I like beets. And I'd love to go to dinner with Dan Savage and Sarah Silverman. I'd feel like a fat old boring home economics teacher, but I'd still go.

Give it a rest Dan. Move on. Your constant harping is tiring.

What the BoBs need is time. Time to witness the coming shit show. It will clarify the options and strychnine won't look equivalent. The 1st debate ought to do it.

Oft humiliated gay teen grows into powerful man; tries to excise past traumas by humiliating others.

@2 You know what's tiring? Shitstains like you who chose political purity over have a majority in the Supreme Court.

Pretty accurate, except beets are tasty.

@3: God Almighty, I sure hope so. With any luck, the moderators will actually fact-check on occasion.

I don't think many people remember or are too young to know that when Ronald Reagan ran against Jimmy Carter there was a third party choice: John Anderson. Carter made lots of promises to the gay community that he failed to keep when he was in office and I was pissed along with others so I voted for Anderson. Considering the consequences of Reagan's election (thousands of deaths from AIDS while he dawdled along this destroying the US economy with supply side economics and trickle down prosperity) this stands out as one of the regrets I have in life. I worry that there will be a lot of regrets in the future about this election.

My only consolation is that my mom who was a lifelong moderate Republican also voted for John Anderson so I view these as votes as canceling each other out. She didn't like Reagan's position on abortion.

There is a chemical in beets that some taste as delicious, and others taste as dirt. I fall more in the dirt category and wish I didn't, as beets are pretty good for you.

Whoa @5, I am a HIllary supporter! (Or rather, I am working for her because I am terrified of Trump). I just feel that the continual ragging on Sander's supporters by angry knee jerks - like you- will cost her the election.

Fuck all theseTurnips, Rutabegas, Beets or Strychnines...

. . . I'm voting the FactCheck / Honesty 2016 ticket!

I mean, if that's even plausible in this here information-overload Internetty age... :>(

What?... No?... No, it isn't? *sigh* Ok fine, I'll take the beets then.

.

@3,5 - Yeah, I think you're right. It'll take awhile for the emotional storms to subside, everyone to lick their wounds, and hopefully come around to the only non-fascist choice.

I'm with @10. I voted for Sanders in the CA primary. I'm glad he ran, and I'm happy he moved the party--and Clinton herself--to the left. I'm grateful that he got economic disparity front and center in the Democratic Party discussion.
Let the BoBs have some time to handle their disappointment. Kicking them when they're down isn't doing anyone any good. Let them adjust, and most of them will come around. Keep poking at them, and they'll still be angry in November. And that benefits only Trump.

You know what, buddy, some of us are trying really fucking hard to just plug our noses and eat the beets. The beets taste like garbage, just let them taste like garbage already and let us get this over with. They're not going to taste good just because they're not strychnine. You can't act surprised that we think they taste like garbage, because they do, but we're here eating the beets and not the strychnine. I'm trying not to be picky or petulant here, I'm really doing my best to try and eat what's on my plate. We'll accept that Hillary is the only viable person we can vote for with a chance if you can accept that she is on a personal level extremely difficult to like for many of us, does that sound like a fair deal?

Most Bernie supporters will vote for Clinton. The remainder won't make much of a difference. The polls support this, and it will become more certain the closer we get to the election, and the further we get from the convention.

Meanwhile, Hillary has more important things to worry about, like getting out the vote and convincing any possible conservatives that Trump will be a disaster for the country. The "Bernie or Buster" faction is a giant, stinky red herring (reference to socialism not intentional) that Clinton fans can't seem to let go of.

No don't stop it Dan.
I hope you're right Max @3.

Yes, but in reality its more like strychnine has convinced everyone that the potatoes they're eating is actually horseradish.

Hilarious. And comment @2 above could be inserted as a new BoB line.

@4 Or it's a gentle satire of people who mean well and are often on the same side of the issues as the author but in his opinion lack strategic perspective in this case.

@10 you're right..at this point there better be some impressive candidates on the down ticket in Seattle come November or I'll probably sit this election out. That's one less vote in the D column.

Poor people who are allergic to beets. Both options terrible, and being told that they have to choose one or the other or they're being childish and traitorous, but they HAVE to choose what's best for other people but they have to choke down beets and die themselves so the white, I mean, beet majority can persist.

Doesn't this just highlight the ridiculousness of a two-party system?

"You're either for us or you're against us!"

Rings a bell.

Why do I still visit this site?

