I Hate Hillary But I am Voting For Her - Here is Why

Submitted by capforfun on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 2:13pm

I know, I know she is a liar, corporatist and really corrupt, believe me I get it. I supported Bernie from day one as he was the first politician in my life (57) who I felt was both truthful and uncorrupted by the Oligarchs. In other words someone who would look out for me and my family. Finally, on the details I agreed with pretty much everything he said and represented.

Ok that out of the way, why Hillary? Well the reality is we are going to be stuck with either Hillary or Donald and the reality is he is not an option. He is a crazy sociopath who would absolutely destroy any hope for my new grandson. I could go on and on but folks, he is one crazy MOFO.

So Miss Hillary, what are to do with her. I think progressives need to be there on November 9th hitting her hard and pressing her letting her know that the things you were forced to support to get past Bernie are now things we expect done, period. What we have to hold over her head is the 2nd term and it needs to be made 100% clear that she will never see it unless she honors the most recent positions i.e. No TPP, Free college program, Single payer or at least a public option, dramatic increase in taxes on the wealthy, increase minimum wage to $15 and the list goes on and on.

We all owe Bernie a lot, yes I know he should have won but in the process he got Hillary on the record supporting progressive issues she never would have without him. Now it is our job to keep her feet to the fire.

So I encourage everyone to vote and vote Hillary, even if you have to show up to the polls with a cloths pin on your nose (I plan to).

Update - Ok, so I woke up this AM to see that over 100 of you have flamed me but unfortunately your premise is a bit off. First of all I am no Clintonite. If you look at my past posts here or on the other site which I have not posted on for maybe 8 months (and was banned from for weeks at a time for supporting Bernie) due to their insanity.

With that said, as I tell my kids all the time and scream at the TV to the Republicans, you haver to live in the reality world with the rest of us. Now is there anyone here who honestly believes that neither Trump or Clinton is going to be our next president? If that is the case, then pick your poison.

Tags:

#2016 #HillaryClinton #DonaldTrump

Vote

Comments

Submitted by RejectingThe3rdWay on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 2:25pm

Ah I love the smell of Trump fear-mongering in the morning!

FEAR TRUMP, you gotta vote Killary!

I will NOT reward GOP fear-mongering tactics!

I will NOT reward voter fraud, manipulation, and theft of the nomination!

Trump will actually do LESS damage, let's be real here.
No Dems and many Repubs won't support much of anything Trump tries passing
It takes a Democrat to cut social security. Bill almost did it, but THANKFULLY Bill decided to get a BJ that derailed his upcoming plans to privatize Social Security.
Trump is actually LESS OF A WAR-MONGER than Killary! Think about that!
Trump before he does anything too stupid will be impeached as Every Dem would gladly vote for it and many Repubs would as well using it as a chance to clear out the most stank of its garbage

Voting Third party sends a message, that we will NOT be taken for granted.
I am ending my one-sided abusive relationship with the so-called Democratic party until it decides to get counseling in the form of a true progressive make-over.

Voting for Killary is a vote for Wall Street owned government, it is a vote to normalize and give acceptance to blatant criminality, a vote to kill more people

Yes a vote for KILLARY is a vote to KILL MORE PEOPLE!

Hope you sleep well at night with that blood on your hands as you will have voted for her!

—

When I was a kid, Republicans used to red scare people, now it's the Democrats. I am getting too damn old for this crap!

Submitted by pro left on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 6:55pm

I agree RT3W

He is only concerned about being able to take his grandson to Walmart for some cheap third world shit, The rest of the worlds children be Damned. Let the blood flow!

Submitted by RejectingThe3rdWay on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:30pm

Please remind me which candidate

BLOCKED a raise of the minimum wage in a 3rd world country RAISING IT to still less than a dollar?

Psst...Her name is Hillary Clinton

Not saying that trump is good in ANY type of way, but trying to play off Killary as something better is completely fraudulent!

—

When I was a kid, Republicans used to red scare people, now it's the Democrats. I am getting too damn old for this crap!

Submitted by Shahryar on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 2:31pm

was this an assignment?

for future reference, the phrase "I get it" is a giveaway and should be avoided.

You're welcome.

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 2:40pm

When "I get it" is followed by "I am voting for her,"

there is a certain internal inconsistency, anyway.

And yes, my first thought was, "We really have been getting a rash of this kind of diary suddenly, haven't we?"

Submitted by James Kroeger on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:14pm

Oh yeah....

"We really have been getting a rash of this kind of diary suddenly, haven't we?"

Clear evidence of a really obvious effort by the Centrist minions to try to peel away some votes from Jill and/or Trump. Probably on the payroll of one of her PACS. They're pulling out all the stops.

Somehow, I think they're going to be getting more truth from our responses than they were really prepared to hear, stuff they weren't hearing from the echo chamber over there at Kosland.

I'd say there's at least an even chance that, if they stick around long enough, we'll be changing more of their votes than they will be changing our votes, especially if they were really once Bernie Sanders supporters...

—

James Kroeger

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:50pm

Given that she's supposedly so far ahead in the polls,

and 1/2 the Republican leadership is on her side, I'm not sure why her campaign is engaging in persuasion in mid-October. Especially persuasion of people we used to call "5's."

When I worked on campaigns, we would divide voters up in a 5-pt scale; 1's were those who were so enthusiastic for our candidate it would take a broken leg to keep them from voting for her--and even that might not work. 5's were those who were equally entrenched against our candidate.

Conventional wisdom at the time was that you spent no time or energy on either 1's or 5's. Now, Wellstone and Howard Dean altered that equation a bit, because they sensibly wanted to turn 1's into a volunteer labor force and possibly permanent political infrastructure. But nobody I ever heard of suggested spending time on 5's. If someone hates and distrusts your candidate, spending time arguing with them is crazy. Doing that 27 days out from the election seems even crazier. Hillary should not be trying to convince anyone less amenable to her than a 3 right now, and truthfully, she should be beginning the transition to GOTV (where you're not trying to convince people to vote for you, but trying to make sure your voters show up.)

Now add in the fact that she's supposedly a practically sure thing to win, especially after their woman-grabbing October surprise, and the persuasion aimed at those rigidly opposed is, in conventional campaign terms, totally wackadoo.

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI-Y0CMGwxo]

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by James Kroeger on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:07pm

I think the only reason you'd do it...

...is if you have lots and lots of dollars to spend and are looking for ways to spend it. A distinct possibility.

Then again, it could just be some individuals who are not getting paid, but just feel moved to try to get people to do as they have done. Not that it ultimately matters...

—

James Kroeger

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 9:58am

Unless it's not about the election

but rather about training Americans to ride herd on their fellow citizens.

When I was young, nobody would have lectured people condescendingly on their vote, over and over. That was considered in incredibly bad taste, given that your vote was a private matter, and a sacred one, between you and your conscience.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by lunachickie on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 11:01am

It's probably a bit of this and a bit of that....

