Post removed

[Frances]

1. Have you been paying attentionn

To what warren has been saying
Obviously not

[Agschmid]

2. She has been trashing Trump the whole time.

This isn't a trap.

Chill.

[Armstead]

69. I don't necessarily buy the larger premise of the OP but....

I do think Warren will be giving away her credibility with much of her constituency if she goes too far with this Clinton Love thing.

Clinton represents a brand of Corporate/Wall St./Elite politics that Warren has been standing full square against.

It is easy to accept "I support Clinton even though we don't agree on everything because she's qualified and we can't afford Trump."

But "She is the greatest person ever to run for president and I embrace her and everything she stands for fully" is a step too far.

[sufrommich]

3. If only Elizabeth Warren were as smart as you.

[PeaceNikki]

21. right?

[Blue_Adept]

4. She truly is a master manipulator

So many keep falling under her spell.

[Tarc]

5. Or the non-tinfoil reason

Actual Democrats value the message of the party rather than the whims of the individual. Warren saw the big picture a long time ago. Bernie will catch up soon, perhaps.

[Armstead]

70. What message is that apart from Apple Pie?

IU find it hard to swallow "We're the party for the people," when the banksters and Big Corporate Monopolies and the elites and s are the ones footing the bills and calling the shots to the wanna-be zillionaire politicians.

[djean111]

6. I won't vote for Hillary no matter who her choice of VP is.

What a waste of Bernie or Warren that slot would be. Home run for Hillary though - scoop up some voters, and get rid of their inconveniently liberal presence in the Senate.

[onenote]

16. Donald Trump will send you a thank you note.

Because, like it or not, in a two person race (and the presidential election will be a two person race no matter how many third party candidates there are), not voting for one of those two helps the other one even if you don't vote for the other one either.

[LoverOfLiberty]

27. Don't feed the troll

and they'll go away on their own.

[Scootaloo]

30. That's mathematically false

The only way to help Trump through a vote is to vote for Trump.

Let's say you're the very first person in the country to vote in the GE. The score looks like this:

Clinton: 0
Trump: 0

You decline to vote for clinton or Trump. Maybe you write in Daffy Duck. Maybe you just skip that part of the ballot. When you're done the score looks like this:

Clinton: 0
Trump: 0

[onenote]

41. Let's look at it this way:

Eleven people vote in an election

five vote for Trump
four vote for Clinton
two vote for Stein.

Even though the two Stein voters didn't vote for Trump, their not voting for Clinton hurt her more than their not voting for Trump.

To win an election, you need more votes than your opponent. Every vote not cast for one particular candidate hurts that candidate and thereby helps their opponent (even if they don't vote for the opponent).

[baldguy]

55. +1000

BoBs are little better that Republicans.

[Scootaloo]

58. Actually, no. They're still not helping or hurting either Republican or Democratic candidate

Your hinging your argument on the notion that Stein is "taking Clinton's votes." But that's not how it works. Those were not Clinton's votes to have. The voters don't owe candidates their votes. This is why candidates campaign, to try to convince people to give them those votes.

Your argument carries the assumption that voters owe your candidate votes. it also carries the notion that either third parties have no right to run, or that their voters are obligated to vote for the candidate of another party.

A vote for Jill Stein is just a vote for Jill Stein. A non-vote is just a non-vote.

[onenote]

64. In a two person race (and even with third parties one of two candidates will win)

by not voting for one you are indeed helping the other. In the scenario I described, Trump benefits by those two votes being cast for Stein instead of for Clinton. But they weren't Clinton's in the first place you say. Well, that's just another way of saying you don't care if Trump gets elected because if you cared you wouldn't withhold the one vote that can be cast that will hurt his chances.

Saying a non-vote is just a non-vote is like saying you don't like the sunrise so you're going to close your eyes. Guess what. The sun will still come up. You're non-vote isn't going to prevent one of the two principal candidates from being elected. So you have to decide, do you do anything to help one or not. If you don't, you help the other.

[brush]

59. Thanks for breaking that down. Also add in, or don't add in really, the stay at homes . . .

who don't vote and add onto the Democratic candidate's tally.

For some reason that's hard for some to get.

[brush]

56. Donald Trump? You mean the guy that's tearing the repug party apart?

He will lose spectacularly.

[demigoddess]

37. then-- delete your account

[djean111]

44. Oh, after the 16th it will be gone. or whatever.

Anyway, I am not advocating that anyone else not vote for Hillary. Or saying I will vote for someone else.
Have patience - a lot of us will be gone soon!

[mac56]

46. I guess that's the new order of things.

[Codeine]

7. BENGHAZIIIIIIIIIII!

Seriously, so sick of this shit. Stop carrying water for the GOP.

[Scootaloo]

31. Where was Benghazi mentioned, and how is he carrying water for the GOP?

[Agschmid]

36. Last paragraph.

[Scootaloo]

42. Oh wow. I guess my eyes glazed over. I feel silly.

[Agschmid]

51. It happens. No biggie.

[LexVegas]

8. ...

[Dem2]

9. You seem very "concerned"

[CrowCityDem]

10. Or maybe actual adults are capable of supporting someone they don't agree with 100% of the time.

[tonyt53]

13. Hell, I'd be terrified of a candidate that was in 100% agreement with all the time, They'd be nuts

[mac56]

47. Or maybe actual adults want someone to vote FOR rather than AGAINST.

[CrowCityDem]

53. Warren seems happy to be FOR Hillary.

[Maru Kitteh]

57. Decided not to leave yet after all eh?

Thought you said you were making a final post and what not? No?

