sad that a pseudo "alternatvie" weekly in Seattle fawns over a war criminal beholden to Wall Street. Fuck yourself Dan.
love,
not a bernie fan either.

Let me get this straight, Dan: MORE people have moved from Bernie to Hillary in 2016 than moved from Hillary to Obama in 2008, and you're still bitching about people not moving from Bernie to Hillary?

It sounds like you're just looking for an excuse to endorse Brady Walkinshaw, the weakest candidate in the 7th District.

Being worried about Bernie-or-Busters is like being worried about getting AIDS from being next to the guys holding hands.

Next to two guys holding. . . .

Given the way the movie ended, I'm not sure I'd use the same 52-year-old cultural reference for this year's elections.

But I wouldn't get complacent based on poll numbers. A lot of people will come out of the woods to vote for Trump. And if a lot of the "young people" in the UK who are whinging about being shafted by the old folks in the Brexit vote had actually voted (about a 36% turnout in the young people demographic, as opposed to 70% of the geezers), they wouldn't have anything to whinge about today.

That's one thing about a Clinton campaign, they tend to run a pretty rigorous get-out-the-vote operation; I got a visit on election day 1992, and don't recall anything similar in subsequent elections.

Yes Dan, and some of us are actually old enough to get the reference without requiring an explanation...

No one should vote for Hillary even if in a swing state. At least if you're a principled progressive.

I don't engage in fear based voting. I don't engage in slippery slope fallacies. I won't vote for Hillary. I don't vote for a candidate that:

- Supported the Iraq War
- Pushed Obama into Libya (what he says is his biggest mistake)
- Pushed military action for Syria (and wants a no fly zone)
- Pushes for military action against Iran (or at least the option, gee, very Republican eh?)
- Supported the TPP (her state department helped write it and she lobbied for it 45 times!)
- Supported NAFTA
- Supported/lobbied for the Omnibus Crime bill for the tough on crime part (not for the violence against women part or the assault rifle ban)
- Flip flops on gay marriage
- flip flops on guns
- Engages in dirty politics to "artfully smear" her opponents (Bernie Bros and Obama Boys and using kennedy assassination or Sandy Hook against her opponents)
- Sold weapons to nations around the world like pretending to be anti-weapon (btw, one of those weapon manufacturers she helped sell weapons for was the same one that created the assault rifle used in Sandy Hook)
- Pushed fracking around the world (Climate change advocate? ya right)

I can go on and on. There are so many negatives of Hillary. I will never support her as my vote is earned, not given.

But I could actually argue there is reason that Trump would be better (I do so love to argue too :D)

Thanks to Paul Ryan and other conservatives outbursts of late, my argument is even stronger.

Trump gets elected, what happens? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Why? Congress HATES him. They utterly hate him. And as much as people like to pretend the Presidency is a "powerful position" (it's not without power, but they conflate it with more power than it has), without congress, there's little to no power. So what happens? Congress and Trump fight each other for 2-4 years and that weakens the GOP grip on congress as 2018 more voters come out and flip the house and 2020 we can get a real progressive to run and win.

Hell, there's a good chance Congress will work to impeach Trump. Both GOP and Dems will work together on this. So ultimately, a Trump presidency means nothing happens.

Now, let's look at Hillary. Hillary is hated by the GOP, yes, openly, but in private? There's a lot they agree on.

* Hillary is a war hawk ( http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/24/magazi… ) and she's openly been for war with Iran ( http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-cli… ). So there ya go, GOP and Hillary agree and war with Iran seems even more likely.
* Hillary is for the same kinda trade deals the GOP are for ( http://www.ibtimes.com/cables-show-hilla… ). She might be saying in the primary that she's against the TPP, but she lobbied for it FORTY FIVE TIMES! Her state department helped create what it is today. Words are like the wind. Easily ever changing and meaningless without action to back it up. And, quite frankly, Hillary's actions on trade show opposite of what her words do.
* Hillary is for the same deregulations the GOP are for ( http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/06/politics/h… ). We're going to see even more deregulations toward wall street and corporations because she, like the GOP, are bought off by the same buyers.
* Hillary is all for tax avoidance/tax havens ( http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/the-clinton… and http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-p… ), the same kinda thing the GOP love.
* Hillary has pushed and is for fracking ( http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2… ) as are the GOP.
* Hillary will work with the GOP and corporate dems to kill Net Neutrality ( https://www.techdirt.com/articles/201512… ). While Trump talks against it, he won't care to do anything. But the internet has almost screwed Hillary outta her crown (still might). She will do anything to neuter that in the 2020 election.

So, ya, I could go on with more points (her flip flopping on various issues like guns, immigration, gay marriage, etc) and I could make the case that a Trump presidency would be "better" than Clinton. I could see way more corporatism under Clinton than Trump where as with Trump I see the GOP imploding and the Dems/Progressives uniting against him.

Ultimately, as I stated my stance is "not voting for either of them, I'm writing in Bernie or voting third party". I would be the same in a swing state. My vote is EARNED, not freely given because of the fear of the other or going with the "lesser of two evils"

And I haven't even gotten to the point of how a faux progressive screws over the movement even more because it divides the movement. Divides it against the truly principled that can't be conned vs those who like the ideals, but are conned because of cult of personality or some other issue. We see it right now with Obama and how he's for the TPP, but the Dems won't go against the TPP as their party platform because of it despite so many of the party not approving of it. The divide is going to weaken our chances of stopping the TPP.

Btw, Americans want an independent option

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/po…

Finally, I won't vote ANY Democrat other than Bernie and others like him, because I refuse to give the Democratic establishment any help. They don't get a reward of MY vote after rigging all this going on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qfHnlMU…

http://www.wkyt.com/content/news/Grand-j…

And I can get even more sources to prove the election fraud if you want....

NO ONE who is principled should vote for Hillary or any establishment Democrat.

