What a bullshit question. There is a wealth of women in politics with the experience to be leaders besides Clinton. But you specifically want “experience at war”. Welp, our hands our tied.

I feel ya. This kind of politicking was already too cynical one or two months ago. Now, I just hope for it to end. Their camp is hoping liberals just stay quiet, out of fatigue, and it’s working.

They started believing all of those fake reasons they hated Obama, to avoid the cognitive dissonance of accepting why they really hated Obama. This grew into the anti-intellectual movement for which Trump stands.

Trump is the undisputed king of handing out monetary favors to politicians. His constituency believes he’s the guy to end corruption.

Despite this, I’m seeing a rather strange pivot from Trump lately. In the early election cycle, he’d badmouth Mexicans and threaten to ban an entire religion from the country. (Word’s still out on how he intends to check for Muslims, other than giving everyone a questionnaire and hoping we all tell the truth.) He was…

“Bernie or Bust” will not end up like PUMA (except in the fact that it won’t succeed). PUMA had a PAC. There’s no money behind Sanders’ movement. Plenty of liberals will give up on fighting for liberalism, accept the premise that liberalism is “unpragmatic” and “won’t ever work”, and vote Democrat in the fall after a…

Hm. Yeah.

After New York, there’s gonna be cries for Sanders to drop out, so we can finally stop talking about the Democrats! It’s gon’ get reeeeal ugly-like.

i agree it was a legit funny lul bb

We, as in, all Clinton supporters? Most Clinton supporters don’t even care about “lulz”, certainly not enough to rally behind a right-wing troll on purpose.

“Paytrolls”, we calls ‘em.

I’m an ENTP, tho. Just commentin’. :D

The difference between PUMA and “Bernie or Bust” is that PUMA had enough money to become a PAC, and it had a few establishment-backed Obama-opponents (like McCain) that its constituents wanted to vote for. PUMA was, at its core, a centrist movement; a response to the fear that Obama was too much of a liberal outsider.

I agree. This notion that the media is liberal? No, it is perfectly capitalist. It does whatever makes the most money. To them, every election is a horse race, every story is amazingly interesting, everyone needs to keep watching, and everyone needs to ask their doctor about LYRICA®.

I’d agree, if the post itself wasn’t ironically mocking of Clinton’s “credentials” about halfway down the list. It was a right-winger who managed to thoroughly mock Sanders’ vagueness and the gullibility of speed-reading Clinton loyalists who support literally any hyperbolic statement about their opposition. It was…

Internet political conversations be like this:

This article is amazing. A really thorough analysis about why the process is working and why uncertainty is good.

The worse part was how many stars and positive replies it got from Clinton supporters.

I’m a believer in MBTI types, for some reason. And I think Clinton is in the INTJ camp.

I’ve heard people complain that Clinton “isn’t a politician they could drink a beer with”. That’s because they know she’d drink ‘em under the table!