I respect that viewpoint. I really do. But I’m not sure what has actually been accomplished policy-wise, since a platform is a hypothetical based in ideals. It’s easy to have ideals and get people excited about them. It’s much harder to turn those ideals into substantive legislation.

There are thousands of people booing and jeering our only shot inside and outside the convention hall, and I’m the “ideological purist”?? I just want a democrat to beat Trump. I would’ve been perfectly happy if that person had been Bernie, because I agree with his policies. Doesn’t mean I like him, or owe my…

If you need to be won over, when not voting Hillary is support for Trumps election, there’s nothing to be said.

I just find the guy insufferable. Have since before he ran. The thing is, he doesn’t have to do anything right. I don’t need to like him. What difference would it make if I did now? If he had garnered the nomination I would have vocally and lovingly supported him even still. Because that’s what you do.

Well, your suggestion that HRC supporters aren’t invested in a social-democrat platform is a big part of the problem. And your choice of the phrase “those of us” speaks to this quite well. Sanders supporters hold no superior claim to progressivism. Y’all don’t represent some real left wing of the party. You aren’t the…

She and Elizabeth were both amazing. I had butterflies and heart eyes and all the hope when they were done speaking. These women are true champions of the people.

I was only pointing out originally that “female person” and “woman” do not actually mean the same thing and shouldn’t be treated as though they were interchangeable. Not all women are females, and not all females are women.

Ummmm, yes there are? There are both male cops and cops who are men. Just as there are both female cops and cops who are women. The often forgotten point is that those two categories need not overlap.

I appreciate your willingness to keep this conversation going and to keep it substantive. We will just have to agree to disagree about whether these emails suggest there was corruption that went against the party’s own rules. Individuals within the DNC will always hold personal biases. Always. That’s just humanity at…

There is zero evidence that there was a culture of bias against Sanders in the DNC. More importantly, there is zero evidence that DWS or her staff took action to prevent Sanders from becoming the nominee. Even the fucked up faith comment can be justified as part of vetting a general election candidate. If you care to…

90% of sane,non-bigoted people will vote for Hillary no matter what she does so long as Trump is the only real alternative.

Except for the list of like 5-8 celebrities theyve lined up to speak this week? Moretz and Messing are as much activists as Antonio Sabato Jr.

And where exactly were they giving Clinton fuel against Sanders? Are we talking about the question of his faith? I said that was wrong, but it’s ONE email amongst hundreds of thousands that proves max 2 biased staffers. Unless DWS condoned or acted on this to help Clinton, which these emails DO NOT show, I still see…

I’m not shifting at all. I admitted from the outset that the PROCESS is biased, I simply said that bias was at a systemic level rather than being carried out by DWS and her staff. You’ve yet to show how DWS showed personal impartiality that effected the outcome of this race

And if you can show me evidence that the process was specifically rigged against Bernie in any real way by DWS and the DNC, I’d like to see it.

I’m so tired of hearing about bias. If Sanders wanted to run for the presidential nomination of a party, perhaps he should have played the long game and courted their favor. Nothing was the least bit “rigged” or “unfair.”

I don’t know, ClamJam may be a new commenter with an unpopular opinion, but I don’t think they’re just a troll. They aren’t baiting people into angry responses, they’re expressing an actual popular opinion (if a bit obnoxiously) and even responding directly to points made by others. That’s conversation, not pure…

But none of those comparisons you made have any relation to the very real history of anti-abortion rhetoric and legislation.

I’m not sure why we’d treat this like wisdom teeth. Wisdom teeth aren’t a lifelong financial, emotional, and physical commitment faced by an oppressed group.