TL:DR version of @7 - "I am too dumb to actually weigh the costs and benefits of various actions or make reasonable predictions, so please ignore me."

good thing I have no principles, or I'd have to read that whole thing @7.

What a load of garbage. As usual, the vast size, integrity and commitment to the cause of #BernieOrBust is misunderstood and underestimated.

I understand Dans frustration, ever since New York the Sanders campaign has been a walking corpse held aloft by magical thinking. As reality challenged the magic over and over again his hardcore followers became crazier, coming up with more extreme propaganda to share with each other that painted Clinton not as a moderate, or someone who was not fun enough as they had been saying but as a baby eating monster capable of any inhuman depravity. They made themselves into their own FOX news, all bias-confirming propaganda all the time.

Now, the zombie campaign still shuffles about but most of his fans have gone through the grieving process and acceptance begins to take over from rage, denial and bargaining. the ~45% support sanders was seeing in polling at his highest has eroded extremely, he has attempted to use that support as leverage, but in doing so he alienated a large number of his supporters. By waiting to strike deals he has just made his hand weaker.

I am more concerned about the future. This could be the birth of a left-wing Tea Party, a purist ideology over reality insurgent group who sets about primarying mainstream dems from the left in blue districts. That is one of the main things that is crippling the GOP right now and gave us Trump. I agree with some of Bernies policies and would like a more lefty USA but I completely disagree with the tactics and methods of his campaign, which was from the beginning more about division, celebrity and ideology than about actual governance of a nation. The whole thing was a case study in ideological bubbles and bias confirmation.

Today's Quinnipiac poll has them too close to call (40%/42%).
http://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinni…

Taking political advice from Dan is like taking sex advice from Henry Kissinger.

@7: sgt_doom, is that you?

Hillary is a shit candidate, but if you're really looking at how this whole thing has gone on, you should have gotten off of the Bernie train a couple months ago at least.

@12 33% of Hispanics back trump? Mmmmmmmmmmk

@14:

Is it sgt_doom???

nah dood, the writing style isn't quite batshit enough.

PROOF for all you bitches that the neoliberal conservatards in this comment thread are bought and paid for by the Rothschilds and their secret banking mind control cabal!!!!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb1vcaqA… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzmWzXLP… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJyxt3VD…

@13: Actually, the onetime boyfriend of Jill St. John, Liv Ullman, Diane Sawyer, Candice Bergen and Shirley MacLaine — whose most famous quotes include, "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac" — is probably a pretty good source for such things.

Bernie Sanders is not Hillary Clinton in 2008. He's not even a Democrat, or wasn't until recently. So there is no reason to expect or require him to endorse the Democratic nominee. Given the constraints of the US two party system, most people will absolutely back the non-Trump candidate. However, Sanders has connected with a large proportion of voters who are not satisfied with the two current parties, and I think it's a great thing to continue to express the views of those voters into the future. He's looking ahead of the presidential race. I think it's encouraging that in a time when the political narrative around the world is dominated by polarized views of globalization and immigration, there is a candidate who's willing to look past the paranoia and represent voters that do not fit into one of the two predefined categories. He's the only hope I see (right now) of bringing back nuanced discussion of the issues, instead of continuing the escalation of polarizing opinions.

Having daily, "scolding" posts aimed towards Bernie supporters is a funny way of not worrying. It also does little to win over his supporters.

Here's the thing... Approximately 45% of the people who voted in the Democratic primaries, latched on to Bernie because he's talking about specific issues. (The influence of money in politics and the Democratic party, the climate change crisis, the eroding of the middle class, student debt, single payer healthcare, stupid foreign policy decisions etc,,,, ) They supported Sanders because he has been more consistent with these issues over the years.

Rather than berating Sander's supporters, Hillary, her surrogates and the Democratic party would do much better winning them over by addressing some of these issues. How about you Dan? What do you think about money's corrupting influence in politics? How about the 20 plus million who still aren't covered by healthcare?

In the end, a majority of Sanders' voters will vote for Hillary. A Trump presidency would surely be a disaster. It would be nice if Clinton supporters would at least also acknowledge the disaster of the status quo, We have about 3 weeks until the convention. Let the process happen and hopefully we'll have a unified party when it's over,

I did a lot of hand-wringing over Bernie or Busters a few weeks back until I read a blog article (can't find it now) where someone pointed out that what we're actually seeing is a particular demographic that is louder than it is powerful and that does not yet realize that. The election will not be determined by a small group of white straight dudes who overestimate the size of their movement because it is loud online. (And I know most Bernie supporters are not this- I'm talking about Bernie or Busters, most of whom are this.)

I'm more afraid of Trump quitting than I am of anything Bernie or Busters might do. If Trump stays in, he's basically guaranteed to lose, and he knows it. I'm waaayyy more concerned about him finding a way to quit and save face and the Republicans running someone who is more "polite" and "presidential" yet even more backwards (someone like Cruz) because that person could actually win.

@20 Thank you. The scolding, belittling, and mocking got old months ago. I'm voting for HRC, because it's the right thing to do (pun intended). Not because I want to. Still looking forward to the day I can cast my vote for an anti-death penalty candidate...

I just gotta say that knew a long time ago (like, April) that people were freaking out over nothing, and that most Bernie supporters (or, I should say, enough Bernie supporters) will vote for Hillary in November.

@11 - yes exactly. That's brilliant.

I voted for Sanders. I think Clinton is terrible. I'm going to vote for her because of civil liberty issues, but she's horrible. Her foreign policy was a nightmare as senator (the votes for the war, patriot act) and as sec of state (arming/funding sunni militants, backing the removal of Assad). Her stance on isolating Russia terrifies me. She's going to be terrible.

But any current Republican would do all those same things too, only they'd also overtly go to war (carpet bombing) and destroy civil liberties at home. So I'll hold my nose, vote for Hilary.