A bit of desperation, doing what they can to sow fear and distrust;
A bit of desperation, because the internal polling (such as it is) doesn't look good for Her Heinous
A LOT of desperation by Team Trump, because as a Ringer, he can't be permitted to win--if he does, they've got a real problem.

And definitely, this:

training Americans to ride herd on their fellow citizens.

I don't remember offhand, but I think you and I are both fiftysomethings, CStS--I, too, remember when you didn't shame someone over their vote. People didn't ask you who you voted for, because they knew it was none of their damned business.

It's still none of their damned business, and I will not justify my vote to ANYBODY. Period. I happily volunteer who I am voting for--some don't like to do that, but I want it on the record that I will never, ever vote for That Woman, Hillary. She's a dishonest hack, and that's as nice as I can muster up. I also can't vote for someone who, IMO, doesn't actually want the job.

That leaves me Stein and Johnson, and no Libertarian will ever get my vote. Green it is! And I'm fine with that, because I *like* Jill Stein. I don't agree with everything she says, but she runs rings around every other candidate for that office. I'm looking forward to voting FOR her. And I'm going to do my damnedest to photograph my ballot this time, that's for damned sure.

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 4:39pm

I'm 48. It wasn't like this in the 80s & 90s.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by Ellen North on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 10:07pm

Thu, 10/13/2016 - 9:58am —

Thu, 10/13/2016 - 9:58am — CantStoptheSignal

Unless it's not about the election

but rather about training Americans to ride herd on their fellow citizens.

When I was young, nobody would have lectured people condescendingly on their vote, over and over. That was considered in incredibly bad taste, given that your vote was a private matter, and a sacred one, between you and your conscience.

As usual, damn good point!

And just wanted to add that nobody with a conscience would vote for someone without one.

This time, voting for evil (including the TPP corporate coup illegally and unconstitutionally offshoring domestic law in multiple countries into ruthlessly destructive corporate/billionaire hands, which every Presidential candidate currently running - except Jill - supports out of mindless greed/appalling ignorance) dooms life/oxygen production on the world within decades, at best...

The wealthy thinking that this global hostile corporate takeover in progress will make them richer should think about what will actually remain to them in a globally Biggest-Greed-regulated environment after more stock market crashes and the all-new 'legal theft' (hah!) crashed bank seizures of depositor's money takes place, no doubt somehow shuffling everything up to a very, very few billionaire insiders at the very, very top. There will rapidly be almost nobody left with money to tax/make more money from, of course.

The now-disposable once-wealthy bankrupts won't like working for toxic food, to 'compete' with the lowest global wages, like the rest of us, any more than will the rest of us 'lucky' enough to at least have this while we sicken and die of unlimited industrial pollution, for-increased-profit-heavily-contaminated food/water and unsafe other products and workplaces - assuming that we aren't all nuked/irradiated and nuclear wintered virtually immediately upon Hillary taking public office to forswear her oath of upholding the Constitutional principles she defies.

Some might hang on, otherwise, until the global oxygen production declines too far, though. And they will not be the lucky ones.

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Submitted by ggersh on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:29pm

Polls, reality, polls, reality

may be the reality is the polls are so off like they were during the primaries and the clinton campaign knows it so they are pulling out all the stops to try to right a ship that was always leaking voters.

Watching the tube it's all anti-trump along with many old "liberal" sites, but the places I now go to on the net seem to be anti-hill and many saying that they'll vote for Jill if not trump.

Remember Lawrence O'donnells quote on hillary, her numbers never go up.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD2eqs_VxfY]

—

I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish

"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"

Heard from Margaret Kimberley

Submitted by Hawkfish on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:36pm

Friedman was "interesting" in the NYT this AM

Here is the money quote:

The bigger Clinton’s margin of victory, the less dependent she’d be, I hope, on the left wing of her party, and the more likely she’d work with Republicans, as she vowed during the last debate, by “finding common ground, because you have to be able to get along with people to get things done in Washington.”

The Democratic Establishment has now publicly stated through one of their leading surrogates that the left in this country is a liability. I see no reason to vote for her.

And then we have:

The nightmare scenario — ruling out, God forbid, a Trump victory — is that Clinton wins with a slim majority and the G.O.P. holds the House and the Senate. The Democratic left would have a stranglehold on Clinton

He says that like its a bad thing, but I say if she is inevitable, then Friedman's "nightmare" means that we need to make her margin wafer-thin.

Vote Jill!

—

We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg

Submitted by Roger Fox on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 6:06pm

Take your proper position under the bus

You're welcome.

—

FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

Submitted by Caerus on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 6:09pm

Please make sure

Please make sure any wafers, hope there isb't even one, but if so, may they have lotsa worms in them.

Don't think she's going to win. Her surrogates seem frantic. They must know sumpthin' we don't! She's too sick, can't be near a flash bulb, no one is allowed to use mobile phones to take pictures when she's speaking. Can't remember name of reporter who broke the story, but they could only use those old fashioned cardboard cameras.

What ever is the matter with her, neurologically, as we saw on 9/11, it's unpredictable. All prayers to FSM, wearing my colander constantly as I pray please make it happen before election day.

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:53pm

Because if she wins we end up with President Kaine?

I had to laugh when I got to this part of the essay:

...letting Hillary know that the things you were forced to support to get past Bernie are now things we expect done, period. What we have to hold over her head is the 2nd term and it needs to be made 100% clear that she will never see it unless she honors the most recent positions...

"What we have to hold over her head" has always been exactly nothing. It seems unlikely that Hillary will see a second term, and by the looks of her, she may not see a whole lot of the first. Destroying nations and murdering or displacing brown people just wears you out. That means the Neocons using her as a hand puppet will have to work fast.

—

____________________

The political system is what it is because the People are who they are. — Plato

Submitted by Leu2500 on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 8:01pm

Lol!

"2nd term". How'd that work out for us with Obama?

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 10:05am

There is no left wing of the party.

Where's the left wing?

Is he talking about Merkely, Lee, Grijalva, Ellison, and Sanders?

If you want to push it, I guess you could include Waters, Conyers, and Warren.

Gee, three Senators and five Congresscritters. Hillary must be shaking in her boots. And anyway, where's the "dependence?" They do whatever she tells them to.

I agree w/voting Jill, but Friedman is really stuck in last decade's politics. Like a lot of people.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by Zenza on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 1:28pm

I would add Tulsi Gabbard for sure. N/T

Submitted by betterdemsonly on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:34pm

They want to make sure Jill

They want to make sure Jill Stein doesn't get anything, because that would really put pressure on them from the left, where as they can totally ignore polling and protests, which are a waste of time.

They also want a mandate for her betrayals on the environment and economy.

