Propane Jane is one of those twitter accounts that I feel like everyone should follow if they care about this stuff (especially anyone out there who reads this and is like “I don’t understand why Bernie isn’t winning”). I feel like at least once a week during this election cycle she puts out a tweet storm that is just…

He strikes me as the type that doesn’t not care about those issues, but views them as secondary to economic concerns and doesn’t seem to get why people would want to prioritize women’s and racial equality issues. I feel like his reasoning is like “this helps the most number of people of all backgrounds, therefore I am…

He’s previously said that overturning Citizen’s United is his only litmus test. The interviewer was even like “...nothing else?” and he doubled down. It was definitely a side-eye moment for me when it happened.

Yeah, that kind of bothered me too. This strikes me as a time when honesty is not the best policy- even if he feels this way, now is not the time to say so. President Obama is clearly doing a thing at the moment (picked someone he would find acceptable if he got confirmed but is also clearly a compromise pick to prove…

This. After today it might be too late to simply beat Trump with one of the others outright (not that the others are less terrible, of course) and doing a brokered convention or being like “you’re on your own” will hasten the split. So, the GOP establishment is going to have to choose if they want to unite behind…

Jez has actually been comparatively even-handed. There are a few with a negative slant, but there have been some with more positive slants. They’ve also been insufficiently effusive about Bernie, so they catch shit from the Berners as well. Now, Gawker, on the other hand, has been very negative towards Hillary and…

Didn’t she endorse ages ago? It was a big deal at the time because she had initially endorsed Clinton and then switched. I’m pretty sure she endorsed in the fall.

The Sanders Campaign hasn’t been engaging in the kind of horrifying invective that the GOP is, but they’ve said some shitty things. Off the top of my head: really early on Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver said about Clinton that they would “We’re willing to give her more credit than Obama did. We’re willing to…

Indeed! With the star eyes from “Story for Steven”!

That is an amazing analogy.

I’m not who you asked but I can give you my thoughts.

Yeah. Last debate, there was actually a discussion on if Marco’s “No exceptions except for life of the mother” policy was too extreme vs the candidates exceptions for rape and incest. It was a dumpster fire, obv, but they have discussed it quite a bit more than the Dems have.

This is a rundown of the primary system overall, but it might help. He also has one on the electoral college.

I agree that that statement is incorrect, but I think it might be an accurate read of the current campaign strategies. From what I can see, Sanders is currently focused only on winning the nomination, whereas Clinton is constantly also pivoting to the general, so the rest of this analysis might hold true.

I support Hillary and I’m just like “jfc Steinem, wtf is wrong with you?” Now a bunch of people are saying this what all Hillary supporters think. So, thanks for that one Gloria.

I agree. Hillary’s historic candidacy isn’t the only reason I like her, but it definitely does matter. If she doesn’t win, we’re probably looking at at least 10-20 years until we have a new viable female candidate (and it’s more likely to be someone like a Kirsten Gillibrand than Warren)

This is actually part of the reason I really, really don’t hold Hillary’s SuperPACs against her. The decision which created them was by a group that pretty clearly intended to attack her, so it’s a pretty short walk to realize that a lot of SuperPAC cash would be targeted at her. SuperPACs are shady as hell, but as…

Her argument isn’t that she is not establishment, it’s that she can’t be emblematic of the establishment (and thus in Bernie’s anti-establishment views, a symbol of everything wrong with the establishment) when she’d also represent a historic first for it.

It isn’t something that can be separated. The two decade anti-Hillary GOP hate-a-thon is predicated almost entirely on her being a woman, specifically a woman who did not conform to their notions of how a First Lady should behave.

I recommended this to another person, but I came across an essays that I think might give you some of the perspective you were asking for. It’s by a feminist political writer about how the Hillary as establishment line is kind of problematic, and how having a female president puts a serious crack in the establishment…