wow - and look at what Trump makes a speech - 1.5 million -
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-tr…

@104 "more liberal than 70% of her fellow Democrats..."

THAT'S THE FUCKING PROBLEM. Her right wing notions are considered left by the people we're supposed to consider the left. Her economic policies are considered center right in most of Europe.

Democrats aren't a liberal party. They're centrist at best.

@108. That's the fucking problem? No honey, that is democracy. The majority of Americans are right of Green, sorry. And that's why the Greens get no traction. Because the vast majority of Americans don't agree with their platform. And if the Democrats adopt it, they get voted out. Ricardo and a few others have taken me to the woodshed over europe. I really admire many things Europe offers, particularly the support for early childhood education. But this country is right of Europe and that is the matrix with we function. We can't "ram" Bernie's agenda down the country's throat because as a democracy the knuckle daggers (which includes me btw, as I am right of Bernie) have a voice.

So we have a choice - pick the party that moves us in a direction that leads us left, in the hope that we move the needle across the country left - or allow the right to further entrench their political philosophy in our government.

Raindrop can't you talk to yourself without involving the rest of us?

@108 -- No, you fucking idiot, that isn't the fucking problem. The problem is that most of the country, and indeed, most of Congress is far right. Holy shit, man, if a modern Rip Van Winkle fell asleep for 50 years and read your bullshit, he would assume that the Democrats were the majority party. He would assume they held control of the House (as they did for a very long time) and the Senate. A majority of governors must be Democrats along with a majority of state legislatures. It is only the centrist President of the United States -- a modern day Ed Muskie -- who is slowing everything down and preventing us from becoming the socialist utopia that a majority of people want.

But that isn't the way it is. The Nixon Strategy has been hugely successful. It is based on identity, not ideas. The Republican convention was all about that. Day after day of attacks and cheer leading, with nothing in the way of substance. Just about every columnist wrote about it, but Pitts wrote my favorite summary of events: http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/opn-c…. This is the majority party. This is the party that has -- by far -- the most power in the country.

If that doesn't change, it doesn't matter much what the president does. Blame Obama all you want, but the last six years -- and probably even the last eight -- would have been much the same under just about any Democrat, Socialist or Green. Congress is bat shit crazy, and any reasonable President would be forced to just play defense. President Obama, President Clinton, President Sanders or President Kucinich would do the same fucking thing. You are blaming the goalie for the team not being able to score.

But the last six years (and the next two) would be completely different if a Republican -- any Republican -- were in office. Mitt Romney is probably the best Republican nominee since Gerald Ford, but the country would be total disaster if he had won. He would have been forced (by his own party) to open the flood gates to the lunacy that is the Tea Party.

Speaking of which, what do think the are doing right now? Are they excited because Clinton is more malleable than Obama? Fuck no. They want a Republican -- any Republican -- in power so they can pursue their master plan. Their dream candidate (Ryan) sat this one out, but they will be pleased as punch if Trump manages to squeak out a victory. Ryan will then be able to gut the fuck out of the government. Not only will they roll back the small bits of progress we've made in the last fifty years (which include the ACA) but they will chop away at every bit of the social safety net that has been built since Roosevelt came to power (take your pick). Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, Food Stamps, AFDC -- you name it, it will be cut (or eliminated). You think Trump is scary, just imagine a President Ryan.

But the Tea Party isn't focused on the presidency, because they know Trump is a fucking idiot. They are focused on the House and Senate, and you should be too. If you really think the country is ready for a socialist president, then how about getting us a socialist congress. Holy shit, man, how about getting us a moderate House. That is my biggest problem with most -- not all -- of the Bernie or bust people. They are focused only on the presidency, and ignore the fact that most of the really terrible shit in this country is the result of an election that occurred six years ago. I really don't give a shit if you sit this one out. As stupid as this country is, I don't think they are stupid enough to elect Trump. But here is a crazy idea. If you can't find it within yourself to support the head of the ticket, how about you go out there and put that energy into electing leftists running for Congress. You can start by getting rid of Reichart in the 8th. If half the people willing to bust their ass for Bernie were to bust their ass for Ramos, he would win easily. You could then tell him (Tea Party style) who put him into office. He would help support a very progressive agenda, which (believe it not) Hillary Clinton would be all too happy to sign.