Submitted by James Kroeger on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:03pm

Hey Capforfun...You say you HATE Hillary?

Well, one thing is certain: you do not FEAR her the way you ought to. Surely every one of the bad, detestable, horrible things that are being said about Trump are true---except the Russian crap, of course. But you know what?

...that dour assessment of his overall worth as a human being does nothing to change my perception that we would all be a lot better off with an embarrassing jerk in the White House than we would be with Hillary Clinton in charge of America's military might.

It is important to understand that the most outrageous things he has proposed require legislation and I think it will be possible to defeat his essential sociopathy on that level, since he will face not only the opposition of the Dem Party, but also MSM and a significant number of people from his own party.

But when it comes to the President’s ability to put American ‘boots on the ground’ vs. some theoretical enemy, no such approval from Congress is necessary. Hillary Clinton will be in a position to get us into a costly war without having to overcome any domestic opposition to pull it off.

What scares me is my knowledge of her career-long investment in trying to convince the generals and the admirals that she is a ‘tough bitch’, ala Margaret Thatcher, who will not hesitate to pull the trigger. An illuminating article in the NY Times, How Hillary Clinton Became A Hawk revealed that she always advocates the most muscular and reckless dispositions of U.S. military forces whenever her opinion is solicited.

All of her experience re: foreign policy that she’s been touting is actually the scariest thing about her, when you look at what her historical dispositions have been. The “No Fly Zone” she’s been pushing since last year is just the latest example of her instinct to act recklessly, as it directly invites a military confrontation with Russia.

Her willingness to roll the dice, to gamble with other people’s lives, is ingrained within her political personality, of which she is so proud.

Her greatest political fear—that she might one day be accused by Republicans of being “weak on America’s enemies”—is what we have to fear. That fear is what drives her to the most extreme of war hawk positions, since her foundational strategy is to get out in front of the criticism she anticipates.

It is what we can count on. She will most assuredly get America into a war within the first 6-9 months of her Presidency, since she will be looking forward to the muscular response she will order when she is ‘tested’, as she expects.

How reckless is Trump likely to be? Well, like Clinton—and all other civilian Commanders-in-Chief, Trump be utterly dependent upon the advice of military professionals in deciding what kind of responses to order. But in the position of The Decider, there is one significant difference between Trump and Clinton.

Trump is at least willing and able to 1) view Putin as someone who is not a threat to the United States and 2) is able/willing to question the rationality of America’s continued participation in NATO.

These differences alone are enough to move me to actually vote for someone I find politically detestable, simply because I fear that the alternative is a high probability of war, and a greatly enhanced risk of nuclear annihilation—through miscalculation—under a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

Quite simply, she scares the hell out of me.

You say you hate Hillary? The problem is that you don't fear her they way you would if you knew some key facts about her had your wits about you.

Read the NY Times article. Educate yourself about the person you're planning to vote for. There's still time for you to wake up and see through the campaign personality that's been presented to you. You just might be able to save your children's lives.

—

James Kroeger

Submitted by snoopydawg on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 6:41pm

DK has really jumped the shark today

There's a diary about what one of Putin' BFFs said today and my god, the comments in make me wonder if the same people who joined the site because of the Iraq war have been replaced with pod people.
They didn't buy into the Saddam had WMDs, or that we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud, but they are buying into the fallacy that Russia is interfering in our election without a shred of evidence.

The diary is what a person said about the election.
Basically that if Trump wins there might be a chance for peace. But if Hillary wins there will be little Nagasakis and Hiroshimas all over the world.
The diarist took that to mean that if Hillary wins the election then Russia is the ones who is going to use nuclear weapons I read the statement as meaning that if Hillary wins then there is a good chance that if she does create a no fly zone in Syria, there is a good chance of it drawing us into a war with Russia.
I read 30 comments and just couldn't believe what I was reading.
As Jill said, "I know what Trump has said that he would do, but I know what Hillary HAS Done."
Yes Trump is a despicable human being, but as James has pointed out with the link to the Times article, Hillary hasn't seen a military intervention she hasn't been in favor of and she gives absolutely no thoughts to how many innocent people have been or would be killed.
Just watching her reaction after watching the video of Gaddafi's torture and murder tells me everything I need to know about how much Hillary values human lives.
The welfare reform bill saw millions more women and children sink deeper into poverty, and has she ever said anything about that?

—

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

Submitted by MrWebster on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:07pm

DK will next year be thee most pro-war site on the Web

If Hillary is elected, DK will become thee most pro-war site on the Internet. Okay, one of thee most pro-war, all in support of Hillary. To support Hillary, DK has taken on what would have been right wing reactionary politics in the 1950's. There are calls to prosecute Trump for treason, inquisitions into a person's political loyalties based on connections even a kangaroo court would thrwo out, and support for thee most vile right wing figures because they support Hillary. Lots of chest pounding war drumming to teach the Russians a lesson.

The poster subhir had a posting on Eugene Debs as a reaction to Trump saying he would have jailed Clinton. The thing is, DK has become from I can see a site of "faux liberal McCarthyism". As one pundit said, the democrats have become expert at mouthing the language of the left and empathy while pushing right wing policies in private. It won't matter how many articles for example they have on global warming--their advocacy position will be to take whatever position Clinton takes. An woe the person who dissents.

Submitted by snoopydawg on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 9:30pm

MrWebster, remember how many of them backed Obama's war on Libya

also, and that many of them were okay with the drone program.
I didn't see much outrage when people found out that he had a kill list which on Tuesdays he decided which terrorists and any civilian around him were next in line for being bug splat.
One or two people argued with me about his use of drones because in their minds it saved US troop's lives .
My argument was why was he using them in the first place on countries we weren't at war with?
And in the diaries against the increasing use of our military by many prominent diarists who no longer post on that site, there were plenty of people who backed Obama no matter what.
The Snowden diaries were pie fests because people were upset that Snowden revealed what the Obama administration was doing in regards to the NSA spy program.
They said that it was legal because secret courts made secret rules that over rode the 4th amendment.
And he got a pass for voting for the FISA bill which he had promised to filibuster because in order for him to become president, he had to vote for it but once he became president then he would work on rolling it back.
Instead he increased it, yet people didn't care.
There are tons more examples of what people were against when it was Bush doing them, but silence after Obama continued doing them.
It's just so damned mind boggling.
And I read that he has ended two wars and hasn't started any new ones.
I'm pretty sure that the Afghanistan war is continuing, the troops are back in Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine is full of dead people and those things happened during Obama's tenure.

And this is for capanfun

—

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

Submitted by MrWebster on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 12:27am

You are right, started with Obama and torch handed to Clinton nm

Submitted by sojourns on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:07pm

Do you need an antacid or anything?

you must have a strong stomach. I have a strong stomach and I can not bear that place any longer.

