposedly doesn't care about anti-oppression issues).

They are THAT obsessed with trying to force Bernie out of the race before anybody gets a chance to vote.

Are to be used?

Mind you, I am not surprised.

None of this was spontaneous.

If that's the coming meme oh my gawd, pathetic! They'd rather try to split the party up into little bits than campaign on the issues. Ha! That's a losing strategy.

Thank you.

for that article? It would be great to post it as a rebuttal to some of the outrageous bullshit that is popping up so frequently now.

Thanks.

that you are oblivious to the discrimination and stress that the African-American and Hispanic communities have to deal with.

Because of some quote from Mr. Sanders about the A-A pride about Mr. Obama's presidency.

by supporting the most left-leaning major candidate the Democratic Primary season has seen in decades.

.....or something.

Bernie is as good or better.

But when it comes to economic policy and war policy, Hillary is dismal and Bernie is great.

For a liberal or progressive, the choice is clear.

Supporting Bernie does not imply any personal or sexist animus against HRC.

This is the problem with hero-worship politics, as we've seen with Obama and now Hillary - questioning policy is interpreted as unreasonable attack.

and he voted more recently for the PLCAA, which overturned state product liability laws that used to apply to gun manufacturers.

Unlike HRC's right-wing views on trade, economics and defense policy, it didn't outweigh anything major that he was better than the other candidates about.

The only reason he didn't get nominated was that the delegate selection rules that year were rigged so that the party leadership could choose whoever it wanted as nominee, popular sentiment be damned.

In one state that year, the 1968 convention delegation had actually been selected in 1966.

In another, Pennsylvania to be specific, McCarthy took 70% of the popular vote but Humphrey was given 90% of the delegates.

That's why Hubert Humphrey, who won almost no significant voter support in the primaries, and who really didn't represent anyone anymore by then, was imposed as nominee-even though the party leaders knew that doing this(and imposing a "keep the war going" platform plank on Vietnam when the overwhelming combined vote for McCarthy and Robert Kennedy was a clear rejection of staying) was going to guarantee a Democratic defeat in the presidential race.

(Johnson was doomed to defeat against any Republican once the Tet Offensive happened)

And McCarthy ended up winning 600 delegates on the first and only ballot.

His failure to be nominated after RFK was murdered discredited the party and the process, not him.

It goes without saying that the effort to nominate a peace candidate in '68 had to be made.

No politician is ever going to please even one person all the time. Probably not even herself or himself. I like Hillary, and know she will be a much better president than any Republican. But I like Bernie better.

I had a client a few years ago who liked Obama a lot. She was what some might call an Obamabot; to her he could do no wrong. One day she asked me what I thought of him. I said I like him a lot, but that he was a little too conservative for me. That was the last time I ever saw her - lost her business. To her, since I thought he was not perfect she thought I hated everything he ever did and stood for.

To so many people, it is either all or nothing. It is either all perfection, or else all total failure. Well no one is perfect, especially politicians. Choose one who best represents you and don't be afraid to change your mind as you learn more.

But that says nothing to rebut my OP.

It's not "hating" to support the more-progressive candidate against the less-progressive one. It;s just legitimate areas of disagreement.

I was agreeing, using one of my experiences.

I think what we're seeing here is another example of cult-of-personality politics.

Most of them ADMIT Bernie is the better candidate, and they cannot explain why they are against him or why they are for Hillary.

It's sort of weird, IMHO.

I'd love to burn a fatty round the campfire with Mrs. Clinton. I'm sure she tells a hell of a road story, but several of her major policies are very much in direct conflict with my core beliefs. I also think she runs a sloppy, out-of time campaign and is a lousy "retail" politician. I honestly believe that if she's the nominee she loses to the Klown Kar Kandidate....

But relying on the opposition to be stupid in order to win is very bad strategy.

Run as bland, passionless centrists and hope the other side makes itself look too insane to trust with power.

They never noticed that that approach failed four times against Reagan...in California in 1966 and 1970, then nationally in 1980 and 1984.

have kind of burned us. I 100% agree with you that progressives' criticism of Hillary is policy-based, not gender-based.

However, we on the left also must accept most of the blame for creating this culture where any criticism is auto-countered with a cry of discrimination. While it has been a powerful (and often effective) political tool, it is coming home to roost and it sucks.

All we can try to do is focus our language on the issues, but it really doesn't matter what Hillary does or how how good Bernie is as a candidate, any negatives about her or positives about him will be a "war on women," "sexist," etc.

It's an extremely unfortunate turn of events for which we only have ourselves to blame.