The tiny Bernie-or-Bust minority really isn't worth wasting so much time on, especially given how much splash damage the endless insults give to the vast majority of Bernie supporters. We get it, Dan, you hate Bernie. It was fucking obvious all along. You want Hillary to win for real? Move on.

@3- I have no idea why you think anything that happens in the debates will change anyone's mind. Trump will seem like an immature, hateful, unqualified wannabe dictator. Hillary will seem like a technocratic, shifty, well-programmed robot. Everyone's pre-conceived notions will be confirmed. Very, very little is going to change in the next 4 months. Which is terrible news.

It's not the fault of bobs that Clinton's favorability rating is in the shitter. Of course, that wouldn't cost her the election, only bobs could do that. Right, Savage?

The problem, @13, is that (just to torture this metaphor even more) the folks voting for strychnine are passionate and starting to convince people that they'll not only survive eating it, but will be made more healthy as a result. That's patently ridiculous, but here we are. Meanwhile, you sit there struggling with your hurt widdle feewings about having to eat beets, making the strychnine seem even more palatable.

So say you're going to eat your fucking beets already, and say it like you mean it. Or you--and the rest of us--get a squirt of rat poison instead.

Yes Hillary supporters probably do believe this analogy works as they see her as the food equivalent to beets. A very unpopular vegetable that some people hold their nose to eat.

However I think your little story would better illustrate what some Bernie supporters believe, and some independents also believe, if you changed the choices from "beets or strychnine" to "cyanide or strychnine".

Am I the only one who remembers the 1990s here? Clinton's husband has already been President for two terms and they have virtually identical politics! Let's see - from 1992 to 2000 we had:
- A strong growing economy
- Reasonably sane foreign policy
- Two wars, but both with strong international support, no quagmires, reasonably good outcomes
- Two great supreme court appointees
- A budget surplus
No it wasn't all perfect and yes some of the free trade deals had bad long term effects but still thats not a bad record. And of course we then elected W (with a strong assist from Nader and the G.P.) who proceeded to blow up the economy, turn the surplus into a big deficit, appoint two young right wing justices, and launch a disastrous series of unilateral wars. Haven't we learned anything?

That's a hilarious strawman, much like all the other bullshit that gets posted about Bernie Bros or Bernie or Busters whatever brush you choose to paint them with. This bullshit exists in your mind and that's far easier for your lazy politics than actually engaging someone on the issues.

Catalina @1, I like beets too, grated not cooked. Yes, that would be a fun dinner. I'd be happy to cook, make up one of my special meals.
No, please don't stop Dan. If the margin re Bush's win in 2000 was so fucking small, because the left vote was split; Isn't it all that matters now? This dark cloud is over all our heads.
Though it does get hard to come up with new ways to say the same thing.
More comedy writing like this one. If we're laughing we're not freaking the fuck out.

Auron4TF @19: They’re going to die either way. Strychnine poisoning or beet allergy, they’re doomed. They can be vengeful and take everyone else with them (strychnine) or they can try to take the high road and spare the people they can.

I'm allergic to beets. So, why did you choose beets?

I appreciate that Dan is willing to speak the truth without fear: beets are a disgusting vegetable that tastes like dirt and stains your fingers (and poop) red.

Lava girl, speaking as a former Sanders voter, I can tell you that that hysterical bromides thrown at Sanders supporters are far less effective than treating us like adults and moving forward. The daily attacks (Bern shaming?) are what will cause people not to vote for HRC.
It is more fun of course to ground your defeated opponent's nose in dogshit, but you don't get votes that way.

@30 The beet party chose to kill me because I'm allergic to beets. So, of course I'm going for turnips or rutabagas.

Meanwhile, why are you yelling at me for trying not to die when half the dinner party is choosing strychnine? Your willingness to kill me because you prefer beets means you don't give a shit about me at all. I might as well side with strychnine to kill all y'all since I'm going to die anyways.

Love Smoked Salmon @26, okay, let’s try your suggestion:

BoB: Cyanide can shove a can up its ass sideways!
M: I see you're upset, but if strychnine wins then we all have to eat it.
BoB: So?!? It's the same thing either way.
M: Not really, see one is a disgusting vegetable that tastes like dirt and stains your fingers red. The other is poison.
BoB: Right, same thing.
M: Um... no. There's an actual, material, identifiable differ—
Strychnine: Mexicans pick cyanide!

... no, I don’t see that it works better this way.

