Who the HELL would stay home rather than vote for even Clinton?
I hate her lying GUTS, but I'd still happily vote for her rather than see McCain or Mittens dance into the White House.
Have some of the people on DU gotten willfully STUPID?
Haven't we suffered ENOUGH under 7 years of Bush?
I guess we haven't learned our lesson yet.
Fuck, if the Repubs win again, I'm laying the blame at the feet of every moron who didn't exercise their legal right and OBLIGATION AS AN AMERICAN to vote.

Its not our fault that shes the most divisive canidate weve seen since......

but that doesn't mean i won't vote for her.

you know how i feel about hrc and i will vote for her in the general because she will be the lesser of two evils...and i am so fucking sick of voting like that, but that is a rant for a different day

but, you know what honey, i'm going to miss you :*

:P

=P

Nope

it's yourself and your country you have to answer to.

As long as we're all clear.

of a supreme court full of Thomases and Scalias?

Are we going to see a repeat of 1968 when many anti war voters stayed home and brought us Nixon?

And compared to the current cadre of Republicans, Nixon was a liberal.

The apparent Democratic front-runner, Bobby Kennedy, assassinated in Los Angeles. The nomination of Hubert Humphrey, who was a good man but was tied to Johnson's war. The entry of George Wallace to siphon off Democratic votes, especially in the South. The victory of Nixon in a close race.

What would have happened if Bobby Kennedy had lived? Or even if Humphrey had been elected?

A lot has been wrong with people for centuries now.

pretty much.
sigh.

As much as I dislike Hillary Clinton, I'll vote for her over ANY Republican. The question is, will enough independents do so?

I'm a Californian and if the country can't pull their collective heads out of their asses then sorry!

when mccain or romney pack the court with conservatives wing nuts, exhaust our military even further, screw the poor even harder, create a bigger deficit, destroy health care, dismantle what remains of the social safety net, outlaw abortion, and so on, and on and on.
i don't want to hear a fucking word out of any of you.
that's the future you invite upon yourself if you refuse to vote.

That's why many won't vote for her. She is just as war mongering as John McCain.

Next time you make something up, post a little proof

If you really, truly believe that, then go ahead. Stay home. Don't bother voting.
Let the rethugs win. See just how much you like the next four fucking years.
You'll be wishing Hillary had won in no time.

:eyes:

I don't like your candidate, but I'd have to have a railroad spike driven through my skull before I would even begin to THINK something that mind-bogglingly foolish.

That is totally bogus. She will get us out of Iraq within a year after being sworn in. Frankly, why all Democrats aren't rallying behind her is baffling to me. She IS the only one who can do this job. Obama is far too inexperienced to do it and there's no way that enough voters would get behind Edwards as the Democratic candidate in the general election. If you want to destroy this country and allow what this current corrupt administration has done to all of us for the past seven years to continue, then by all means support Obama, because if he's the nominee, then we are doomed. We will get another Repuke. At this point he doesn't have what it takes, and I do fear that not enough white people in the country will vote for a black man. I just don't think many are ready to take that step. It's not a pleasant fact, but it is a fact. We need Hillary Clinton, and if those on THIS board cannot see that then I fear my family and I may be packing up for a move abroad after the next election. She is electable, she's the only one who is electable from our side and we MUST see to it she is the nominee if we care at all about reversing the damage that has been done. I know I'll be doing my part to get her in the White House, cause I sure don't want to move.

We also have the two houses of Congress to worry about and getting a strong majority in both. There's more at stake in November than just the Presidential race.

In the General Election, we fall in line. Such is life...

You mean 27 years of Bush-Clinton?

I don't want to see her as the nominee, but if you honestly think she's no better than Bush, than there's no helping you.
We are at WAR to take back our country...to sit on the sidelines in protest because you don't like your general is chickenshit cowardice. I DESPISE hillary but realize that the alternative would end up being someone like McCain, Romney, or God forbid, fundie asshole Huckabee.