@108: Ohhhh, I see the problem. When I say "liberal" I mean "liberal", and when you say "liberal" you mean "far left ideologue". THERE'S the confusion!

"You are blaming the goalie for the team not being able to score." THANK YOU!

@110: So then why are you pinging me for a confirmation?

@109/111. You're both wrong according to actual metrics, such as polling. A vast majority of Americans believe the rich pay too little in taxes (http://www.gallup.com/poll/190775/americ…).

Americans want tougher regulations on Wall Street (http://thehill.com/regulation/212537-pol…).

A majority of Americans still want a public option (http://www.pnhp.org/news/2015/january/ma…).

Your assertion that Americans are conservative flies in the face of all evidence, especially when it comes to economic matters.

And while it's typical of neoliberals to blame Congress for everything, the Obama Administration chose on its own not to prosecute Wall Street (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuess…).

The Administration didn't need the go-ahead of Congress to kill innocents in drone strikes (https://theintercept.com/2016/07/01/obam…).

Nor did Congress stop it from accelerating President G.W. Bush's constant surveillance on American citizens (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/articl…).

President Obama didn't need Congress to prosecute more whistleblowers than all previous presidents combined (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015…).

If you were honest, you'd just say you don't give a damn about the vast majority of Americans who suffer due to the policies of both parties. But you aren't honest, so you're going to blow smoke. It's not going to fool most people these days.

@39 (deux):

That's precisely what extremists on both the Right AND the Left pine for: to have everything just go completely to Hell in the proverbial hand basket, because that's the ONLY scenario - a complete and utter societal breakdown - that gives them even a snowball's chance of getting anywhere close to what they want: complete control. I think that's why Trump is drawing such support from the extreme Right: because deep down in the darkest nadir of their primitive animal brains they sense he is their ideal envisionment of The Guy Who Might Just Bring It All Down. And that, if for no other reason, is why a Trump presidency would be an absolute disaster for this nation.

But those on the extreme Left really aren't that much better when it comes down to it.

Ideological purists of whatever stripe, despite their protestations to the contrary, aren't really about policy; they're all about POWER. That's why it always becomes a pissing-match with them: 90% commitment to the cause isn't good enough, because there's always someone who demands 95%; but then there's always someone else demanding 97% or 99%, and if you can't achieve that, well fuck you, you clearly aren't really dedicated, at least not as dedicated as THEY are. This is precisely what we've seen from some of the Bernie Bro's since he endorsed Clinton: their ideological savior, Our Last, Best Hope, became overnight a sell-out, a turncoat, a loser, co-opted, whatever term of derision and betrayal they can devise. They couldn't convince the majority to take their side, they're butt-hurt in the extreme, and now they would rather see everything come crashing down, because it's they only way they think they can WIN; and it's ALL about the winning with them.

Ideologues play to win at all costs, it's all or nothing for them, and if they can't get it ALL, then they're going to do their damnedest to see that nobody else gets ANY. That's a child's way of looking at things. Mature adults, on the other hand, negotiate and compromise to win the best deal they can get, because that's the ONLY way you can play successfully with other adults.

@39:

As an addendum, I think it's worth noting that it's not just the Extreme Right that now seems to be pining for a Trump presidency, but from what we've been hearing out of the most virulent of the Pro-Sanders/Anti-Clinton camp, they seem to share that same sense of hope, if only that Trump WILL in fact bring it all crashing down, so they can rush in and fight it out with the survivors to pick up the pieces of whatever socio-political structure remains in the aftermath. They want to be the scrappy little ground-hugging mammals taking over from the big lumbering non-adaptable archosaurians after the Big Extinction Event; problem is, for that to happen you need an actual Big Extinction Event, and I suspect they envision Trump as bringing us all one step closer to its fruition.

