I’m trying so hard to think of what her “initiatives” would be as a first lady and can’t even come up with anything stupid but plausible enough.

That is a bullshit thinly veiled excuse for sexism.

There are a good number of them/us, I just think they’re usually too busy being actually good people to bother (one of my best friends is a (gay) pastor of a church in rural Ohio that actively welcomes trans members).

To be fair, this piece was generally considered to be a fairly unethical hit job (for instance, the writer goaded MIA to have the truffle fries and then used it as a point to illustrate her privilege, as we knew from, as i recall, released tapes of the interview). Also, Ben Bronfman is in fact the son of a billionaire…

And the first part of his statement isn’t any less disturbing:

“When I was [a BYU student], we had guys get in trouble for this stuff, so I think it’s a problem.”

Even in countries where prostitution is legal and regulated sex trafficking is a huge concern. In the Netherlands in Germany it’s estimated that well over half of sex workers (some estimates up to 85%) are foreign women from less-affluent countries. This article is a few years old, but it has a good overview of some…

If 85% of the sex workers are trafficked, the regulations aren't protecting the sex workers at all.

You're wound up way to tightly if this drives you nuts

Bernie. You mean they can’t say shit about Bernie.

This is pretty funny, considering that, so far as I can tell, nobody at Deadspin has ever written anything that wasn’t negative about Hillary.

Well, you’re supposing a pretty strange set of circumstance- a candidate whose views you find repugnant, but whose views you find better than the other party’s views. If here views are really that repugnant, vote for the other guy? If they aren’t, then why shouldn’t you vote for her?

So you are opposed to the very idea of one party containing policy compromises. That is, opposed to the idea of a “Big Tent.” In your mind, to vote for someone whose policy positions do not exactly match yours, and, even more, for someone to say doing so is a good idea, is “repulsive.”

I could not agree with you less (it almost never happens, btw). The people she is talking about are already voting for her overwhelmingly, while the more affluent white millennials are voting for Bernie and threatening to “bust” if he doesn’t win. Her tweet is directed at the latter.

First of all, when the fuck did reprorductive rights and LGBT issues become for-the-rich-only???? I didn’t know only rich ladies had unplanned pregnancies and needed cancer screenings. Definitely didn’t know that there are no poor LGBT people. Here I was thinking, based on overwhelming evidence, that those issues…

Right, because a President Trump will be great for poverty.

I was particularly amused by his contention that reproductive rights, civil rights and/or LGBT rights are solely for the upper classes.

Your argument seems to presuppose that Sanders believes his own rhetoric. I don’t think he does. Sanders has made zero, that is no, none, nada, effort into supporting other progressives/liberals/Democrats in downticket races. By not doing anything to help other liberals overturn congressional seats held by the GOP-…

Ideologically I agree with Bernie more than Hillary. However I support Clinton because I don’t believe that Sanders can win the general election. Republicans “prefer” him to Clinton because they know they can beat him. Believe me, I would LOVE a single-payer health plan. I would LOVE for America to become a country…

Trump will do real damage if he was elected to real people. So, no. He can't be allowed to become president.