The bullshit destruction of the middle class. Systematically carried out ever since Reagan & Poppy crawled into the White House. NOT stopped by Bill Clinton who insisted on pushing Poppy's NAFTA through Congress, when he could have just as easily killed it. We need a change from these destructive policies NOW. Not 8 more years of them. Hillary is NOT an option.

when median income rose in real terms, unemployment was at a 30 year low and we had the first surplus in decades, with very low inflation, $1.30 gas, a massive decline in poverty and 23 million new jobs?

Damn those horrible Clinton years.

Most of those jobs have since been outsourced to India & China, thanks to the Bush-Clintons.

23 million people got jobs under Clinton. That's more than EVER worked in the whole IT industry.

The median income went up under Clinton in real terms. It went up across a whole range of sectors - was in no way restricted to IT.

7 million people fewer in poverty. That's even more than the IT industry.

Budget surpluses did not come from IT taxes.

The "boom" had a minimal impact on everything but the NASDAQ.

If the democrats piss off sections of their constituency, they may stay home to send a message rather than be thrown under the bus again in the future. While I'm not sure I agree with that, and I think I'll probably vote for the democratic nominee no matter who it is, I can't really blame people who decide to punish the nominee and the party for not voting in the presidential race.

i shudder to think of the damage another rethug could do to this country.

That's just shirking your right to vote. Boycotting the vote isn't the answer. At the very minimum a responsible citizen should go and do a write in vote if they don't like the choices. Just staying home is passive and lazy.

:hi:

I am with you!

We have to win this one, and I for one am voting for whoever our nominee is!

We have suffered more than enough under the bushbots! :grr:

K&R

:patriot:

hillary is at best a centrist, imho, but she's a hell of a lot better than mccain or mittens.

They -know- they're leaving. They'll do as much as they can...

it's only going to get worse.
another reason why we CANNOT have a rethug win in 08.

whoever wins the democratic nod. But in the primary i can vote, well at least i get my choice.

My man isn't on the ballot here in TX but in the general in Nov I'll suck it up and vote Dem just like all of us should.

my man is edwards, but if it's a close race between obama and clinton, and i could help obama win with my vote...
like i said, tough choice.

get a testosterone high doing it (no matter their gender).

Better to deal with the devil you know. We need such a MASSIVE TURNOUT that there is no doubt in DC's mind that the people are PISSED!

This is about the future of our country.
Hillary is far from my first choice, but we have to make a stand, to hand the rethugs victory because of 'principle' is foolishly short-sighted.

Talk about a TRIUMVIRATE! And Cindy Sheehan in Pelosi's seat to put the fear of God/Goddess in all of the Congressional Bastards. And I mean that in the nicest, most respectful way. Really, I do.

No thanks to Sheehan, though. I hate Pelosi, but I have absolutely no use for Sheehan. :P

else would. Sheehan in the House is a form of blackmail. Just a nice little reminder to every other accomplice and collaborator that they too, irregardless of political pedigree, can be sent packing. Far too many of our elected Representatives consider their elected positions a type of entitlement. That, my friend, has got to stop. If it takes one or two or three slapped back to their districts with their heads hanging and their tails between their legs, SO BE IT! In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing corporal punishment on the Great Mall, right outside the Native American Museum. How fucking fitting!

Wake up America!:kick:

but my extremely conservative friend who thinks huckabee, giuliani, and mccain are too liberal, loves mittens.
that makes me very, very worried.

and so far, he's leading in florida...think the machine will pull the plug on him either way?