Pity the people of the world who are effected by US decisions.. that would be all of us.. don't get a vote. We stand open mouthed that such an obvious con man has been nominated as a contender for the top job.
Cmon. And now all these wounded children who wanted this other movie to play, are sulking in the corner.
Really. Wtf. American may be the greatest country on Earth. It's also the weirdest.

And fuck it. Nader did not cost Gore the election. Goddamn Gore cost Gore the election. That narrative is bogus. Way more democrats split the party to vote for Bush than left to vote for Nader. I think it was by a factor of ten, but am too lazy to look it up now.
If HRC loses, it will be partially because her supporters can't be magnanimous in victory. Yeah there are some assholio Sanders folks. But just ignore them and they will go away- or better ignore them and give them some piece of the pie.

Almost every fucking poll shows that 90% of Bernie Supporters are going to vote Hillary. Even though Hillary's VP is even less progressive than she is. Kaine Supports TPP/The Dark Act. A big FU to 43% of the party. Then it comes out the DNC rigged the system against Bernie. I don't think he would have beat her either way, but you can't deny the thing was rigged. DWS steps down as chair and Clinton immediately hires her. Another big FU to 43% of the party. Just feeding into her image of being dishonest. Still I and 90% of the other fucking Bernie Supporters will be voting for Hillary. That 90% will probably keep rising if people would just relax and let them other 10% get over the defeat. Instead you got assholes poking at them every day. They are eventually going to get pissed off enough either not to vote, vote 3rd party or god forbid vote Trump. So Dan you and Hillary can just keep fucking with those people. If she loses because of lack of turnout you and her need to take a look in the fucking mirror to figure out why. Alienating 43% of your party isn't a good thing. You reap what you sow.

@37 the Democrats are just as bad as the GOP when it comes to not owning up to their own screw ups. They refuse to admit any fault and immediately blame straw men when it suits their purpose.

And yes, Gore would have won had the Supreme Court allowed the recount to happen. The Dems should have fucking revolted but sat on their asses and played victim.

Someone said to me the other day, "Well, would you rather be shot in the foot or shot in the head?!?!"

Well, not sure you thought that one through, but if those are the only choices I'll go with the foot. Especially if would prevent others from being shot in the head. Wouldn't you?

I’m not going to let my principles condemn other people to suffering.

As a Bernie Bruh, stop tone-policing me.

@2:

Yeah, so tiring...so, soooo tiring. Must drag self to desk, raise hands to keyboard...soo tired...click...click... sooooo very tired...and...comment posted. Now, back to bed...very tired here..."PING!" Oh noez...another comment after my comment! Back to desk...damn you, Savage! Will you not let me just...rest...?

@37, @39 That really wasn't my point (or at least not an important point). The point is that we know what type of governance Clinton is likely to bring because we've already seen it, and it wasn't all bad. There were some very good points. I don't see a danger with her. It's true that she won't be a great champion of progressive causes but if we can get some strong progressives elected she's not going to stand in the way of progress either.
You think there is too much corporate influence in politics? Then the single most important thing we need to do is get Citizens United overturned. This almost certainly will happen if Clinton is elected, and almost certainly won't happen if Trump is elected.

@37 -- No one said Nader was the only thing that cost Gore the election. There were a number of things that cost him the election. First, there was Bill Clinton's screwing around in the White House and lying about it. Then there was the bullshit story in Wired. Fuck You, Wired: we probably missed a chance to get the nerdiest president ever (someone who might have done something when the industry that was responsible for much of the growth collapsed) because you chose to focus on his unusual pronunciation of router, and his misstatement about the internet (instead of the real work he did in its conception). Then there were other bullshit stories, that painted Gore as a pathological liar, even though every one of them was largely true (Love Story, Love Canal, etc.). Top of the list was probably his horrible speaking style, and terrible performance in the debates. Of course, we can't forget the fact that people cheated in Florida, or that we have an antiquated system that not only doesn't give the election to the person with a majority, but to the candidate with a plurality.

All of those things cost him the election. But at the same time, most of the people who supported Nader (a far left candidate) would chose Gore (the center left candidate) over Bush (the far right candidate). But they didn't. They thought -- for whatever reason -- that it didn't matter that much. They didn't want to pick their second choice; they chose Nader.