—

"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage

Submitted by FuturePassed on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:23pm

Works fast.

Give it a try if you ever have need of an emetic.

Submitted by gustogirl on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 1:00pm

Capforfun calls Trump a crazy sociopath

as if he doesn't recognize that SHE'S as sociopathic if not more so than Donald. Which of the two has caused the most harm? It's pitiful I'm asking that question about the presidential candidates, but the answer is quite clear: Hillary has a record of it, while Donald is far more narcissistic than anything else.

Submitted by Anja Geitz on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 6:02pm

We've certainly come a long way

Since the "I used to be for Bernie but now I'm with Hillary" diaries at TOP. Apparently CTR now thinks they've got to begin their propaganda with declarations of Hillary loathing.

Geez, really makes me wonder what her internals in the swing states are looking like if they are reduced to this.

—

There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 10:16am

That was the #BernieLostMe crowd. That had been planned from

the beginning. A group was supposed to declare for Bernie at the outset, then decide Bernie or his supporters or both were just too terrible for this person to continue to support Bernie. It was Hillarious how obvious they were.

Submitted by Caerus on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:30pm

Hasn't this individual written this essay before?

Wonder, what is the purpose of writing this again? Paid by the number of publications?

CTR must have lotsa money to give away!

I'd vote for Richard Nixon before I'd vote for the Clintons.

A.B.C. = ANYBODY BUT CLINTONS

Submitted by Shockwave on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 2:32pm

If you live in Florida please do

Here in California I am not so sure.

—

The political revolution continues

Submitted by crbngville on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:10pm

I live in Florida

and I will never vote for $hillary. Anyone advocating a vote for $hillary based on geography, is just advancing the LOTE cause.

No more lesser evil!

#JillNotHill

Submitted by gulfgal98 on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:30pm

I vote in Florida

and am casting my vote for Dr. Jill Stein. My vote is being made based upon my values and it is being done with a very clear conscience. I am tired of having my vote held hostage by the lesser evil modus operandi of the Democratic party. They did everything they could (including vote rigging) to prevent the superior candidate from getting the nomination. If Trump wins, the Democratic party has only themselves to blame by shoving the most corrupt and flawed candidate ever down our throats.

—

Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Submitted by fugwb on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:01pm

And I'm in Ohio

and clinton would get my vote when they pry it from my cold dead hand...or something like that. Of the top four candidates she doesn't even make the cut so for me there's the top three candidates...Jill, Thing 1 and Thing 2
Jill2016

Submitted by gustogirl on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 1:13pm

Isn't Ohio one of the states

where election results have been questionable for more than one election? So they might not pry your vote from your cold, dead hand, but they might very well flip it with a bit and a byte.

Submitted by Ellen North on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 10:26pm

Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:01pm —

Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:01pm — fugwb

And I'm in Ohio

and clinton would get my vote when they pry it from my cold dead hand...or something like that. Of the top four candidates she doesn't even make the cut so for me there's the top three candidates...Jill, Thing 1 and Thing 2
Jill2016

Going by the Dem nomination, they probably will try - I only hope they don't make voters dead to do it. (Sorta snark: with anyone but a Bernie miracle or Jill gaining the Presidency, they'll kill everyone off anyway with the corporate coups and thereafter simply by doing globally what corporations have been doing in any country where the people and environment have no protection from their depredations.)

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:53pm

Sorry.

Three Floridians in this house, none of whom will be voting for Hillary. I'll be voting for Stein. I'm guessing my family will be voting "No Confidence." Or possibly Big Bird. (I wish they were voting Stein, and who knows, they might.)

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by Arrow on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:02pm

Make that four

This Floridian is for Stine.

Better news is my wacko right wing sister is actively promoting Johnson.
So...Trump ain't getting her vote.

—

I want a Pony!

Submitted by RejectingThe3rdWay on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:58pm

If you live in Florida, PLEASE DON'T VOTE KILLARY

Vote Jill

Do NOT help sending more Americans to die and create even more enemies for the US!

We can NOT afford a war-hawk any more!

Title edit: As I was was responding, but the comment came off with some confusion

—

When I was a kid, Republicans used to red scare people, now it's the Democrats. I am getting too damn old for this crap!

Submitted by The Voice In th... on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:47pm

Jill is not a warhawk.

~~What are you talking about? Some kind of 11th Dimensional Chess wherein you vote for a candiate you don't want to win instead of a candidate you do want to win?~~

Ediited after OP clarification. Original post was ambiguous.

—

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Submitted by fugwb on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:47pm

That threw me off

also Voice. I think R3rdWay is responding directly to the diarist as in "Please don't [vote for Hillary] Vote Jill." Then referring clinton as the warhawk not Jill...
The Clintons are the Third Way. I don't think someone going by Rejectthe3rdWay would be a clinton troll.

Submitted by RejectingThe3rdWay on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:57pm

I was

Will put in an edit to clear that up

Sorry for confusion

—

When I was a kid, Republicans used to red scare people, now it's the Democrats. I am getting too damn old for this crap!

Submitted by dkmich on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:45pm

So don't do the right thing if you

might cost hillary the election? People in ALL states should vote for Jill. Only voting for Jill in states that are safe Hillary is like jumping out of the airplane as long as its parked on the runway.

—

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

Submitted by Big Al on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 2:39pm

Have you considered her warmongering credentials?

Her past actions that have resulted in the deaths of basically hundreds of thousands and the displacement of millions? The strong probability that she will institute a No Fly Zone (illegally) in Syria thus directly challenging Russia militarily and threatening a world war? That she is clearly more of a warmonger than Trump and is a de facto war criminal that should be placed on trial for crimes against humanity?
I have a new grandson too. Both of these candidates are a danger to him and everyone else. Voting for either one of them won't help.

Submitted by mimi on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 8:35pm

Hi, grandpa, imagining you as a grandpa, makes me smile,

I am sure he (your grandson) will fight tooth and nails, when his time comes and we still haven't had the revolution that would throw out the oligarchs.

—

https://www.euronews.com/

Submitted by Ellen North on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 11:53pm

And Hillary seems to have

And Hillary seems to have promised war crimes to big donors like Haim Saban, looking at the over-all promises made in the few glimpses we have of her private meetings and confidential speeches...

(Read 2015 letter at source)
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/hillary-clinton-tells-israeli-...

Hillary Clinton Tells Israeli Billionaire and Mega-Donor She Will Support Israel, Fight Palestinian Movement
Pro-Israel billionaires like Haim Saban have long supported Clinton, but she is risking her support from the Democratic base.
By Zaid Jilani / AlterNet
July 7, 2015

Israeli-American Haim Saban is one of America's richest men, the owner of numerous media and entertainment outlets — and a big Democratic donor. When the Democratic National Committee needed a new building, he coughed up $7 million to fund it, “one of the largest known donations ever made to an American political party.”