In reality, I think the rethuglicans will do whatever they can to try and at least attempt to hold the White House. But I don't think mittens is electable in the heartland. John Mc is a bona fide war hero. And he has been promised this shot at the gold ring. Remember the horrid abuse he and his family were subjected to by the cheney*/bush* smear machine in 2000. kkkarl slimed the entire family and good. I know there were several years of very bad blood between McCain and the BFEE. And then remember the picture of John hugging Gee-dumbya like his long-lost momma? Damn near made me hurl. No, the rethuglican high command has anointed John McCain, perhaps with mittens in the VP slot. It certainly won't be Rudy-patootie. All they have to do is circulate the pix of him in drag and he's toast. Not to mention one FUGLY-assed drag queen.

was always kissing his ass like that.
And I begin to wonder...maybe they promised him 08, no matter what?
Interesting idea...

and mccain falling in lock step baffled me...i knew there had to be some kind of sweet deal

we can use that pic against him, big time :evilgrin:

Those who don't like HRC, please think for a moment who that bastard John McCain would appoint to the Supreme Court: it would be a clone of Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, or Ailito - in other words, a FAR FAR right crackpot....Now, the Democrats should pick up seats in the senate in November & hopefully could defeat a Republican nominee...With senators like Joe Libermann, sure as hell need to get more than 51 Democrats in the senate....

Supreme Court appointments are for life & the court is already dangerously tilted to the right..If Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, or Breyer is replaced by a Republican president, that truly would be one of the darkest days in American history....

Vote Democrat in November (even if you have to hold your nose to do so)

it'll only get worse...and worse...and worse...

it's not even a decent bowel movement.

Useless pieces of shit got us into the predicament we're in now by forgetting that politicians are politicians, not messiahs. There is no "message" to send them-- it's just dealing with a crowd of self-serving fuckers, some of whom might get around to worrying about us when they have the time. Our choice is for who is going to take a bit more of that time to trhrow us a bone. And, while they're at it, run the country reasonably well. If that is Hillary, then let it be Hillary, and let us rejoice in the choice for an adult, if perhaps imperfect, alternative to McCain, or Mittens, or Huckleberry, or (gasp!) that Rudy guy.

If you can't vote for the one you want, vote against the one you don't want. They are NOT all entirely the same, and thinking they are got us the last 8 sorry, miserable years.

it'd be a-okay if the rethugs won, when we have Huckster saying he'd CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION TO SUIT HIS VERSION OF GOD.
fuck, that's enough to have me running to vote for hillary with my ass on fire.

as should everyone else. I remember a dominant talking point was that there was no difference between Bush and Gore (so let's vote Nader!). And we all know where that got us.

maybe some of the idiots who think clinton is no better than bush can go over to vote for nader again.
a moron for the braying fools would be very appropriate.

from Hillary.

As I said, we've got the adults on our side and there will be none of that nonsense from ANYONE of ours.

that i do not like clinton in the least, but i would be PROUD to do so because it would mean i'm taking a step to take back my country from bush's knuckledragging ilk.

It's utterly amazing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4150839
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4151388&mesg_id=4151388

The stupid is in full force.

Thanks for the link, I've got some real winners in my collection. Reagan over Clinton :wtf:

defend to say whatever you wish too....

:P

:rofl:

Nothing would energize the Repukes more than having a Clinton to run against. And while they can't keep her out the White House, downticket races will swing their way.

because there's no way she loses New York . . . I still might vote for her -- but I reserve my prerogative not to . . .

frankly, I can't stomach either Hillary or Obama . . .

If she gets the nod she gets my vote period. After all isn't it about winning?

Surveys Show House Dems Maintain "Nearly Landslide Leads" Heading Into '08 Elections

Despite growing disapproval of Congress, Democratic House candidates -- both incumbents and challengers -- are steadily gaining ground for a 2008 election likely to be a repeat of 2006, according to two surveys (here and here) by Democracy Corps.

The surveys dispute the hardening conventional wisdom that the failure of Democrats to force the start of withdrawal from Iraq has turned voters against both parties. The notion that the public sees Democrats and Republicans as "equal offenders...completely misreads the current moment," according to Democracy Corps.