What troubles me about Bernie supporters (and I am one) is exactly the sort of crap that you point out. He's not a great activist- he's a mainstream left of center politician. If one of his supporters came at me with a realistic assessment of his attributes (correct focus on wealth inequality, health care and corruption in politics) AND his flaws (misinformation campaign, ignoring non-white issues, lack of coherent and detailed plans to implement goals, misogynistic and antiscience publications in his 30s, focus on New Deal style economics despite the fact that the economy is different) then I would listen carefully to what they have to say. But instead, all I hear is a cult of personality and a desire for things to be different than they are.

The thing that mostly bothers me about Bernie or Busters though is that many of them seem to have very little awareness of the larger progressive movement around them, and I haven't heard Bernie say much in the way of supporting the larger world of progressive politics. It's important for progressives to have a Democrat in the White House, even a totally corrupt one like Hilary, because of civil liberties issues, lobbying possibilities and the SCOTUS appointments. So why not say that, and then focus on networking with progressive movements that ALREADY exist as well as generating momentum for local politics and downticket measures? Bernie could use this platform to talk about prochoice advocacy, school board appointments, congressional elections, black lives matter, labor advocacy, etc. And even on foreign policy issues (where Hilary is damn close to actually being evil since it's impossible that she doesn't know what she's doing), Bernie has laid out no clear plans unless I missed it.

Interesting that everyone keeps quoting this poll and completely ignoring the Bloomberg pool that showed only 55% of Bernie supporters will vote for that woman or a Young Turks poll that showed that number at less than 30% (though that poll was admittedly skewed to a younger and more progressive respondent). I belong to the 3 largest Bernie groups on Facebook, and the widespread prevailing sentiment is "Bernie or Jill Stein or bust." As someone who has voted for 25 years straight for democrats, watching the DNC run the first candidate under a current criminal FBI investigation, a woman who has threatened ground war in both Syria and Iran - despite the hundreds of thousands murdered in Iraq and Libya and the terrorist disaster created in both those countries, and who will most likely rubber stamp TPP at the first opportunity, I have made the decision to absolutely reject the DNC candidate for the first time in my life. This country is screaming for change, to such a degree that we are not really sure this woman can beat a bigoted, moronic, orange reality star who failed at selling steaks in the Sharper Image catalog. THAT is how bad she is. A majority of voters neither like nor trust this woman, with good reason. She may be a federal criminal, on top of being a HORRIBLE leader with a long record of wretched judgment. I've personally had enough. And I suspect there are far more folks like me out there than this poll suggests.

Problem with your "analysis", if you wanna elevate it, is you are getting your intel from celebrity or semi celebrity twitter comments and polls. Have ya been at a Bernie rally or event? Like how about the Protest the Jay Inslee Fundraiser last Friday, on the steps of the Washington Convention Center? Do those people look fired up? Do they look like they are folding up tent and going home? Yeah. You aren't out among the people, OP....er, author of this Stranger article. Get out among the real people in 3D and find out. This REvolution is revved up to second gear, where the power is made. Just wait til you see us burn rubber at the Convention. #BernieorBust and we ain't lyin, we ain't dyin, and we ain't gonna shut up. Whose streets? Our streets? This is what democracy looks like. Link arms, REvoutionaries, we're goin in! #PresidentSanders rides a wave of global support from all demographics, all the way to the OVAL!

@27.

Did you read DS's article? The twitter was the hook. The meat of the article involved the polls. 81 % of Sanders supporters have moved to Hillary.

Dan, I've been a big fan of yours for decades. Seriously, decades. I've agreed with you on just about everything, which is why I feel like you need to see us Bernie supporters from another perspective. Okay, let's get down to business, LGBTQ rights. I demonstrated with Queer Nation and worked with ACT-UP doing HIV prevention work in the early 90s. Some might find this impressive, but Bernie Sanders has been supporting the LGBTQ community in a very public way for longer than that. Hillary? Not so much. Hillary takes bribes from nations that execute gay people and, when she was Secretary of State she got them arms deals in return. Where was your support, Dan Savage, for Bernie Sanders six months ago? You're like Elizabeth Warren who talks about Wall Street and the big banks and the unfairness of the economic elite, but didn't endorse Bernie Sanders six months ago when she should have. Now both you and Elizabeth Warren are speaking out for the hawk, the multi-millionare, the woman who wouldn't even say that same-sex marriage is okay until it became socially acceptable. The woman who supported DOMA and don't-ask-don't-tell. I hate and fear a Trump presidency as much as anyone, but I cannot vote for this woman who will send gay and straight soldiers to war in Iran and Syria within six months of her taking office. She will sign the TPP. Hillary Clinton is certainly different than Trump, but rest assured, she is just as heinous. She does not give a damn about people unless they serve a purpose for her. Choosing between Hillary and Donald is like choosing between pancreatic cancer and rabies.

@27:

A hundred people protesting oil trains doesn't exactly instill confidence that ANYTHING having to do with Sanders (and suggesting they're related is a very tenuous conflation, at-best) is "fired up" or "revved up" in the post-primary environment. It was only a few months ago the Sandersnistas were pointing to stadium rallies of 20,000 people as "proof" that their guy was going to roll over Clinton like an asphalt paver. Where are all those True Believers now, pray tell? Your "revolution" stalled out the moment Sanders lost CA (actually NY, as @11 notes - but, inertia is a thing, so...), and it doesn't show any signs of getting back in gear anytime soon.

But hey, keep pumping your fist in the air and wearing those Che Guevara t-shirts if it makes you feel all grown up and empowered. Meanwhile, the rest of us adults will continue to engage in the harder task of actually working to effect change, instead of just chanting about it.