Unlike Bernie (a guy who obviously has his shit together), the candidate himself encouraged it. Nader basically said they might lose one election, but it would start a movement. Bullshit. History has proven him wrong. This country and the world is much worse off because Nader voters in Florida and New Hampshire believed that bullshit. Nader -- and his followers -- was one reason that Bush, not Gore, became president.

@36: There are plenty of us inside the US also standing open mouthed that such an obvious con man has been nominated as a contender for the top job. It's staggering that this election is not an issue of if the Dem will win, but by how much, and if an independent (like Bernie, since we're dreaming of an ideal scenario) would peel away enough votes to make any difference. It's unbelievable that it's come down to this.

As others have said, hopefully the choice will become more stark after Hillary repeatedly obliterates Trump in the debates. She will, of course, but it remains to be seen if that will convince anyone.

@23: I'm talking about BoBs who are still going Green at this point, not "anyone". I don't expect my Dad will change from Trump to Clinton.

I don't believe Clinton's going to come off as robotic as you think. She didn't come off that way in the Dem debates.

Seriously knock it off and stop baiting the sanders types

@35 Allison Cummins

A lack of universal health care in America is directly responsible for a tremendous amount of pain, suffering and death.

Israel's current relationship with the Palestinians and the Gaza Strip is responsible for a tremendous amount of pain, suffering and death.

Aggressive regime change, supported by warhawks in America, is responsible for a tremendous amount of pain, suffering and death.

These seem more comparable to poison than vegetables to me. If you can't see the comparison you should become more familiar with Hillary's stated positions on all of the above. She's not trying to hide, nor is she shy about, the things she supports that are, and would be, responsible for a tremendous amount of pain, suffering and death.

"Nader basically said they might lose one election, but it would start a movement"

Jill Stein was on Democracy Now saying the exact same nonsense. They have no ideas. They couldn't even choose a new candidate this year, and just recycled Stein - one of the most thoroughly unpleasant people in politics.

You busters should be kissing
Hillary's ass. She is the only person who can save you from a trump Presidency.

It could've been enchanted potatoes that lost the first round and it's the same. Or maybe the enchanted potatoes (they're magically delicious) are the third way alternative to strychnine here, given how unlikely it is that there are magical tubers.

@49 "They couldn't even choose a new candidate this year, and just recycled Stein - one of the most thoroughly unpleasant people in politics."

Unlike the Dems, who nominated that fresh up-and-comer Hillary Clinton. And talk about pleasant people in politics -- Hillary is fully 2% less unlikable than Trump!

@26, @35, From Wikipedia: "Strychnine poisoning can be fatal to humans and other animals and can occur by inhalation, swallowing or absorption through eyes or mouth. It produces some of the most dramatic and painful symptoms of any known toxic reaction"
and: "If cyanide is inhaled it causes a coma with seizures, apnea, and cardiac arrest, with death following in a matter of seconds"
Both poisons, but not at all the same.
Note that in movies, and possibly in reality, cyanide is a popular suicide pill, so even if you think both choices are poison, one might still pick the less painful death

@30, Or, we can just learn how to cultivate a better diet consisting of a variety of fruits, vegetables and grains and maybe even meats.

Long time reader and comments voyeur, never posted. I've read too many articles where Dan is honestly being a bitty towards Bernie supporters and trying to jam Hillary down their throats. Now, just because he has the skills to open up and say ahhh doesn't mean everyone is able to do that without suffering from a violent gag reflex or prevent themselves from vomiting.

Myself, I'm a Bernie supporter. I am saddened that the top two candidates are people that I find to be awful people in general. I can't honestly say that I'm going to get over the bull that the DNC pulled and to "put my big girl panties on" and vote for either. I honestly think the two are in cohorts somehow and the whole election is a sham. The biggest troll ever played on the American population. Neither give a damn about real people (you know, the ones who don't make a years salary off the interest of their bank account), pretending they do isn't going to make it true.

I'll probably throw my vote at a third party, knowing that in doing so, I'll be helping elect the worst of the worst. My problem is, I don't know who it is at this given time. The whole election makes me nauseous, further proof I can't just swallow that load of bull.

So, yell at me some more, you can be sure that without explanations that I find to be reasonable, I'll just stop listening to whatever point that was attempted to be made through the demeaning posts/blogs/comments. Kthx.

@50 LOL. Every time I start thinking the Bernie supporters have a monopoly on absurd, deluded emotionality, someone like you reminds me that Clinton has her own contingent of loons.

Mrs Du-Ray - I'd have put you in a class far above that of Ms Silverman.