Instead, the authors of an accompanying memo -- Stan Greenberg, James Carville and Ana Iparraguirre -- contend that "Democrats are maintaining stable and nearly landslide leads in both the race for President as measured by generic performance (51-41) and the named ballot for Congress (52-42 percent)."
In a targeted survey of the 70 congressional districts most likely to be competitive in 2008 (half with Democratic incumbents, the other half with Republicans in office), Democracy Corps found that Democratic incumbents hold a solid 52-40 lead on average. In contrast, the Republicans are in trouble: when voters are asked whom they would choose between the named GOP incumbent and an unnamed (generic) Democrat, the Republicans are behind on average 44-49.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/07/31/surveys-show-house-dems-m_n_58592.html

http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/analyses/Democracy_Corps_July_31_2007_Memo.pdf
http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/surveys/Democracy_Corps_July_25-29_2007_Battleground_Survey.pdf

Republican Outlook Dims for '08
The race for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination has become wide open, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows. But the value of winning it has fallen sharply.

The survey shows that without formally entering the race, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson has risen to second place in the Republican field. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani continues to leak support, but leads the pack with 29% to Mr. Thompson's 20%, while former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has pulled even with Sen. John McCain at 14%.

Of greater concern for Republicans generally, however, is the party's weak state heading into the 2008 election. By 52% to 31%, Americans say they want Democrats to win the presidency next year.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB118177312675434460-lMyQjAxMDE3ODExNDcxNzQzWj.html
oth parties. The notion that the public sees Democrats and Republicans as "equal offenders...completely misreads the current moment," according to Democracy Corps.

Instead, the authors of an accompanying memo -- Stan Greenberg, James Carville and Ana Iparraguirre -- contend that "Democrats are maintaining stable and nearly landslide leads in both the race for President as measured by generic performance (51-41) and the named ballot for Congress (52-42 percent)."
In a targeted survey of the 70 congressional districts most likely to be competitive in 2008 (half with Democratic incumbents, the other half with Republicans in office), Democracy Corps found that Democratic incumbents hold a solid 52-40 lead on average. In contrast, the Republicans are in trouble: when voters are asked whom they would choose between the named GOP incumbent and an unnamed (generic) Democrat, the Republicans are behind on average 44-49.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/07/31/surveys-show-house-dems-m_n_58592.html

http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/analyses/Democracy_Corps_July_31_2007_Memo.pdf
http://www.democracycorps.com/reports/surveys/Democracy_Corps_July_25-29_2007_Battleground_Survey.pdf

Republican Outlook Dims for '08
The race for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination has become wide open, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll shows. But the value of winning it has fallen sharply.

The survey shows that without formally entering the race, former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson has risen to second place in the Republican field.

There would been no difference between Gore and Bush according to Nader. How many of you "She's the same as Bush" want to risk that strategery again?

I live in VT. It's not going to go repuke no matter what. It makes little difference if I vote for that woman or not. Yes, I probably will, but if one lives in VT or MA or CT or NY, it's really not going to effect anything if you don't vote.

But I will still vote for her if it comes to that.
Every last vote is important, especially this time.

If the public doesn't get it after 8 years of Bush, maybe we need another 8 years of nazis to wake up the population.

unless you opt for an independent

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789.

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." --Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1795.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." --John Quincy Adams

It will never, ever change. In fact it will get worse, hell, it's gotten worse in my lifetime. We've gone from candidates who generally cared for the people and espoused truly liberal positions, like RFK and McGovern, to corporate whores like Hillary and Obama.

Why actively, or even passively, support a system that is against your own best interests? Why continue enabling a system that is actively working against your interest? Sure, Hillary might throw us a bone or two, but the sad fact of the matter is that she will continue to enable corporate America to suck us all dry, just as her husband did.

And while you try to spread the blame around to anybody but those who are really responsible, the fact of the matter is that it's the responsibility of the Democrats to nominate somebody who will attract voters. If that doesn't happen, if Hillary loses, it isn't the fault of those who didn't vote for Hillary, it is the fault of the party for nominating a candidate whose very presence on the ticket repulses and repels people. Americans, independents, liberals, don't owe the Democratic party a damn thing, including their vote. It is the responsibility of the party to earn those votes. By nominating Hillary, in the face of her high negative ratings, it looks like the party is failing to fulfill it's responsibility.