No, there are DEFINITELY Bernie or Bust people (and a lot of them, at that). You have your head in the sand and that's pretty scary when it comes to making big decisions like voting in a presidential election. But who am I kidding — that's probably why you're not voting for Bernie is the first place, because your head is in the sand and you've allowed the corporate greed and mainstream media to pull wool over your eyes. You're going to have a rude awakening come November, my friend.

@7 Choosing a set of actions that helps Donald Trump become president hardly makes you a principled liberal. Unless by "principled liberal" you mean "long-winded dimwit"? Those are actually different things, regardless of what Bill O'Reilly says.

I didn't read your whole post. No one did.

You know, I commented in another thread a while back that I wished more of my fellow Bernie supporters would lose with grace and dignity. I still do. Winning in the same manner is also a thing, though. Hillary won, she's going to be the next POTUS. Congratulations. Hillary supporters, you got what you wanted. And I'll be at the polls with you voting for Hillary. Just, y'know... winning with grace and dignity is a thing, too.

Progressives should keep in mind that when they refused to compromise or settle in 2000, the progressive cause was set back 16 years. Even if you downplay or deny the role Nader played in electing Bush, you can't deny that his popularity didn't translate into the Democrats saying "if only we were more liberal" and picking up the progressive standard. And yes, many Nader supporters did say that they wanted to "send a message." That message was not received then, and if you insist on going your own way that message will still not be heard.

Bernie has accomplished quite a lot for progressives. He has gotten the Democrats to acknowledge the progressive wing for the first time in decades. He has gotten some good things into the Democratic platform, and may get more. But that's the limit of what he can do for now. And it's gain, the first real gain for progressives on a national level in party politics. It will be all for naught should the Bernie or Bust crowd be a factor in the general election, and you can expect another decade or two of irrelevance as your reward.

The time has come to get off your lazy asses and work. I don't care if you join the Democrats, the Greens, or form an entirely new party. But you have to organize at the local level. You have to identify viable progressive candidates for LOCAL races and get them elected. You have to accept that this will require some discipline and organization - no endless debates about minor issues, a respect for leadership and even authority. You'll have to go to local meetings, you'll have to volunteer to campaign and knock on doors and make phone calls and accept that people will get in your face about it. You'll lose some. Maybe a lot early on. And (if this part galls you, you're hopeless) you'll have to compromise at times. But change isn't going to be delivered by a white knight, and it definitely won't be achieved by voting for presidential candidates that have no hope of winning more than 5% of the most progressive state's votes.

7: "Trump will do nothing because the President really isn't that powerful, but I won't vote for Clinton because she'll get us in a war!"

I think the important point in Jamie's piece that your pol should note is how waiting to endorse has crippled Bernie when he should be a rising star.

He had the list, he had the energy, he had the so-called "high ground." And he gave it all away to Elizabeth Warren by slinking back to Vermont and playing hard to get.

Now his influence is gutted. He'll have his prime-time slot at the convention, but he'll have to sing Hillary's tune.

If she doesn't like what she's hearing, all she has to do is make him follow Warren at the podium.

Speaker line up:
7:40 -- Warren
8:20 -- Bernie
9:00 -- Obama

And it's good night, Bernie.

Bernie still has his supports. I don't know anybody who has folded yet. I suggest you not read the polls. Not a single one has been correct this election cycle. If Bernie is not on a Ballot then I refuse to be a part of electing a scumbag like Trump or a War Monger like Clinton. You will see a large 3rd party block and whoever is elected president will not get more than 42% of the popular vote. Clinton may win, but she has destroyed the Democratic brand.

["I was for Bernie or Hillary or both this year," "is complete bullshit."] I fixed it for ya.

Wow Dan. That was intense. I like the Trollytrolltroll.
Yes. Cmon Bernie. Man up or whatever the allowed phrase is, and get behind Hillary.

Following a life-long behavioral motif, Bernie has once again seized irrelevancy from the jaws of opportunity. A peculiar choice as cult hero ... but these are peculiar times.

@38. What bullshit. Clinton is listening to Bernie and his supporters. And if she doesn't, then the turmoil will continue.
I see Hillary is shifting is hearing.
And you on your superior limb of never having committed any sins ever, will add to such purity letting a fascist like trump get power and doing nothing about it.

@39 Seriously. And he had the fall to say that he was only supporting Clinton because his husband pressured him into it (kinda like how Hillary blames Bill for NAFTA, and the omnibus bill and everything else she wishes never happened in the 90s), but then constantly went to bat for her after that.

Seriously, Dan, I get it. You and Hillary share a lot of the same traits. You both are pressured by your husbands. You both supported the Iraq War, and then both said you were making a mistake about it. You both then blamed your support on misinformation, this coloring you as gullible. I get it Dan. But, this whole bitankual thing is just ridiculous, and I wish you'd stop pushing the narrative.

Also, it's one thing for you to be pushing a fiscally conservative war monger in the general as your only hope at stopping the Orange menace (who pays far better lip service to fiscally liberal causes than Hillary), but it's another to then set your rage on a senator who plain old doesn't like what you like. Sorry, Pramila doesn't have to support Hillary to earn respect if her policies are sound. I'm in the tank for Pramila because of the economic policies she brings to her debate. Not because she is endorsed by Hillary or Bernie, nor because she has endorsed either candidate.

I'll let that 52-year-old pop culture reference pass, Dr. Savagelove, as long as you swear that "Degraded And It Feels So Bad (Right After It Feels So Good)" was not a lame 38-year-old pop culture reference.

@42 Never trust a politician who changes their position in an election year. The only thing they've learned is how to pander, and who to pander too. She's already setting the stage to double back on her being against the TPP by having her surrogates block a DNC platform statement of being against the trade deal.

@38:

"I suggest you not read the polls. Not a single one has been correct this election cycle."

Except for the ones that predicted Clinton would win the Democratic nomination and Sanders wouldn't, you mean.