@54: Basically, cyanide is a metabolic poison that screws up the electron transport chain, whereas strychnine is a neurotoxin that makes nerves hyperconductive. Given the choice of the two, I'd take strychnine; it's possible to treat strychnine poisoning, but there's not much to be done about cyanide poisoning.
This is unrelated, of course, to my political stances.

PS Really love how this whole thing is framed as petulance. "Boo hoo, was baby's election rigged? Does baby want a fair democracy? Look, he's so red in the face because he actually wants meaningful campaign reform! Wah wah wah, cry me a river, just vote for the person you're supposed to already!"

@56 Maybe you will like Bernie Sanders' reasons to vote for HIllary as outlined at his website,

https://berniesanders.com/sanders-prepar…

His conclusion is:

Hillary Clinton will make an outstanding president and I am proud to stand with her here tonight.
- Bernie Sanders

Your analogy is all well and good, but then you must also conclude that America is no longer a democracy. The choice between suicide or living is not a legitimate choice. At best, American democracy is now no better than that found in Russia or Singapore, where people must vote for the least worst form of corruption in order to have a livable society. As much as I disagree with the Bernie-or-Busters, I at least admire that they are fighting to have an actual democratic choice, not "Hitler or Putin". By the way, all those concessions Sanders won at the convention, bet you anything they'll all go out the window after January 20 -- no matter who wins. The Clinton Democrats are Reagan Republicans in economic and foreign policy. So yeah, no real Democrats anymore. Choice is between Nazis or New Republicans. Not a democracy to be proud of.

@11 The actual non-fascist pro-LGBT anti-war pro-choice anti-crony pick is Gary Johnson/Bill Weld. But I'm sure no one wants to hear that. There's always http://www.burnmyvote.org/.

Instead of strychnine and beets, with the inspiration of Dame Agatha, I'll use cyanide and arsenic. (Strychnine, the assembled company will doubtless recall, was actually an ingredient of Mrs Inglethorpe's tonic.) Cyanide is a quick and certain death all around, but arsenic rather less so, and there are even those who eat arsenic on purpose and find it beneficial. That would explain the True Believers whom I shall pay the compliment of calling sincere in their efforts to convince the assembled company that Mrs Clinton isn't the marginally lesser evil but a positive good. Mr Savage is not a True Believer, although he is the husband of one, and therefore is the equivalent of those who become kinky by marriage. His second biggest reason for supporting Mrs C is clearly the desire to see Republicans choke on their own fury, and he just can't help giving a bit of the same to supporters of Mr Sanders.

Where things get tricky is that it's difficult to tell the difference between True Believers who genuinely think Mrs C will be a wonderful president for everybody, and True Believers who know that she will be a great president for them while simultaneously about as disastrous as Mr Trump for a lot of their fellow travelers on the blue side of the aisle but don't dare admit it. To either sort of True Believer, I suggest that you channel Lucie Manette offering up her most heartfelt thanks for the self-sacrifice of Sydney Carton, as galling as that might be for the first and more pure sort. What you at present look like to the waverers is Major Armstrong inviting his rival solicitor to tea and, instead of passing the tray, handing Mr Martin a plate with a very carefully selected scone. The first type of TB really thinks the scone is yummy; the second type of TB has wounded vanity that people have realized the scone is poisoned. Therefore, they respond similarly, which is why it's hard to tell the difference.

But it makes us harder for non-TBs if we are required to call the arsenic beets. (And I don't want to imagine the punishment the non-TBs are going to get once Mrs C wins, which is why she must be prevented from winning with a margin that bestows a claimable womandate.)

@61 "Rigged" is a pretty strong word. Yes the DNC leadership were very unprofessional in the way they were talking about and dealing with Sanders and its not OK, but the greatest influence DWS had was the scheduling of debates and there's just no way it made that much difference. The RNC tried even harder to rig their primary against Trump and he won anyway. Bottom like is that 3 million more people voted for Clinton then Sanders, and its not because of anything in the DNC emails - what about their right to a fair democracy?

@60 you DO know that Mike Pence is Trump's VP pick, not Clinton's, right?

I hope it makes people happy to keep bloviating on this incredibly stupid topic, since time after time surveys and polls suggest that 85%-90% of Bernie supporters plan on voting for Clinton.

I understand using a strawman as a way to try to win an argument, but I guess I see it less often as a way for so many self-righteous people to simply feel better about themselves, or to remain outraged at all times even after their candidate clearly won.