Perhaps the saddest thing about it is that we've almost rendered true discrimination unrecognizable.

Hillary Clinton will probably receive some sexist remarks & comments -- certainly the case with any minority. It is a powerful when the shoe fits and one or two posters, don't know how many were running with this implication that Bernie Sanders is 'not good enough' or some kind of racist. Not sure what but close examination of who is on his staff, whose in the crowd, what he said or didn't said -- When it is coming from the cheering section of the candidate who her husband is known for some controversial remarks on Obama in '07-'08 is saying Bernie Sanders is racist because he talked about economic issues? Bernie Sanders will no doubt be on the receiving end of some anti-semitic criticisms.

People or the unethical types, will make up or use anything if it is to their advantage or they're more interested in ruining a person. I only blame those launching the false attacks and that could be for anything false in any situation and the racists & discriminators have themselves to blame for discriminating & behaving like racists. My former State Senator Russell Pearce is a racist. Hell he even endorsed a Neo-Nazi J.T. Ready for city council. I can still recognize as best I can when I see it, living in Arizona kinda gives me a front row seat to it all.

Her foreign policy views are indeed troubling as she as conservative as most people I can think of. A doubling down in Afghanistan, always advocating the furthest course of action of anyone in the Obama administration including Robert Gates.

Basically pretty much most of what she says here
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/08/hillary-clinton-failure-to-help-syrian-rebels-led-to-the-rise-of-isis/375832/

That would go for anyone advocating policies and I'd let my disagreements known whenever they come no matter who it is. She certainly takes it to another level. Obliterate Iran all she will do is create a lot of enemies.

....maybe I have been too harsh, and maybe I should lighten up on Hillary's critics. After all, a plea from one individual surely must represent everyone who presents their criticisms on this board. Maybe I'm just being too sensitive and I'm reading hatred when it's not there..............NAAAAAAAH!!!! Sorry, but for every thread like yours, there will be 5 or 10 that come along and prove you wrong. Just the way it is.

Keeps GD from getting bogged down in bickering over candidates & keeps GD availuble for other newsworthy items.
As it was intended.
Thanks

Posts in GDPrimaries Forum, if that is the subject of the post.
Simply keeps GD available for other current newsworthy items.
I cannot understand Why anyone would have a problem with this.

It was an honest mistake on my part-didn't realize GDPrimaries existed when I posted this year. Wasn't intentionally flouting the rules. OK?

Only hosts.
And hosts do not have the ability to move posts.

I stand corrected.

with his policies. I've had seven years of white men telling me that. With straight faces, no less.

heck yesterday the TV was full of white men telling me how they didn't have a problem with President Obama's race they just really really really didn't like the fact that he gave low cost health care coverage to millions and millions of Americans.

many of the same white men have been awfully reluctant to lower a certain flag because in their opinion it's about their heritage and not hatred of Black people.

I sure am glad when these white men carefully explain to me exactly how I should interpret their statements and actions.....lest my pretty little head get the wrong idea.

thank you for explaining to the women of this board about gender politics, lest we draw incorrect conclusions from the treatment of Hillary Clinton by the male-dominated media male members of this board and male candidates.

And it can't be sexist to oppose her on the issues from the left(those who actually use sexist rhetoric ordemean HRC because of her gender are in a different category and are to be condemned). She'd get the exact same response from virtually all o f us if she were a white man and if Bernie was a woman.

Bernie's campaign has never been opposed to the idea of a woman president, and Bernie's supporters have nothing in common white with the white conservatives who bash Obama relentlessly.

We just don't want a hawkish globalist who happens to be female.

None of her more conservative views have anything to do with her gender. A big war budget only benefits straight white men. Trade deals only benefit straight white men. "Pro-business economics" only benefit straight white men. And anti-oppression work won't really be able to triumph while those policies remain force, because conservatism andthe wealthy will always nedd to keep a certain amount of bigotry festering among ordinary people(and among the police and military)in order to stay in power.

Support whomever you want. But it's bullshit to equate opposition to HRC with opposition to feminism or indifference to bigotry.

And you can't hold white guys on the left responsible for what the right-wing does.

We treated Kerry and Gore and Dukakis and El Perro Grande and Mondale and Carter just the same as HRC. It's about issues...gender doesn't enter into it.

We don't have to give her special deference just to prove we're not sexist.

I'm a woman - a single mother who raised three beautiful, strong, independent women on my own. I want more than anything to see a progressive woman lead this country.

The OP rings true for me. I'm sorry you can't accept that some people are just saying how they feel.