@45. Never trust a politician period.
I thought that was a given.
Then there is nothing Hillary can do now to show she has heard? Is actually a living being who is intelligent enough to adjust her perspective in response to others imput?
This social and economic shift that people are calling for is not going to happen in five minutes. I see Bernie is pushing for longer term political engagement and I hope his supporters are listening.
If you guys are true political animals, then the long game needs patience. Intelligence. And leaving childish responses behind.
Hillary will move the process along.
In the next four yrs get the Republicans out of office, find a younger person to carry the torch for the next Presidential election. Bernie has helped set the path, it's your intelligent energy that can carry it thru.

@43
I'm not picking up a lot of 'rage' at anyone from DS's article. If Bernie is going to run as a Democrat, take their money, use their infrastructure, then he should endorse their candidate when he loses the nomination. Its a reasonable request. And Pramila, as a democrat, should give it up and endorse the Democrat candidate that won the nomination.

@47 It's all well and good for you to rally around Hillary from your protected haven of Australia, but up here there are some SERIOUS concerns about Hillary and her record. There is no human I would trust to have a meaningful Mea culpa on the campaign trail, and Hillary is definitely in that category. She's not a liar because she's Hillary, she's a liar because she's a politician.

@48 Dan said he spent the better part of an hour "laying into" Pramila because she didn't want to endorse Clinton just yet. I dunno what your definition of laying into somebody is, but it's generally pretty angry in my book (and Dan isn't exactly a calm cucumber if he's not getting his way).

@13 haha I can disagree with a comment but still appreciate its wit. Well done!

Bernie never had a chance and Trump has no chance. Just remember that the News's goal is to sell ads, not report news. It sells no ads at all to say that Clinton won this a year ago. But she did.

Regarding the weird hate toward Bernie, all he's done is run. He has done nothing wrong and does not owe Clinton or anyone a concession speech or endorsement. Bernie was not even a member of the Democratic Party until LAST YEAR. The luxury of his being an Independent from Vermont at his age is he owes no one a fucking thing, least of all people who did not even vote for him (i.e. Clinton supporters).

Clinton voted for the Patriot Act and the Iraq War. And up until a few years ago, she was against marriage equality. I would never vote for any candidate with so many mistakes against them no matter what they say about those things today. Many of us knew those positions were fucked up and wrong so why did she not know?

Embrace your Bernie if you love him. Don't be bullied into supporting someone you know in your heart is completely full of shit. She'll win anyway, so just vote your conscience. I'm voting Libertarian.

My fellow Berners, should Bernie NOT be the nominee, we do have another option in November's presidential election! The plan B option is Jill Stein of the Green Party. Jill is a Harvard educated medical doctor who refuses money from all special interests. She's for getting us on 100% renewable clean energy by 2030! She's for tuition free college and for cancelling of all student debt. Jill is also for universal healthcare, expanding social security and more! Don't fall for the "lesser evil" nonsensical argument. Jill Stein's platform is IDENTICAL to Bernie's platform. Please go to http://www.jill2016.com and take a look for yourself.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Let's stop the insanity and have the Green Party as our Plan B!

Also, with the exception of Bernie endorsed candidates, we Berners must vow to vote AGAINST every single democratic and republican incumbent up for reelection in November all the way down the ticket to dog catcher and try to vote in either independent or Green Party candidates. It would be a great thing to have more parties in government as opposed to just the corrupt two party system we have now. Hopefully, all Bernie supporters will join me in their respective states to do just that in November! Please do NOT write in Bernie's name on the ballot as ALL WRITE IN VOTES WILL BE THROWN OUT UNCOUNTED. Please click on the link below to take the Bernie or bust pledge (Bernie or Green Party pledge).

REMEMBER THERE IS POWER IN NUMBERS! THERE ARE MILLIONS OF US, AND UNITED, WE ARE EXTREMELY POWERFUL!!

https://citizensagainstplutocracy.wordpr…

Remember, if Bernie's not the nominee, please vote for Jill Stein of Green Party in the November presidential race!

@52:

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Let's stop the insanity and have the Green Party as our Plan B!"

You mean, like, voting for a minor third-party candidate who didn't even break a measly half million votes when she ran four years ago and expecting her to beat out BOTH of the two major party candidates this time around? THAT'S your "Plan B"? Hell kid, that isn't even a Plan Z. It IS, however, a textbook example of Einstein's (possibly apocryphal) addage.

@18: I chose Henry Fucking Kissinger precisely because I was well aware of that quote (and also because he's a war criminal, and Dan seems to have a soft spot for war criminals). If you think the quality of your sex life is indicated by the celebrity of one's partners, you are indeed in need of some better sex advice.

The more Sanders is able to wield his influence towards a progressive agenda, the better off Clinton will be in November. For instance, last week Sanders was pushing hard for opposition to the TPP as part of the official platform at the convention. Sadly, he was overruled by Clinton's people (Clinton was temporarily opposed to TPP during the primary, but now she's pivoting back like a good DLC dem). Trump has immediately seized on this issue (which will be huge in places like PA, OH, MI, etc), and since then Clinton's lead in the polls has shrunk. Clinton's worst enemy here is not Sanders; it's her own neoliberal/neocon tendencies. If Sanders and progressives lie down and surrender immediately like Dan Savage so desperately wants them too, they'll only be helping Trump.

Savage would realize this if he were capable of independent thought. Sadly, the DNC seems to have taken over his brain, with their overriding message: "PROGRESSIVES BAD!!!"

@17: Nailed it. Now if you omitted the close-italics tag, causing every subsequent post to adopt it (impossible in the way they've set up SLOG now, I realize), it would be perfect.

Yeah I would say it's not Bernie or Busters we should be worried about, so much as Hillary being a terrible candidate.