But hey, if it makes you happy to just keep on whining about those millions of imaginary people who have the nerve to think differently than you, I guess just keep on doing what makes you happy. Which appears to be whining and crying that not 100% of the population agrees with you about something.

@44 Ross. Thank you for the thoughtful response. I'd add the garbage human Lieberman as VP pick for Gore as another reason that he lost.
I have heard from many (Savage esp.) that Nader was the only reason Gore lost. My real problem with that argument is that those people may never have voted for Gore. We have no way of knowing. And the number of Nader voters was tiny next to the # of demos who voted Bush.

Thank you Christopher Baird! When the store is out of Pepsi, just order Clorox bleach.

Noam Chomsky and John Halle published this "Eight Point Brief for LEV (Lesser Evil Voting)" last month. I haven't noticed that anyone here has referenced it yet (my apologies if I'm mistake about that).

Here it is: https://chomsky.info/an-eight-point-brie…

"3) One of these candidates, Trump, denies the existence of global warming, calls for increasing use of fossil fuels, dismantling of environmental regulations and refuses assistance to India and other developing nations as called for in the Paris agreement, the combination of which could, in four years, take us to a catastrophic tipping point. Trump has also pledged to deport 11 million Mexican immigrants, offered to provide for the defense of supporters who have assaulted African American protestors at his rallies, stated his 'openness to using nuclear weapons', supports a ban on Muslims entering the U.S. and regards 'the police in this country as absolutely mistreated and misunderstood' while having 'done an unbelievable job of keeping law and order.' Trump has also pledged to increase military spending while cutting taxes on the rich, hence shredding what remains of the social welfare 'safety net' despite pretenses.

"4) The suffering which these and other similarly extremist policies and attitudes will impose on marginalized and already oppressed populations has a high probability of being significantly greater than that which will result from a Clinton presidency."

The full article is well worth reading and sharing.

@80 yes, it is. But if you want the condensed version; in a choice between a continuation of existing US policy vs a descent into an utter Hieronymus Bosh fuckedscape you choose the former even if you think existing US policy sucks

and no, I can't count

Tiresome scolding is such an effective campaign strategy.

What you on about Chase. Dan has been a political animal a lot longer than he's been a sex advice columnist.
Trump calling on Russia to release Hillary's emails. Asange, the twisted sister locked in the Embassy, has hinted there are more leaks coming.
What the hell. Trump conspiring with Russia and Asange doing the same.

Chase. I responded to you on the wrong thread. Your post re Dan and his political comments on the daily thread.

@66 I use 'rigged' as a term to illustrate that the deck is stacked against non-establishment candidates. Some people are okay with that because they believe that only establishment candidates who have chops within the party ought to be leading the party itself. Some others, myself included, feel that's backwards. I consider closed primaries and superdelegates to constitute a form of mathematical rigging wherein the interests of the party and insularity take precedence over the desires of the majority of Americans.

I understand their desire to prevent themselves from being sabotaged by people who don't like their party and want to see them fail but that comes at the unacceptable cost of shutting the door on independents who wish to make their voices heard, and about 50% of Americans are independents and not affiliated with either party officially, even if they de facto vote one way or another. Well, they get shut out of closed primaries by default, and even when they don't, the superdelegate system means it might not matter. Some of our superdelegates in Washington state were unwilling to follow their constituency and there's no rule dictating that they must. These numbers get unfairly tacked onto delegate numbers, making Hillary look like she's a stronger and more popular candidate in media reports when actually many of those delegates aren't representative of a large voting group but instead are individual superdelegates who are free to vote as they choose.

Does that constitute rigging? It's not stuffing the ballot boxes, but there was shady shit going on. That happens in every election by every party, I'm not so foolish as to believe the dems are above this sort of thing, but nevertheless it is bullshit. A presidential primary is supposed to *help* the party by indicating to it which of its potential candidates would have the best shot at winning the election. The poll numbers didn't really change throughout Sanders' campaign: He would have had a better shot at beating Trump than Hillary, so somehow we came up with the weaker candidate against the Republicans' looming crypto-fascist monster that even they are repulsed by.

At this point there is no helping it, Hillary is the nominee. I in no way wish to ignore the many votes which she did receive during the primaries, and according to the DNC rules at least, it was a fair match-up. I believe the system of primaries and caucuses is unfair and skewed by its nature, and so I don't blame Hillary Clinton or even DWS for what happened because they, too, are part of a system larger than themselves which also supports this sort of thing for self-serving purposes.