What does Saban want for all that money? “I’m a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel,” he said.

In order to pursue this objective, Saban has been pouring money into Hillary Clinton's super PAC, $2 million by one estimate. This week, Hillary returned the favor. She wrote a long letter to Saban praising Israel and pledging to fight the Palestinian-led boycott movement, which seeks to use economic pressures to end the occupation of their territories. ...

Within a couple of months, she goes to Saban's think tank and promises that with her, 'everything will always be for Israel', as Saban was quoted as saying of her following a private meeting.

(Please, anyone who hasn't yet, do read this in full at source. It says enough right there to justify placing Hillary in socially protective custody.)

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/09/hillary-clinton-goes-militaristic-ha...

Hillary Clinton Goes to Militaristic, Hawkish Think Tank, Gives Militaristic, Hawkish Speech
Glenn Greenwald

September 9 2015

...She vowed that in dealing with Iran, she will be tougher and more aggressive than Reagan was with the Soviet Union: “You remember President Reagan’s line about the Soviets: Trust but verify? My approach will be distrust and verify.” She also explicitly threatened Iran with war if they fail to comply: “I will not hesitate to take military action if Iran attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon, and I will set up my successor to be able to credibly make the same pledge.” She even depicted the Iran Deal as making a future war with Iran easier and more powerful:

Should it become necessary in the future having exhausted peaceful alternatives to turn to military force, we will have preserved and in some cases enhanced our capacity to act. And because we have proven our commitment to diplomacy first, the world will more likely join us.

As for Israel itself, Clinton eagerly promised to shower it with a long, expensive, and dangerous list of gifts. Here’s just a part of what that country can expect from the second President Clinton:...

... Then she took the ultimate pledge: “I would not support this agreement for one second if I thought it put Israel in greater danger.” So even if the deal would benefit the U.S., she would not support it “for one second” if it “put Israel in greater danger.” That’s an unusually blunt vow to subordinate the interests of the U.S. to that foreign nation.

But when it comes to gifts to Israel, that’s not all! Echoing the vow of several GOP candidates to call Netanyahu right away after being elected, Clinton promised: “I would invite the Israeli prime minister to the White House during my first month in office to talk about all of these issues and to set us on a course of close, frequent consultation right from the start, because we both rely on each other for support as partners, allies and friends.” She then addressed “the people of Israel,” telling them: “Let me say, you’ll never have to question whether we’re with you. The United States will always be with you.” For good measure, she heaped praise on “my friend Chuck Schumer,” who has led the battle to defeat the Iran Deal, gushing about what an “excellent leader in the Senate” he will make. What’s a little warmongering among friends? ...

... But overall, the picture that the stern Iraq and Libya war advocate painted of herself was as clear as it was unsurprising and alarming: She resides on the hawkish, militaristic end of the Democratic Party when it comes to most foreign policy questions. But the real significance is this: If Hillary Clinton is already this hawkish and war-threatening while trying to fend off Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Party primary while bolstering her liberal credentials, imagine what she’s going to be doing and saying about all of this once she’s the Democratic nominee running against a Republican in the general election and, even scarier, once she occupies the Oval Office and, as far as the U.S. military is concerned, assumes the title of Commander-in-Chief. ...

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Haim-Saban-Univision-Bets-Millions/2016/...

Bloomberg: Univision's Haim Saban Bets $10M on Clinton Win

By Joe Crowe | Thursday, 13 Oct 2016 10:30 AM

Billionaire and Univision owner Haim Saban is supporting Hillary Clinton for president, donating $10 million to her super PAC and apparently using the Hispanic TV network to support her campaign, according to Bloomberg.

Saban, an Israeli-American and chairman of Univision, the Spanish-language TV network and media company, endowed a think tank at Brookings Institute, now called the Center for Middle East Policy. In the entertainment world, he owns the superhero characters "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers."

According to Bloomberg, Saban aims to take Univision public, which coincides with his Clinton support and his company claims it is "the gateway to Hispanic America," and those voters turned out to get Barack Obama elected, reports Bloomberg. ...

There's more known about this particular exchange of favours - but it's anyone's guess as to what was promised to whom, in return for donations or whatever.

If whatever device allows for reading this in full at source, please do - it's very telling.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/858997d5d9a540688d316654a5bb0c15/clintons...

Clinton's State Dept. calendar missing scores of entries
By STEPHEN BRAUN
Jun. 24, 2016

WASHINGTON (AP) — An Associated Press review of the official calendar Hillary Clinton kept as secretary of state identified at least 75 meetings with longtime political donors, Clinton Foundation contributors and corporate and other outside interests that were not recorded or omitted the names of those she met. ...

...At a time when Clinton's private email system is under scrutiny by an FBI criminal investigation, the calendar omissions reinforce concerns that she sought to eliminate the "risk of the personal being accessible" — as she wrote in an email exchange that she failed to turn over to the government but was subsequently uncovered in a top aide's inbox. ...

... Despite the omission, Clinton's State Department planning schedules from the same day listed the names of all Clinton's breakfast guests — most of whose firms had lobbied the government and donated to her family's global charity. The event was closed to the press and merited only a brief mention in her calendar, which omitted all her guests' names — among them Blackstone Group Chairman Steven Schwarzman, PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi and then-New York Bank of Mellon CEO Robert Kelly.

Clinton's calendar also repeatedly omitted private dinners and meetings with political donors, policy sessions with groups of corporate leaders and "drop-bys" with old Clinton campaign hands and advisers. Among those whose names were omitted from her calendar were longtime adviser Sidney Blumenthal, consultant and former Clinton White House chief of staff Thomas "Mack" McLarty, former energy lobbyist Joseph Wilson and entertainment magnate and Clinton campaign bundler Haim Saban.

The AP first sought Clinton's calendar and schedules from the State Department in August 2013, but the agency would not acknowledge even that it had the material. ...

... Clinton's terse calendar entry on her 2009 private breakfast on Wall Street contains no details on what she and her 12 guests discussed.

Besides Schwarzman, Nooyi and Kelly, Clinton's other guests were Fabrizio Freda, CEO of the Estee Lauder Companies Inc.; Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks Corp.; Lewis Frankfort, chairman of Coach Inc.; Ellen Kullman, then-CEO of DuPont; David M. Cote, CEO of Honeywell International Inc.; James Tisch, president of Loews Corp.; John D. Wren, CEO of Omnicom Group; then-McGraw Hill Companies chairman Harold McGraw III; and James Taiclet, chairman of the American Tower Corp. Also attending was then-NYSE CEO Duncan Niederauer, who later accompanied Clinton when she rang the stock exchange bell.

Four of the attendees — Schwarzman, Nooyi, Cote and Kullman — headed companies that later donated to Clinton's pet diplomatic project of that period, the U.S. pavilion at the 2010 Shanghai Expo.