There's so much nonsense that comes from the Bernie side (there isn't a side anymore really, he lost) but the "just being for the gay community a few years ago" is utterly unresearched. Hillary supported allowing gay folks to serve in the military, she preferred openly, but DADT was easier to get through at the time. She supported civil unions from very early on, as well as the federal government providing benefits to same-sex spouses. All of these steps were incremental toward the goal of equality, which we are still marching toward. She's a Democrat who can get things done.

@ 51 - "Many of us knew those positions were fucked up and wrong so why did she not know?"

What makes you think she didn't? She's a politician. Doesn't that say it all?

But so is Sanders, and all those who think he's somehow purer because he was an independent all those years should remind themselves that he is now a member of the Democratic party: a thoroughly calculated move. Typical of a politician.

Just saying.

It's better that you not worry about us "Bernie or Bust" voters. Continue to think that we do not exist. Reality is that we will be the future of the party...most likely not the Democrat Party because many of us will leave after the election and form a new progressive party in line with Bernie's platform. A platform that you most likely don't support. You make a decent paycheck so 15/hr is beneath you. So is the thought of fracking and the environment after all you probably sit behind your computer writing insulting articles like this one, most of your time. So why would the environment concern you? Free healthcare for all, totally unfair right? For many of us who do support Bernie...its because he understands that we will never acheive a quality of life like most of you. I'm Native American and live on a reservation by choice...to help my people. Truthfully, many of my students will never achieve or experience all that this country has to offer. Bernie at the minimum gives me hope that one day they too will have opportunities that will at least give them a taste of what most take for granted. Bernie or Bust voters do exist but just like those that live in poverty, you fail to see them too. That's why it's easy to dismiss us, and yet know that Bernie sparked a fire in us and now we want what you have and will do so with hard work and hope.

honestly impressed that the input sanitization works, despite my attempts to break it

@56: I gotchu fam

HAHAHA OH WOW.
Seriously, you thought THAT would work? Hire smarter web people, you drips!

@59 So she knew the positions were wrong and took those positions, anyway? That's an error of judgement as opposed to an error of knowledge (those who took wrong positions because they did not know better). And that's worse. I guess it is about purity. Who was against human rights? Don't vote for them.

@ 64 - That's what politicians do. All of them.

You talk about purity? Don't be so naive. It's rather unbecoming to anyone of voting age.

@60:

(Well, SOMEBODY done broke the formatting, just sayin')

When your "progressive party" reaches 30 or 40 million voters, give us a call, until then enjoy hanging at the folding card table in the kitchen with the Transhumanist Party, Workers World Party, Pirate Party, and all the other Z-Listers in the political arena.

Behold! so as I brought the plague of bold italics upon the page, so I have taken it away. Am I not powerful beyond human measure?

Or at least beyond the measure of anyone who maintains The Stranger's website.

@67 I love you

Sure, Clinton is leading in the polls but how many will really turn out to vote given her life long record of not being a progressive? Remember what happened to Gore who faced an incompetent frat boy, understanding that Nader was a small factor in that election compared to low voter turn out and Republicans disenfranchising minority voters

@69:

Here are two very good reasons why they should turn out in November: Supreme Court Justices John Roberts & Samuel Ailito. The make up of the Court would have been very different had Gore won instead of Bush II. The next POTUS will be nominating one new justice right out of the starting gate (thanks to an obstructionist GOP Senate majority), and possibly as many as two more before their term expires. That alone should be sufficient to motivate voters; if not, there are all the down-ticket races at the state, county and municipal level up for grabs. It's not just about voting for President, it's about VOTING.

@67: Use your powers only for good. And don't get me started about how broken the website is. I thought they'd fixed the posting thing, but clearly not.

And, as an added bonus, when they rolled out that latest change, they broke profile picture editing, and seemingly have no interest in correcting it.

Today's Rasmussen poll has Trump leading by 4 points...
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c…

One of these days, I'll figure out why Hillary supporters keep writing and talking about this if they truly believe it doesn't matter. Why don't they spend time talking and writing about the nonexistent POTUS aims of Donald Trump instead? It's been clear for months that the man is doing everything he can to work his way out of the campaign and won't be a threat at all by November, if he's even on the ballot, but dumb a** Hillary supporters keep saying, "We've got to stop Trump!" Most elaborate episode of Punk'd ever. And of of these days maybe the Hills folk will wake up and realize what Bernie's always been about and why Bernie or Bust exists. Look beyond November folks. It's going to be a whole different ballgame, and most people won't be ready.

@73:

I don't know what YOU'RE looking at, but from where I sit there is absolutely nothing that would lead me to believe Trump wants out of this race. He is quite simply a narcissist of such supreme dimensions that even the idea he could be come President is too attractive a prospect to pass up. Everything that's come out of his mouth during this campaign, rather than indicating a desire to "work his way out", makes him sound to me more like a guy who feels so emboldened, so above playing by the normal rules, that he can get away with saying literally ANYTHING, no matter how offensive or provocative or uninformed or just plain bat-shite crazy, and STILL garner support from a significant percentage of the hoi polloi. Plus, he has a competitive streak about ten miles wide, and doesn't perceive himself as a "loser" no matter how many times he gets knocked down, so why in the world would anyone assume he would just willingly walk away from this? Even if he ends up being routed by the largest Electoral or even popular vote margin in modern U.S. political history, he's still going to spin it as a "victory", because the outcome will not have been his fault. Instead, he'll blame it on cheating, on the ineffectiveness of the GOP leadership, on anything other than his own incompetence or lack of actual leadership skills. And he'll probably make some serious bank on this no matter what, which he would still consider a "win" even if he doesn't get to re-brand 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue as the "TRUMP White House" come next January.