[NurseJackie]

11. OMG! Someone really should warn Elizabeth Warren about this!

[Turin_C3PO]

12. Progressive elected officials

almost always stop criticisms once a nominee is clear. They resume after the electikn, similar to DU. That isn't new. And I very highly doubt anything email or Benghazi related smears will take her down.

[MattP]

14. The trap of stopping Trump?

Last edited Fri Jun 10, 2016, 01:06 PM - Edit history (1)

WTF!!!!!

[yallerdawg]

15. Hillary Clinton.

"Bond villain!"

?w=500&h=333

[Agnosticsherbet]

17. I had to check and see if this was Borrowitz or the Onion.

[Garrett78]

18. Occam's Razor

If all of the people and organizations and newspapers supporting Clinton thought she was going to be shamed out of public life, and that their support would then reflect poorly on them, do you really think they'd be supporting her? No. So, why do you suppose they feel so confident that she's in no danger of being shamed out of public life?

I don't see either Warren or Sanders being offered the VP slot. I do, however, see them supporting Clinton because they know she's not all that drastically different from them and that she's a much better option than Trump.

When you're not a viable candidate for POTUS, you can more easily get away with taking a relatively radical stance. Once elected POTUS, though, you discover the limited parameters within which you must operate. It's up to the masses to expand those parameters. Too much focus is placed on individual actors in our very individualistic culture, while systemic forces are underestimated.

[Sunlei]

19. She won't let republicans take her Senate seat. That's what Rs want and it's not going to happen.

Republicans may start to focus on "removing" their man trump. He's the "one man republican show" who destroys ALL Republicans who associate with him.

[randome]

20. Women and old men are so gullible, aren't they?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[Lord Magus]

22. Or, you know, she WANTS HILLARY TO BE PRESIDENT.

Your assertion that Elizabeth Warren was a "leading critic" of Hillary is nonsense, given that she openly encouraged Hillary last year to run for president. That's not something you do if you actively oppose her.

News flash, it's true that only Hillary is in a position to stop Trump. She's the Democratic nominee. We the voters have made our choice. And please get that lunatic "BENGHAAAAAAZI!" bullshit out of here and back on Free Republic where it belongs.

[chillfactor]

23. 6 more days....

get the garbage out of your system.....you will be blocked after that day...

[TwilightZone]

24. "Only Hillary is in a position to stop Trump!"

This is 100% true. Who else is going to stop Trump? You?

[wyldwolf]

25. One thing I've learned after three contentious primary seasons and 15 years on DU...

"Progressives" are terrible political prognosticators.

[Scootaloo]

34. So hey, where's that quote in your signature from?

[wyldwolf]

60. Harry Truman, Life Magazine Jan 30, 1956

The full quote:

"It was a historic day for the party. The greatest achievement was winning without the extreme radicals in the party and without the Solid South.* It is customary for a politician to say that he wants all the votes he can get, but I was happy and pleased to be elected to the presidency by a Democratic party that did not depend upon either the extreme left wing or the Southern bloc."

[leftofcool]

26. You get my vote for the funniest most ridiculous post of the day!

[Surya Gayatri]

43. Hyperbolic conspiracy theory wins the day.

Truly prize-winning stuff!

[snooper2]

28. oh jesus e. fucking christ don't you guys have any hobbies?

[NNadir]

45. I think this is their hobby. One wishes they'd get a life. That won't happen though, any more...

...than all the super delegates switching to Bernie because, well, he's Bernie.

[WhiteTara]

29. And the bus continues to roll along

crushing every political person who doesn't think like you.

[Marrah_G]

32. If warren or sanders get involved in a clinton administration they will be muzzled

And the banks will rejoice.

[brooklynite]

33. Only five days to go...

[BumRushDaShow]

39. We need a countdown clock gif.

[brooklynite]

49. I used one yesterday...

POsted some my phone, so too hard to embed graphics

[Surya Gayatri]

66. How's this?

[BumRushDaShow]

68. !!!!

[Dawgs]

65. To what?

This OP would be acceptable under the new rules.

[brooklynite]

67. "When the scandals that are brewing now hit HRC..."

When the scandals that are brewing now hit HRC, as they will in the near future, everyone who is advocating and promoting her so highly for President because we have to stop Trump, will be be stuck on "her team" and will be tarred with the same brush, unable to take the moral high road as they normally would have. They too, will find themselves forced to cover up for her.

I'm thinking you're wrong...

[jzodda]

35. What bullshit!

First off there will be no indictment. Get used to it. An intramural spat between agencies over classification....Well there just is nothing there.

You like repeating right wing red herrings? Well that's what this is...just nonsense intended to distract. It belongs on Mark Levin but not HERE.

Next where is the logic in your arguments? "Please Bernie and Liz don't fall for that evil Hilary!" Don't back her so we can have President Trump right?

I'm getting fucking disgusted with this shit. One more week...Then next Thursday all the Trump supporters can go away.

[alcibiades_mystery]

38. ROFL

Good lord!

[Surya Gayatri]

40. Watch out there, Liz. And, you too, Bernie. Bwaahaaaa!

[MattP]

48. ok..

[Proud Liberal Dem]

50. Ummm.......ok

[baldguy]

52. How demeaning & disingenuous to both Warren and Sanders.

Thankfully their fair opinion doesn't match the obvious hatred you have for Democrats and the Democratic Party.

5 days.

[grossproffit]

54. OMG! GET THE *SANE PROGRESSIVE ON THIS NOWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

[closeupready]

61. oh wow - is THAT the talk, that her unsecured server tipped off terrorists

in Benghazi? I really had no idea about that, but NOW all the controversy makes sense. Thanks.

[mcar]

62. Umm, OK

[LonePirate]

63. Now that the primary voting is almost over, it's apparently time to fire up new conspiracy theories.