M le Comte - Not just anti-Clintonites. Half my headway in dissuading lukewarm Trumpers has come from convincing them that, like Mr Limbaugh in reverse, a Trump victory would be the best thing that could happen to the SJWs the lukewarm Trumpers want to anger. Just as the Clinton, W presidency made Mr Limbaugh the behemoth he is today, I'm sure many SJWs, while they may be voting for Mrs C, know that a victory for Mr T means they get to spend the next four years in their favourite role as attack dogs rather than having to spend the next four years defending Mrs C's being unable to do anything they want and only accomplishing things they don't want (not to mention appointing reverse Souters to the Supreme Court).

@114. I don't remember reading anyone thinking Obama's shit doesn't stink.
He didn't go start a new war. No Vietnam or Iraq. America, check out what your presidents have done in your name. The Republican ones, close check of them.
What is all this hippie shit? Not going to San Fran with flowers in your hair next, are you. Politics, running countries, is dirty business.
Obama has kept his humanity, as well as making some dumb choices.

@114 -- Americans want this left win proposal or that left wing proposal. Yet they keep electing Republicans (at every level but the White House). What gives?

Oh, I don't know, maybe it is because Americans are fucking idiots. Maybe it is because they want all the niceties of government, but not to pay for it. Maybe it is because Democrats are smart when it comes to policies, but stupid as hell when it comes to politics. They get excited when a new savior comes along (look, a black man that might be elected President -- Yes we can!) then sit on their asses when it comes to doing the hard work (I voted two years ago -- fuck it). Then again, maybe it is because of redistricting. The House is gerrymandered to support Republicans, the Senate favors the Republicans (natural gerrymandering if you will) but the only race that is national favors the Democrats. How the hell did we let that happen? Oh yeah, because not enough Democrats (or Socialists, or Greens or whatever you want to call the left) bothered to show up and win state wide races six years ago.

Again, the contrast with the fucking idiots in the Tea Party is startling. They win race after race at every level, but a handful of left wingers are happy to throw an occasional hissy fit, even if it causes the worst President ever to be elected. Stop bitching about how horrible the Democrats are and get Republicans kicked out. Just about every political problem in this country is because Republicans -- very, very far right Republicans -- have too much power. They pass absolutely horrible bills, and pressure Democrats to move to the right. It all started with Reagan, which is why the party faithful loves him so much. Issue after issue the country is pushed to the right, and it is because of Republicans. For example, there is no way in hell that Congress would have cut food stamps if the Democrats were in power and you know it. Do I give a damn about the Americans that suffer because Republicans have too much power, and as a result go hungry every night? You bet your ass I do. I'm a Democrat.

Complain all you want about both parties, but you have no strategy. My strategy is pretty fucking simple: Defeat stupid Republicans. Defeat them at every level. If that means I have to put up with a Democrat who is less than ideal, so be it. But until more Democrats win, we can't make progress in this country. Once Democrats win, they might be able to pass progressive legislation, they might not. But I sure as hell know that it won't happen until they win, and win consistently.

Of course I'm going to vote for Clinton. Just look at who the other Clinton's SCOTUS appointees are--Ginsburg and Breyer--and we'll get more of the same under Hillary Clinton, while Trump will appoint a bunch of white Clarence Thomases.

Having said that, ugh, now that Wasserman Schultz has been pushed out of the DNC, Clinton is appointing her as an "honorary chair" of her presidential campaign.

hmmm it took us 95 years to get rid of slavery, another 100 years to get the civil rights laws passed. Women didn't get the right to vote until 1920. It took 100 years to even pass a law that begins too address health care as a national issue (no "Obamacare" is not national health care it is an approach to it).

I could go on, but the point is every fucking progressive step this nation has ever made took decades.