Very obnoxiously written! Treats Bernie supporters as if we are stupid just because we don't want to vote for Hillary. I am so sick of hearing that a vote for anyone other than Clinton is (effectively) a vote for Trump. I will never vote Trump. No way, no how! But I am not convinced I will vote for Clinton either. Voting for Bernie as a write in is at the top of my list. Voting Stein is second. Just not voting at all is third. Dead last out of four options is a vote for Hillary. Don't call it a "protest vote." It isn't. It is simply voting "for" someone instead of "against" someone this year. Hillary has sold out too much. I don't mind "flip flopping," as most call it, if there is a valid reason for it. We are humans. We grow, learn, and sometimes change our minds. But Hillary comes across as simply taking whatever stance on any issue she thinks will win her the election. I understand that she got burnt by Obama pretty badly--and might I add that I was for Clinton back then. However, wanting the election so badly it hurts is not enough. I want to hear a clear message and I want it to match the things I have been saying as an individual for years. ONLY Bernie has come out with that message. As soon as I read his quote saying, in essence, that income inequality is the biggest issue facing our country and we need to focus on uniting the races to fight it, I was hooked. I have never, ever heard a message that strong and that clear from Clinton. She seems too afraid to say it, probably because she fears it would turn off more moderate Democrats and more moderate independents. Too bad Clinton! I am left, and I want a leftist candidate. That's the real problem here--the fight to stay in the center to appeal to the nation overall, while Bernie supporters are crying out for more clear, more liberal views to not only be heard, but to have an impact. Has it been a 2 party system up until now? Yes. Will it be a 2 party system this year? Most likely yes (though with Trump being so hated by so many--including Republicans--we could be in for a surprise!) Does it have to continue to be a 2 party system forever? No. I think Trump winning (well, winning in numbers unless they take it away from him) the nomination is really more telling than the matchup between Clinton and Sanders. Voters on both sides want change! The Republicans themselves could easily break off into 2 or more fractions. The Democrats could too, or perhaps, the more liberal Democrats could convert to the Green party to increase their numbers. Honestly, voters seem to be playing a game of chicken with one another, and it has been going on for years now. Clinton and Trump (both the "presumed" nominees) are the result. Voters hate them. Some voters hate them both. The game of chicken is what got us here. No one wants to blink and admit that it is time for change. Don't vote for a candidate outside the 2 major parties. Why? Because you want to vote AGAINST the party you hate the most. Sad but true. Trump seems to have won the primaries because of his "outsider" status. More people who voted Republican seemed to blink first. They shocked the nation by rejecting real politicians in favor of someone who appeared to be extremely right winged, anti establishment with empty promises of Make America Great again. The Democrats, for whatever reason, came close to blinking, but then opened their eyes wide and said "nope, just teasing you." How close did Democrats come? Close enough that neither Clinton nor Sanders really won the nomination based on voters (which is pretty close to being evenly split). We have to factor in those superdelegates. While I have mixed feelings about the supers myself, I read an interesting article online saying that the only reason they exist is to overrule the voters if the powers that be think the voters made a mistake. What would be that mistake? Putting forth a presidential candidate from the Democratic party who would or easily could lose to the Republican candidate. (Sorry, don't have the link, but you can google the concept and simply think about why that is true). As Bernie said, "it does not appear as though he is going to be the nominee." But that doesn't mean that he should not be the nominee. Hillary Clinton is unliked. She had her chance in 2008, but Obama was more dynamic and engaging. To suggest that Bernie supporters who do not and perhaps will not vote for Clinton are spoiled losers pitching a fit like little kids is not only insulting our intelligence, but it is missing what seems to be an emerging factor in American presidential politics--Americans are so tired of voting for the same old, same old. They seem to be even more tired of voting against someone rather than for someone. By choosing Trump, the Republican primary voters have said they want to vote for him as an outsider with an extreme message. (While I can't agree with their choice--obviously--I do understand why Trump would be more appealing than someone like Cruz, for example, if I were a conservative). The Democrats have appeared to have chosen the same old, same old with Clinton--a Washington insider with middle of the road views, and, views which seem to be malleable in relation to her polling numbers. Who is going to win? I don't know. I will say this--if I do give in and vote Clinton (probably after crying my eyes out and perhaps having a stiff drink first) I WILL be looking for another party to join in the next election cycle. I have been a Democrat my whole life. But Bernie--just form the party and here I will come running with open arms! If #bernieorbust does not affect this election, that does not mean it will not affect an election down the line. We are ripe for that kind of change. If Republicans stick with Trump--thereby swallowing a bitter pill and just letting this one go--they might prevent Trump supporters from splitting off. Whether Trump wins or loses (and against Hillary, I think he actually could win), Republicans might be able to barely keep their party more unified in the long run. By sticking with Hillary over Bernie, the split might not come in 2016, but it is going to leave many of us looking for an alternative down the line. That scares me, but not enough to stay a Democrat any longer.

“Change happens when the fear of staying the same is greater than the fear of change.”

Change happens from the bottom up. Millions and millions of people voted for Bernie, and in truth, perhaps he would have more votes than her IF all states held primaries in the same fashion, if there hadn't been voter suppression and disenfranchisement, or even election fraud or at least incompetence, and if Independents had been allowed to vote either Democrat or Republican in all primaries. Being upset about that isn't being a sore loser, it's being outraged that one of our basic rights is being slowly taken away from us. For some reason, not many of the presumptive's voters are concerned with this. And it boggles my mind as to why. Whatever happened to standing up when an injustice is done, especially to your fellow Americans? Not only are there those voters who don't care, but many of our elected officials, our supposed REPRESENTATIVES, are silent on the matter.

This revolution isn't just about Bernie. Bernie or Bust really isn't just about Bernie. When many more realize that it's not just this election, this one man, or one of his ideals that we are fighting for, pushing for, and standing up for - then maybe you'll be able to understand - we have come to the point where the fear of the status quo is greater than the fear of change. We are the bottom. We are the change. And the time has come. If not now, when? If not me, who?

