if you want to know the problem with CNN here it is, they let someone like her make a racist comment and not hit her on it. that is the problem.
Which adds a lot of legitimacy to his, "I could shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters" statement.
as i read so many of the anti-Clinton/Kaine posts, from people like sk, what emerges is the sense that there are only two places---100% progressive or 0% progressive. If you are like Kaine and have a 100% rating from PP and NARAL and 0% from the NRA, but you are not tough enough on banks or support TPP, the you are not a progressive. It is either 100% or nothing.
And some of these posts say Al Franken and Barbara Boxer and Elizabeth Warren are not true progressives because they support Hillary. I guess only Ralph Nader is a true enough progressive, one who helped elect GW Bush. If they aren't then who is? Certainly not Bernie Sanders, who voted against the Brady Bill, has done virtually nothing to help minority communities, and won't release his tax returns. Even Bernie is not 100% progressive, so he is not a progressive.
This doctrinaire, all of nothing, tea party like, get the DINOs attitude is what will elect Donald Trump.
get real. being a progressive is a continuum and different issues come up and and different levels of importance over time. support Hillary or you support trump.
Why would I elaborate any further than I have. You're an obvious troll just out to get a reaction. You are everything that is wrong with the internet and everything that is wrong with American politics.
People like Prog4Hillary16 seem to think that just because the Democratic Party's seeming strategy is to find a slightly better turd to field than the Republican Party that somehow they're owed complete and unquestioning allegiance.
Like it honestly gets to the point where their campaign strategy revolves around Donald Trump. Democrats don't win elections when all they can do is run 'against' the other side. And that's precisely the problem with a Tim Kaine pick.
Then to hear stuff like "Well if we expect our politicians to take the sides of their voters then they'll just give up and go home and you won't have nobody to vote for!" is basically straight out of a right wing 'Job Creator' playbook. Like as if voters are inherently and should inherently be powerless and just hoping that some politician somewhere please trickle down some support.
The electorate isn't and shouldn't be beholden to the whims of any party, it's the other way around.
This idea that the Democratic Party is automatically owed fealty because holding their feet to the fire when they fuck up hurts the 'brand' is self destructive and sickening. If they can't get their shit together then they deserve to lose our support and be replaced, in either part or wholesale.
Because as I said right now the entire Democratic Party's election strategy hinges around "At least I'm not Donald Trump". And it's not going to work. They've used that as basically a foolproof plan for job security for too long now.
I can't imagine the level of Stockholm Syndrome some people must feel, honestly.
Imagine if that was how every industry worked, really (though you don't have to, it's slowly becoming reality).
"Oh, we buy from Store A. Every bit of produce there is molded over, but at least they're not as bad at Store B.", where permanent job security and customer loyalty arises not from doing your job, but just being slightly less bad than the other guy. And getting praised for it.
"Store A is great. It's the height of the retail experience. Mostly by not being Store B."