And all these far left wing nut jobs expect me to believe that if we just elect their candidate (who is now supporting Hillary because he is not a nut job) everything will change over night. Talk about whacked out on goofballs delusional.

Oh they want stuff... but wont pay for it, not even the Bernie supporters

In the 2000 presidential election, Florida threw the election to George W. Bush. Florida vote tally:
Bush -- 2,912,790
Gore -- 2,912,253
Nader -- 97,488
There were less than 600 votes between Bush and Gore. Had it not been this close, there would have been no call for a recount, a recount the S.Court stopped. The result of the votes for Nader was a less than progressive Bush Presidency with wars, environmental degradation, etc.

It was a binary choice then, and it is a binary choice now. Trump or Clinton. No one else can be elected. We all know this; it's a matter of numbers. The two options offered us are not perfect. They cannot be, they are human. But one or the other will be our President. Our collective choice -- whatever it is -- will have long-lasting effects. Again, we all know this.

I am modest enough to be able to vote for a candidate who does not represent everything that I want. This election is not just about me and my feelings. It is about what will happen to this country if one or the other is elected. There is a very real difference between Clinton and Trump. There is a very real difference between Clinton Presidency consequences and Trump Presidency consequences.

Some people claim that "bad" results will "Not be their fault" if they do not participate in the binary choice before us. But they are choosing to not participate. So any "bad" results will be due, in part, to their actions and choices, regardless of what they claim.

People have the right to vote any way they wish, or to not vote at all. But it would be nice if the ones refusing to participate in the only real choice before them had the courage and honesty to admit that their choices could have very negative consequences.

@124 I'm looking at negative consequences regardless of the winner. We have a grossly corrupt two party system that continues because we allow it to. I find it hilarious that Dan, who has been a rabid dick bag to Bernie supporters, is being silent in the wake of Wikileaks' DNC email release. Gary Johnson has my vote.

No jujubee80, Donald Trump has your vote.
It's great timing for these emails to come out. Let the fuckers clear the air, and stand together against the monstrosity of trump. You just standing to the side.

No, I'm refusing to support a lying, cheating political hack who stood by her rapist husband.

Lavagirl, the timing of the leak impacts its veracity in your mind? What kind of mental gymnastics do you go through to make that sit right?

@125: I would love to have the luxury of voting for a Johnson/Weld ticket. It's tempting, and it's fun being smug. Kind of like the warm feeling of a sip of an expensive cognac. But clearly - there is no indication that Trump would satisfy your's or anyone's convictions, regardless of ideology. Might as well elect a paranoid schizophrenic. Re-read #124.

@128: She didn't actually say that.
But while we're on the topic, the documents were leaked by Russian hackers trying to meddle with our election.

@130, she implied that the timing made clear the agenda behind the leak and that it lessened the relevance. I agree that Russia clearly is trying to meddle. I disagree that it makes a difference. I would truly love to know how you folks justify blindly following the Clinton bandwagon. Were the RNC to have a similar leak of emails outlining clear manipulation of campaign funds and democratic process (not to mention a hefty dose of antisemitism!) this forum would not hesitate to condemn them. Try not being a total hypocrite-it's fun!

Yes, this Russian link is a little scary.
What I meant @128, is that if this leak was going to come out anyway, best now just as the Convention is about to start. The various parties can talk, find a way thru. Thanks Venomlash.
And @128. That's all well and good.
If you vote a third party, your vote is going to trump, indirectly. You can bluster all you like.
Long as you purists don't come back here complaining in a yrs time, how trump's govt is fucking lives up.

@106
I'm not talking about speaking fees. Look at her donor list. The people paying for her champaign ro curry political favor with her. It reads like a directory of Wallstreet. https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/…

The hate so many of you show for Clinton is appalling. What you have criticized -- no, vilified -- her for is nothing more than what every politician, including most Presidents, has shown in their public life. None of it is unusual. So what is it? Why the angry animus? And why do all of you appear to know her every thought and action, even though you've never even been in the same building with her? I was an adult during Lyndon Johnson's administration; he was one of the slimiest politicians ever in public office. Clinton couldn't possibly come up to his disgusting public and personal habits and speech. And yet he put in place so many good, necessary pieces of legislation. So will Hillary. But the way you're going now, you won't be able to admit that.