It's either Bernie or Jill for a lot of us in Seattle. And no I'm not talking about millenials.

Glad to see you finally came in and cleaned up my little demonstration, web people.
Here's some friendly advice: you'll save yourself a lot of effort and aggravation cleaning such up if you put a little time and thought into ACTUALLY sanitizing the input stream rather than just lazily appending one or two close tags to the end of each post.

It's remarkable how little factual evidence there is to support this stubborn assertion that Hillary Clinton is a liar and a fraud. Since 1992, when it became clear to Republicans that she and Bill had the potential to form a political dynasty, Hillary Clinton has been the target of a perpetual multi-million dollar cottage industry devoted to dragging her through the mud. Through decades of federal investigations championed by subpoena-powered Republican congressional committees and tabloid media outlets; through decades of inquiries and press conferences and interviews and court appearances and senate hearings; through thousands of pages of legal documents, tax returns, biographies, emails, and personal records dating back to her first years as a young adult; after all of this, the best evidence anyone has against her amounts to a handful of hollow faux-scandals and unsavory campaign contributors, and the most damning cases against her have come not from actual indictments, but from her often disingenuous handling of the media.

Consider this. During the mid-nineties, there was an advisor to Bill Clinton named Dick Morris. The Clintons had known him since Bill's gubernatorial campaign in Arkansas in 1978. During the run-up to the 1996 election, he was the single most influential individual at the president's ear -- more trusted even than Hillary, who had been crestfallen by the failure of her overambitious healthcare efforts. After being ousted by the administration just before the re-election (after getting caught with a prostitute), Dick Morris quickly became one of the Clintons' harshest critics, swinging so far to the extreme right over the past two decades that now FOX News won't even bother with him.

The point is this. If even Dick Morris, perhaps the person who has the most dirt on the Clintons, who has desperately salvaged an entire career out of betraying them, has been unable to reveal any true smoking guns or skeletons in the closet, then maybe, just maybe, the Clintons aren't actually the double-headed demon spawn they're made out to be.

Dear Dan: Thanks for writing one of the few articles I've seen in months from The Stranger that hasn't made me want to pluck my eyebrows from the inside. I'm especially grateful to you for the info on Jaypal. As a Dem PCO, I'll be looking for a DIFFERENT candidate.

@80

Yes I agree with that. There are legitimate reasons to truly dread a Clinton presidency beyond that, however. Political dynasties and oligarchs should be concerning in their own right. I think surely there are enough smart people in this country that we should be able to choose between candidates who are not the children or spouses of former presidents. Likewise, I think there is good reason to dislike her financial ties and to let your disapproval of Clinton's financial reforms in the 90s carry over into your disapproval of Hilary now.

I see those things as politics as usual, and I see no better alternative - certainly not Trump and it will be her or him (unless he quits in which case it will be her or some other terrible Rep).

What gives me real serious pause about Clinton, however, is her foreign policy decisions. I'm thinking of her not just as an individual but as a part of the US neoliberal power structure (which is preferable to the neocon power structure we had with Bush and to the what-the-hell-ever recklessness of Trump). This difference between Clinton and Bernie really can't be handwaved. I don't think it's an excuse not to vote for her if you are in a swing state (I will vote for her) since Trump's or a Republican foreign policy will be worse, but I do think they are accurate concerns. Her policy of isolationism towards Putin's Russia is terrifying- it could have catastrophic consequences in terms of proxy or nuclear war. I'm trying not to be overreactive here, but really she aggressively promotes alternatives to Russia's dominance of Europe's energy supply to the point that she assists in unrest in strategic regions- Assad did not face a civil war on his own. Those "sunni rebels" did not get weapons from thin air. She did the same thing all over northern Africa, and we are currently actually openly funding and arming Al Qaeda in Syria (JAN). Follow the money trail/ weapons trail to see where ISIS gets their guns. It shouldn't surprise anyone since Bill did the same thing in the Balkans and N Africa in the 90s, though for different reasons. And look a what happen to the billions a year we were giving the Iraqi military? Because they had NOTHING- not even a real military, not weapons, not fighters, nothing, when they folded under ISIS. Clinton was sec of state during this. Again, she and the neoliberals did not totally create this situation (Bush and his side are demonstrably worse), but they aren't exactly good guys either. Clinton's foreign policy is ruthless and short-sighted. This is simply true, and it's correct to hate her and attack her for it. It is incorrect to claim that a Republican would be better. There is a slight ethical difference between opportunistic neoimperialism and overt invasion/carpet bombing that translates into real lives, so it's unethical to let the second prevail. But the first is still enough to make you sick to your stomach. Bernie supporters have every right to hate her. She's hateful.

As for other accurate concerns and differences between Bernie and Hilary, I think that a well-organized progressive movement can press for long-term change by lobbying congress and pressuring a Democratic president (who appoints a liberal SCOTUS judge) with or without Bernie. Electing Bernie would have automatically achieved nothing. The work has to be done on the ground by a progressive movement over an entire presidency or two. This is something I really don't think Bernie or Busters understand. The point is the movement- NOT Bernie himself. And a Hilary presidency with a Hilary-appointed SCOTUS will be light years easier to pressure than any Republican presidency and a Republican-appointed SCOTUS. Bernie himself is actually irrelevant (and has never been particularly relevant).

And Hilary has a pretty good record on civil liberties here at home, whereas the Republicans actively seek to limit the rights of minorities, immigrants, women and lgbt. Therefore, it's really throwing everyone else under the bus to not make sure a Dem is in the white house.

My point is that Hilary Hate is real, and it's absolutely justified though not for the reasons you get on Fox News. And we can still be honest and strategic about it and admit that less evil is still less evil. It's irresponsible to let a Republican win.

Non-swing state voters can vote with more discretion.

Uggh, that's my rant into the void. You've just saved my family from having to hear it this weekend.