Kindly put, I feel they did themselves a disservice here and that the result could have been different and more in line with an airtight anti-Trump ticket that would have trounced him handily. Now I am skeptical of their ability to pull off the kind of safe win they could have had, but I understand the reasons why they did what they did.

This, to me, is all the more reason why I feel there is only one real issue right now that ought to matter to the American people, that issue being campaign reform. Everything else hinges upon election reforms being imposed by the American people on the government so we have an actual democracy.

@77. There is little validity to those polls that Sanders had a better shot than Clinton beating Trump. If he couldn't win over the majority of the democratic party....

No one dug into Sanders past that much. And there is much to dig. It would have happened once he received the nomination.

@77 Yes, the primary process is pretty awful and we should reform it. Primary voters aren't necessarily just voting for the most electable candidate, that's just one of many considerations. Trump sure as hell didn't look like the most electable Republican but the voters chose him and here we are. I'd also like to point out two things:
1 - the single largest source of voter suppression in the primaries was the caucus system itself, which singly and massively benefitted Sanders. Compare the Washington caucus vs primary results for instance; see https://tmblr.co/Z30clv26_dw4o (the author is a strong Clinton supporter and you don't have to support his interpretation, but he's quite right on the facts)
2 - if you think one of the problems with the system is there is too much corporate influence on elections then the single most important thing to do is get rid of Citizen's United, and this will most likely happen with Clinton selecting justices and most likely will not happen with Trump selecting justices.

Thats all, go in peace. I don't begrudge you your disappointment that your preferred candidate lost.

sorry, I guess I already made the point about citizen's united. But its very important!

@7 - Yes, I remember telling my Dad I supported John Anderson because Carter was incompetent and Reagan wanted to blow up the world. Of course, I was a birt of a drama queen. I was also 12 and didn't have electricity, tv, or newspaper, so the fact that I even knew John Anderson was in the ballot was in hindsight a bit remarkable.

@3 - I think you're right. For the Sanders supporters who aren't ready yet, I think a little time to decompress may be in order. Some deep breathing, fresh air, smell the flowers, and then come back for th debates. Then decide between Clunton and Stein.

@77 - As a Clinton supporter, I also got annoyed with the media when they started lumping in super delegates with pledged delegates. I sensed immediately that it would just fuel resentment and if Clinton took the lead in pledged delegates (as she did the ole race except for right after New Hampshire), people would either be confused and say she only had the lead by adding it super delegates, or that voters were only voting for her because of the bandwagon effect thinking she was already winning. A lot of people claim the media was in the tank for Clinton but I don't think that's the case -- they're more interested in a horse race than a run-away victory, which this alleged collusion was supposedly conspiring to do. But yeah, while the issue of the very existence of super delegates is more complex than people realize (and I can go on for paragraphs on how minority representation and improved because of them, which is a big part of by the Congresional Black Caucus opposes eliminating them), the way they were reported this cycle wasn't helpful to Sanders OR Clinton.

@8 Tastes like dirt to me. Plants in the beets/chard/spinach family all have that flavor to varying degrees and all hove boatloads of oxalate in them, but I'm not sure if it's the oxalate that gives them that flavor. What I am sure of is that diets high in oxalate can aid in the formation of calcium oxalate kidney stones in some lucky people, like me. I also know that kidney stones hurt like a son of a bitch, so I'm not convinced that beets are such a healthy food.

Maybe for some folks, but they're absolutely terrible for some of us.

Wouldn't it be cool if they tasted like dirt to people who are vulnerable to that type of kidney stone? Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure that's not the case.

@26, There are several problems with you cyanide/strychnine analogy.
1. It is wrong.
2. Hillary is not poison. She's been in the White House before without destroying the nation and reversing the president/first spouse situation won't be that hugely different.
3. Cyanide is at least as bad as strychnine. Trump is a stupid delusional narcissist racist bully who has no idea what he would do if he were president and lies constantly. Hillary made a poor choice about an e-mail server and will not win any prizes for complete candor. Those are not the same. Not even a little bit. If you can't see that, you need to grow up or never vote again.

pansack @73, You really need to take the pills the nice doctor gave you. They're not strychnine or cyanide.

@79- Independents decide elections.

Beets get a bad rap Give them a chance, they may taste better than you think and have many of the same nutritional content of rutabagas.