@135 " Why the angry animus? And why do all of you appear to know her every thought and action, even though you've never even been in the same building with her?"

I think most it has to do to the fact that the Clintons have spent 26 years in the rarefied air of the Presidency, in office out of office, in the Senate, in the Cabinet, always there always in the running. Lay on top of that the fact for each and every one of those 26 years the Republicans have attacked their every move like rabid dogs.

Nothing has ever stuck but in away that fact just feeds the fires of suspicion and anger.

An entire generation has grown up with the Clintons always being in the Presidential air and always being attacked.

@133: any vote for a third party is an indirect vote for trump.
Why are you guys even here? Go to trump's support sites, they'll welcome you.

@108/110 No. Most people are anti-Democrat because they see Democrats as spineless valueless centrists who don't have a central philosophy and the values they do have are made up on the fly at any given moment. Most would probably go left if they had a True Left option, but instead we're given a Goldwater Girl vs a pseudo-populist who actually knows how to prey on the language they speak. There is no fiscal liberal in the Democratic Party leadership. And the "big tent" party is so desperate for membership that they don't know how to crack the whip and lead even when they have the majority. But, that's just talking to actual Republicans and not sitting in my own echo chamber and making crazy assumptions about people I never talk to.

@112 Let's be honest, when you say liberal, you mean a Goldwater Republican.

@124 I wish that the people would actually blame the candidates running for not getting a majority of votes rather than blaming the people who decided not to vote for your asshole. Gore and the DNC screwed the pooch all on their own in 2000. Just like they're doing in 2016. (It sounds like you need the far left wing nut job vote since you keep begging for it, but are unwilling to give us a candidate to meet us even half way)

@137 You're from Australia. Why the fuck are you even here?? Are you that needy?!

@136 Add to that, of the past quarter century, we've had 16 years of a Democratic President and 8 of a Republican. What has been gained for everybody but the rich? An ever spreading inequality gap, millions more in jail, no progress on the war on drugs at a Federal Level, an ever more regressive tax system, and an income level that's been in stasis or decline. We have a universal health care system that shackles us, for life, to a for profit healthcare industry with no control over profits. We have a military budget that's out of control.

And, the Democrats are going to come around and blame the Republicans for it all. The Ds have had a role in it too? Signing bill after bill to make it happen. NAFTA, TPP, crime bill, eliminating Glass Steagal. That's all on Democrats hands...

@139. Yes I'm needy. For a world where trump doesn't fuck the planet further.
I'd be glad to just let you all be, act out your self indulgent bullshit; thing is, whoever runs the U.S. is a big deal for the whole world.
So, why are you here? a trump supporter, even one who votes for him indirectly, is still a trump supporter.

@137 I'm here and will continue to be because I'm entitled to my voice and my vote. I had no idea you are Australian and won't be voting at all here--I find it beyond hilarious but very much in keeping with the spirit of your comments that you believe my voice/vote should 'go away' to suit your foreign agenda. Fucking priceless.

Foreign agenda? You're funny.
I am not critisizing your idealism. Hopefully all this political energy will continue past the elections, will push thru so many of the changes Sanders has put forth.
It's the stubbornness that is so stupid. Trump is a very dangerous man. And by not giving your vote to Hillary, you are helping him get elected.

It was meant to be funny...because it is.

@141 Are you actually a covert Trump supporter? Because, after Clinton's actions this weekend (making disgraced DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz into her Honorary Chair), there should be absolutely no Sanders supporters willing to give the DNC the time of day.

And, if they're being called Trump supporters by annoying foreign fuckwits like you, I wouldn't blame them for voting Trump just to fuck over the Hillary campaign.