All the firms represented except Coach lobbied the government in 2009; Blackstone, Honeywell, Omnicom and DuPont lobbied the State Department that year. Schwarzman and Frankfort have personally donated to the Clinton Foundation, and the other firms — except for American Tower and New York Bank of Mellon — also contributed to the Clinton charity.

__

Associated Press writer Bradley Klapper contributed to this report.

This festering mass of corruption must be cleaned out of government and society, not have a new Mafia leader foisted on the American public in order to globally and immediately polish off the concept of democracy, with life/oxygen production on the planet to be sacrificed within decades to pathological, mindless, all-devouring and insanely destructive greed.

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Submitted by Borkrom on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 2:55pm

She does not care about you or us

I am sorry but Hillary it is in for herself- look at all the emails and how she and Bill have made MILLIONS without any regard for anyone else but their own well being. So I do not buy the argument that she will wake up the day after the election and say "Gee, I really want to be more progressive", sorry wrong, she is going to rule with an iron hand and push the establishment agenda/rule- keep the little person down while distracting them with entertainment and false promises (aka Rome Empire).

Therefore, realize why you are voting- you are afraid of Trump and the end of the world scenario. I myself will feel good about my vote because I am not afraid and will vote for what makes me feel good about myself when I look in the mirror the day after the election.

Submitted by thanatokephaloides on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 9:20pm

actually, "pan et circenses" would be better

she is going to rule with an iron hand and push the establishment agenda/rule- keep the little person down while distracting them with entertainment and false promises (aka Rome Empire).

actually, pan et circenses would be better than what Killary's offering. She offers us shittier and more expensive circenses and no pan for us in the 99%.

circenses -- circuses
pan -- bread

—

"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar

"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides

Submitted by The Wizard on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 2:58pm

Who represents your values the best?

I hope that it is Jill. I feel that she is even a better choice than Bernie, and I loved him. I need to vote my values, not be blackmailed into voting for the lesser of two evils, which would be Trump, by the way.

Of all issues I find war the most repugnant and she is an unrepentant war monger and the darling of the neocons. Trump approaches it from the businessman's perspective, let's talk. She's all bombs and no statesman at all.

Hillary will feed the swamp in Washington, Trump will clean it out.

Hillary will have the most divisive admin in the history of this country. There are more than few documented impeachable offenses from the queen. Half the country will be livid at her coronation.

Trump's problem is his mouth, her problem is her actions, 30 years of secretive duplicity, and actions at and over the limits of legality.

She has no ethics. We know, from the latest wikileaks, that Hillary knew that Saudi Arabia was financing ISIS and Al Nusra. Yet she took millions of dollars from them for the Clinton Foundation and then sold them millions of dollars worth of arms. Where did she think that the arms would go? That's right, slaughter in Syria and now in Yemen. Knowingly supporting terrorism meets the definition of treason.

Find a single action that Trump took in the last thirty years that merits the vulgar bile directed at him. Find a single bill that Hillary authored while a Senator that advanced any social issue. Find a single case where Hillary did the ethical thing that ran contrary to her ambition for office.

In my mind, Trump is by far the lesser of two evils.

—

Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.

Submitted by snoopydawg on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 8:14pm

Bravo, The Wizard. Well stated!

—

Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.

Submitted by Ellen North on Fri, 10/14/2016 - 12:08am

Actually, as a private

Actually, as a private individual, Trump hasn't had the opportunity or power to do the sort of damage Hillary did as Sec of State - which she also wasn't able to do as Senator, then, as far as I can tell, achieving only a few bills to name things.

Corruption comes down from the top - and with Hillary at the top... I can't even... but with absolute power abstracted from the rights of Americans and exerted by the use of the world's largest military and spy system, how long will it take Trump to casually achieve Clinton depths?

Edit: cut part of an incomplete sentence to make it (more, lol) complete-ish.

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Submitted by edg on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:01pm

What will your grandson think about you?

When he is sent to the Middle East to fight in one of Hillary's endless wars? Or when his parents are fried to death in a nuclear exchange with Russia fomented by Hillary? Or when the economy crashes, again, because Hillary loves Wall Street? You're not doing him any favors by voting for Hillary Clinton.

Submitted by doh1304 on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:18pm

"your grandson" will not

be sent to fight in the middle east, but only because the middle east will be deadly hot in about a decade.

—

On to Biden since 1973

Submitted by thanatokephaloides on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:02pm

Don't vote for the Pander Bear!

I think progressives need to be there on November 9th hitting her hard and pressing her letting her know that the things you were forced to support to get past Bernie are now things we expect done, period.

This is known as "pandering". Hillary is now pandering to us former Sanderistas. If you think she has the slightest inclination of honoring any of those things once in power, you are profoundly mistaken.

What we have to hold over her head is the 2nd term and it needs to be made 100% clear that she will never see it unless she honors the most recent positions i.e. No TPP, Free college program, Single payer or at least a public option, dramatic increase in taxes on the wealthy, increase minimum wage to $15 and the list goes on and on.

Take it to the bank: We'll have TPP. And the ACA will be allowed to collapse on itself and die. The minimum wage will stay where it is, and ever more jobs will be paying it. And free college will return to being a pipe dream.

There is nothing we can do to "hold her feet to the fire". Once in power, it'll be the Goldman Sachs and C Street Presidency, all the way. The same Southern voters who cost Sanders the primaries will vote for her over and over again, no matter how she governs.

Voting third party, weak beer that it is, is all we can do to deny our consent to the Pander Bear Warmonger without openly and directly supporting the Psychopath.

That's why I'm voting for Jill Stein.

—

"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar

"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides

Submitted by Leu2500 on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 8:08pm

If she's elected,

The first thing I'm going to do on 9 nov is email my all-republican congressional delegation & ask them why they haven't started impeachment proceedings.

Submitted by ggersh on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:08pm

She wasn't meant to have a first term

but she cheated. You can sell your soul, it's yours, me I'll vote my conscience and vote for #Jillneverhill.

—

I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish

"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"

Heard from Margaret Kimberley

Submitted by Writerinres on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:13pm

Additionally ...

with Hill we get Bill, but no eggrolls. And aside from all the damage that pair will do, from which there is no return, they will somehow install Chelsea, her kids, and their kids in the presidency or secondary power position in perpetuity. Lest we forget, Bill left office with the stink of scandal hanging over him and has unfinished business to accomplish: privatizing Social Security, lowering corporate taxes to 3%, ushering in a tech revolution in which robots take from humans what ever jobs are left, making global free trade deals on the Moon and Mars, and raking it in from whomever wants to pay enough, whatever that means.

Topsy-turvey we will be,
Democracy turns Monarchy,
Trade deals from sea to sea,
Say goodby to liberty.