Bottom line: Trump has articulated aspirations to be the North American analog to Vladimir Putin. What more does a person need to know about him to realize he's dangerous, unhinged, and a threat, not just to our political and economic stability, but as de facto "leader of the Free World", to everyone else on the planet to some degree?

Anyone sitting on the sidelines, or worse, actively seeking his election, whether out of spite or some misbegotten sense of moral absolutism, does not get a free pass here. If this demagogue ends up in the White House, EVERY SINGLE PERSON who helped to put him there, whether by action or inaction, will be complicit in what results - no exceptions. History will be your judge, not us.

@146 And that includes people who voted for Hillary Clinton, the failed candidate, in the primary.

@147: I'll see you eat crow in November.

@145. I realize you're just a
kid( or I hope you are), hence your rational abilities not quite developed yet. So, you are suggesting a fascist narcissistic maniac
like trump should win, just to spite Hillary's campaign?

@ 138
@124 I wish that the people would actually blame the candidates running for not getting a majority of votes rather than blaming the people who decided not to vote for your asshole.

I was not aware that my asshole was in the running. I think you are misinformed about that. It is a cute little thing, but far too shy for politics.

I do not denigrate you for your voting choice. I merely say that it would be nice if you "owned" the consequences of your choice. It appears that you are denying any responsibility for any consequences in this matter. Are you saying that you have no power in this arena?

@147:

That would make sense - except for one very obvious fact: Sanders didn't beat Clinton in the Primaries. He was the true "failed candidate" (although I realize that wasn't your meaning, but it's valid nevertheless) and as such is no longer a factor, so voters will have to chose between the two candidates who actually advanced to the General.

@148 Whatever, hypocrite.

@151 Hey, I'm just putting blame where blame lies. If Clinton loses in the general, anybody who voted for the losing candidate in the primary is culpable.

I mean, the first step to failure is to have a shitty candidate. And we told all the Hillary supporters that she was a Loser well before the primaries even started. So, it's all on those supporters.

@ 152
@151 I mean, the first step to failure is to have a shitty candidate. And we told all the Hillary supporters that she was a Loser well before the primaries even started. So, it's all on those supporters.

In #150 I asked you if you were denying responsibility for elections outcomes because you felt that you had no power in this arena. I see that your answer is "yes." Feeling powerless is a sad and dark place. No wonder you strike out in anger and fear.

But you do have power. Remember, the winning candidate will dance "with the ones that brung 'em." Sanders voters do not have the numbers to get a spot on Trump's dance card. We welcome you on ours. Make it rewarding for the Ds to tango left. Carrot, not the stick.

@152: You can be a delusional dickweasel all you want. I'll just be here alternately slugging down coffee and booze, as I am wont to.

@153 Remember, the winning candidate will dance "with the ones that brung 'em."

They never have. And they will continue to ignore us as long as they believe our votes are secure.

For example, even after our city council sent our state senators a letter to legalize rent control, not even the Seattle representatives want to touch that idea.

Another example, we wrote to our Democratic representatives to be against TPP, and they still supported it anyways. Both of them.

Do they dance with us or take us for granted? Clinton has made it pointedly obvious that it is the latter.

@155
the winning candidate will dance "with the ones that brung 'em." They never have. And they will continue to ignore us as long as they believe our votes are secure

But are you truly "bringing them?" Are you campaigning for them, funding them, volunteering for them? Or are you doing all this for others who do NOT get elected, and then expecting the winners to cater to you? Writing to say "I want" when you can point to how you have helped them is much more effective than saying "I want" without ever having been part of four-square.
Of course, this is exactly why citizens United should be overturned...

@156 Campaigning, volunteering or fundraising for them? Hell no. Advocating for them? I used to. But, they've done bad things for decades, and gotten worse about actually caring about the people. I voted for many of them a few times, but have recently decided there was a better option for my vote in many of the elections.