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:04pm

If you look at it the right way

Clintons and Bushes ran our government from 1980-2008, and maintained serious influence from 2008-2012. 36 years, more or less.

I believe Reagan was a figurehead, and George H.W. Bush was actually running the show, so that's 12 years of Bush, followed by 8 years of Clinton, followed by 8 years of George W. Bush. They tried to follow that with 8 years of Clinton, but Wall St intelligently backed two horses, and Americans rallied around the new choice. Still, there was a Clinton 4 steps away from the Presidency from 2008-2012.

It's only for the past 4 years that we've had a government that does not have a Clinton or a Bush at least 4 steps away from the Presidency.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by Amanda Matthews on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:15pm

Not being contrary here but...

(This is from the OP):

"What we have to hold over her head is the 2nd term and it needs to be made 100% clear that she will never see it unless she honors the most recent positions..."

***
(This is me now)

How did that work with Obama and his 'campaign platform' as opposed to his continual drift toward the right in his desperate need for 'bipartisanship'? A bipartisanship that came at a heavy price for the little guys. He went from to center-left to center-right so fast he left skid marks. We held the House and Senate until 2010 and it can be argued that partial responsibility for the loss of the House can be laid directly at the feet of Obama and his program of bailing out Wall Street but saying no to jobs programs or bailouts for the plebs. That put a lot of people's 'teeth on edge', so to speak. The Clinton creature starts out from that center-right position regardless of the changes in her rhetoric, and all we can truly expect from her is that she'll just keep drifting right and those promises about a ' Progressive platform' she made to Sanders won't mean a darn thing.

The attitude of the New Democrats has been from the beginning: Fuck 'em, where they gonna go. Rahm Emanuel finally verbalized what they always thought of the plebs. We need to remember it.

—

I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks

Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:24pm

True--and she may not even want a second term, or be able to

run again at 71, or however old she will be in 2020.

Submitted by Borkrom on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:30pm

Do not fear- they will prop her up to run again

If she wins the first term, do not worry she will run again. I envision an old Dracula movie- at the start of the night when the monster raises from the coffin- this is the picture I see for her second term election run. She will do whatever it takes to keep her power.

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 11:31pm

Sadly for us and U.S., you're probably right.

Submitted by lotlizard on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 4:38am

The White House as an “Addams family” remake?

In the basement next to the private server, in his man-sized safe Cheney waits, dreaming.

C'thulhu fhtagn.

Submitted by Writerinres on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:36pm

I envision Bill,

Talking to Hillary's embalmed corpse in the Lincoln Bedroom at the end of a hard day at the White House raking in donations, like in Psycho.

Submitted by sojourns on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:13pm

Nice envisage.

—

"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage

Submitted by gulfgal98 on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:15pm

She will be 73 in four years

That is if she lives that long or is even able to physically finish out her first term. Of course, Bill will be the acting President even if Tim Kaine has the title. Seriously, I honestly do not think her health will hold up for four years, let alone eight.

—

Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Submitted by Meteor Man on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:17pm

Why I'm Voting For Hillary

Because I support TPP, fracking, environmental and ecological destruction, perpetual warfare and the end of Western civilization as we know it.

—

"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn

Submitted by Crimson Buddha on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:13pm

You win the internet today

I'm still laughing 5 min later.

Submitted by crescentmoon on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:29pm

Thank my lucky stars for you

Thank my lucky stars for you all. You are my daily dose of sanity and reminder that I am not alone. Jill, not Hill.

Submitted by JtC on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:32pm

Well, well, lookee here...

just to let you know capforfun, I'm keeping score.

Submitted by Caerus on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:40pm

Thank you JtC

Thank you JtC for your sane stewardship of this site.
Don't think I'd survive this election hell without reading the words of my colleagues here. Now the first place I check for real news. Still typing with crossed fingers Alligator Ed can find something, well, fatal for someone.

Anyone notice NO FLASH bulbs allowed at last debate. They had to use those old cardboard "cameras" instead of their mobile phones. Guess those "flashes" can set off a seizure for someone prone to them.

Good luck maintaining that edict. Giggling to think of a Protest by Flash. Red lights especially.

Acknowledging I'm w-a-a-y beyond cynical, especially since reading the recent emails. What a vicious manipulative crew she's got surrounding her.

Submitted by lunachickie on Thu, 10/13/2016 - 11:30am

No Flash?

I kinda think that gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "Flash Mob". And someone ought to do it--about 20 or 30 someones, after they appear, seemingly out of nowhere, at the next debate.

"Smile pretty, Mrs. Clinton!", she said, as she put the camera setting on "continuous" and started snapping away....

Submitted by shaharazade on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:33pm

I'm reading the Podesta wikileak

e-mails part 4-5. One thing they make perfectly clear is that any concessions to Bernie including the most progressive platform ever was all a ploy to come out of the convention with Bernies delegates and supporters thinking they had 'won' something. There are also a lot of Podesta e-mails that make it quite clear that fracking and the TPP are done deals.

They are interesting as you can read how her campaign coordinated with the media, Dem congress fixer, weasels like Harry, DiFi and McCatskill and online sites, to spin her rhetoric. Drafts of policy stances/positions written to be as weaselly as possible and yet still seem 'progressive to the 'self righteous' left.

Throw in the absolutely insane Putin did it and your essay is pathetic. If you hate Hillary so much why vote for her? Methinks you put to much trust in crooked Hillary. Not to mention that The Mad Bomber is a psycho killer and a war criminal. Maybe you should stop listening to Bernie and watching the TV and read some real news sources. Check out her horse's mouth Podesta and read his e-mails. Your fear is misplaced in my opinion. I don't think Trump will win as

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5423

I've lived through many national conventions and have found that it's critical that all delegates, especially those representing losing candidates, emerge from the convention feeling that they have won something, achieved something tangible. I think this is terribly important especially with people like Bernie's sometimes self-righteous ideologues. We want them to go home happy and enthusiastic in working their asses off for Hillary. >> >>

Hillary has already smoothly pivoted to incorporate some important elements of Bernie's ideas and rhetoric into her own message. Thus I don't think the 2016 Platform is a sufficiently tangible prize for the Bernie wing of the convention. I think they have to be given something that they can claim as a singular success. I think I know something that would painlessly work. >> >>

As you probably know I was the guy who drafted the "super delegate" provisions of the party's delegate selection rules. It was an outgrowth of the McGovern 1972 convention where very few of our elected officials were delegates. After the debacle, the "regulars," the Party establishment, wanted a big chunk of guaranteed representation at future conventions ( as much as 25%) The liberal wing was firmly opposed to this, saying it was undemocratic. Through the Mikulski, Winograd and Hunt Commissions I worked out a compromise giving ex- officio delegate status to Democratic members of the House and Senate, Democratic Governors and big- city Mayors. That would have totaled about 10% of the convention, what I thought was a reasonable compromise. >> >>

The liberals were ok with it but the Democratic State Chairmen's Association wanted to add party officials to this new class of ex-officio delegates. >> >>When the new delegate selection rules were voted on by the DNC, it is not shocking that the DNC ADDED THEMSELVES as automatic delegates. That drove the percentage up to over 15%. It has crept up even a bit higher now. >> ( wouldn't the republicans like to have that now!) >> >>

So here's my idea. Bernie and his people have been bitching about super delegates and the huge percentage that have come out for Hillary. Since the original idea was to bring our elected officials to the convention ex-officio >> ( because of the offices and the constituencies they represent), why not throw Bernie a bone and reduce the super delegates in the future to the original draft of members of the House and Senate, governors and big city mayors, eliminating the DNC members who are not State chairs or vice-Chairs. (Frankly, DNC members don't really represent constituencies anyway. I should know. I served on the DNC first as Executive Director and then as an elected member for 10 years.) >> >>

So if we "give" Bernie this in the Convention's rules committee, his people will think they've "won" something from the Party Establishment. And it functionally doesn't make any difference anyway. They win. We don't lose. Everyone is happy. >> >> Anyway, I don't know if Robbie is focusing on the convention at this point but the Bernie people have a lot of passion and we should try to keep them marginally on board. Just saying...

Submitted by Hillbilly Dem on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:53pm

Jesus.

Nice to know what they think about us:

So if we "give" Bernie this in the Convention's rules committee, his people will think they've "won" something from the Party Establishment. And it functionally doesn't make any difference anyway.

Rat bastards.

—

"Just call me Hillbilly Dem(exit)."
-H/T to Wavey Davey

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:16pm

No one I know thinks the platform means anything.

Apparently, the Bernie people at the Convention did not think so, either, because they booed the entire time.

Submitted by Hillbilly Dem on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 6:03pm

These condescending pricks

certainly didn't think that the platform meant anything either. He even put quotes around "won", they thought so little of us that they felt that they were throwing us a worthless crumb. His attitude is straight out of the Manhattan Island "purchase"..give them some worthless trinkets and these dumbasses will think we actually gave them something.

—

"Just call me Hillbilly Dem(exit)."
-H/T to Wavey Davey

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 11:18pm

Whoever thought we'd fall for it are the dumbasses.

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 4:09pm

ROTFLMAO

We want them to go home happy and enthusiastic in working their asses off for Hillary.

Yeah, right.

And yet, I have a touch of sadness here too, because I sense Podesta talking to people who have more the mentality of the Red Queen, and he's still trying to play politics as if he were in a corrupt republic instead of an oligarchy. IOW, he's less crazy than they are.

I can't truly feel sorry for someone like John Podesta, but I have a tiny shred of sympathy for the person who's trying to put forward a Not Entirely Wackadoo strategy--albeit a condescending and lying one--in the court of Queen Hillary.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:10pm

Pitch perfect.

That tiny shred of sympathy you feel demonstrates you can separate the strategy from the actors with ease. If the tables were turned and we were negotiating with the tea party, I would propose the same strategy. It's a common one that makes progress easier.

To me, the fact that Podesta had to push it on these political climbers and election hampsters, is very telling. They are so bloated with their own sense of power, the fools just wanted to sideswipe the Bernie people off the political highway. They are too dense and ugly inside to see that political bullying would only make Hillary's election more difficult or even impossible.

Hillary must have hired Orcs.

—

____________________

The political system is what it is because the People are who they are. — Plato

Submitted by shaharazade on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:37pm

I have no sympathy for the likes of Podesta

they are all the gun slinger's for Empire passed off as a democracy. The strategy consists of actors who all are working for the same end. Getting consent to govern by vote seems to be their goal. What a sham. Why do they bother? It's so baroque and yet so transparent if you look behind the smokescreen of hysteria and fear they pump out. No tiny shred of sympathy from me because in order to separate the actors from the strategy I would need to be blind to the end result they are working so hard to 'win'. It's not real. It's a con.

Why would i sympathize with Orcs? As far as the tea party side goes after spending hours checking out the e-mail release I signed up on twitter and found myself like Alice in a rabbit hole where the tables where turned. I ended up agreeing with articles on right wing sites and reading and agreeing with the tweets of tea baggers. Holy shit! Up is now down and red vs. blue is a useless measurement. Am i conservative? Hell no! But I do know a con when it gets this absurd.

Submitted by Bisbonian on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 8:02pm

Manufactured consent.

That is why they are trying so hard for our (5's) votes right now.

—

"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X

Submitted by UntimelyRippd on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:10pm

the contempt shown by the political consultoriate

is of a kind with the contempt shown by professional financialists for the "dumb money". both groups view their vocation as primarily a matter of duping and manipulating undeserving ignoramuses, so as to further the purposes of their own employers and in so doing, enwealthen themselves.

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

Submitted by thanatokephaloides on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 5:52pm

teeny-tiny micro-tweak

Check out her horse's

.... ass .....

Podesta and read his e-mails.

OK, now it's perfect!

—

"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar

"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides

Submitted by sojourns on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 7:19pm

Yeah right... The Russians surely

fabricated that one. Nice find. Thanks.

—

"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage

Submitted by riverlover on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:36pm

You see that support level for your choice here.

I agree that I can control not one vote beyond my own. But as a former Sanders supporter, one of many, I have pivoted to Stein. I will not cross the line that Bernie did.

—

Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Wed, 10/12/2016 - 3:44pm

We've suddenly had a rash of diaries like this. I'm not sure how

many times we can keep making the same kinds of replies.

First, vote however you want--which you will do anyway. But, please don't kid yourself that Hillary is saner than Trump, simply because each of them manifests insanity with different symptoms.

Just because two insane people are different kinds of megalomaniacal psychopaths doesn't mean one is sane.

Just because two people incompetent to be President are incompetent in different ways doesn't mean one is competent.

Just because two bigots have different levels of circumspection and secrecy doesn't mean one is egalitarian.

Just because two highly privileged white people pander to different voter bases doesn't mean one of them "fights" for anyone but herself or himself.

More http://caucus99percent.com/content/just-because-rant-alert

Please don't kid yourself that she is less of a bigot than Trump because she is not. She is only more hypocritical. http://caucus99percent.com/content/hillary-thy-name-part-four

And, as I said to the most recent poster who put up a thread like this, I candidly do not understand someone who claims to hate Hillary but plans to vote for her and encourages others so to do, but with no mention whatever of red states, blue states, purple states or strategic voting. That does not speak to me of defeating Trump, only of seeking to ensure a greater margin of victory for Hillary, especially today, when polls are showing her up over Trump by well over the margin of error.

http://caucus99percent.com/content/word-about-voting-november-okay-many-...