This only proves to me that people are satisfied with the status quo. They don't want to WORK for a

[BigBearJohn]

better country. Sort of like a "you do it!" attitude. Bernie's path takes participation. It seems people are too lazy for that. Hillary offers incremental change and I guess that's enough. Don't make any major waves. Make tiny changes and hope for the best. Uh-huh. Seems like this country is more conservative than I originally believed. And for those who support Trump, it just shows how easy it is to be taken in by a real slick huckster who offers you empty promises of riches and a jobs, jobs, jobs. He makes it all sound EASY -- and that's what the electorate wants -- EASY PEEZY. He'll do it all for you. You just sit back and watch all the castles in the air that he builds.

God help the next generation. They'll need it.

ON EDIT: I am NOT giving up on BERNIE til the convention.

[Renew Deal]

1. Maybe Bernie isn't the right messenger

[jfern]

12. We shouldn't have to wait 4 or 8 years for a non terrible nominee just because Bernie isn't perfect

[elleng]

2. Kind of feels like that,

doesn't it?

[Ron Green]

3. Lots of people are smart enough to know we've got to have a big change,

but not smart enough to know their part in it. Decades of Teevee has helped with that.

[dana_b]

4. yes! That's exactly what I said to my daughter

60+ years of television has fried people's brains. They can't be bothered with big changes as they're too "big or unrealistic". Thankfully the people in the 60s didn't think like that. "Not now - let's not upset the apple cart. Let's be pragmatic and do things in bits and pieces. We can eat Jim Crow for a while longer. Don't be unrealistic!!"

For instance we cannot wait much longer on things like climate change. Bits and pieces are far too little and way too late. We need sweeping reforms NOW and I don't think that Hillary will do much about it.

Kick the can, kick the can...

[kath]

5. "60+ years of television has fried people's brains" - yeppers. See Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves

To Death"

[Ron Green]

6. Hillary's doing only what she knows how to do, which is

play politics: curry favors and call 'em in, work her connections with big money, keep her finger in the wind, and say whatever people want to hear.
She truly does not have the understanding Bernie has of the moment of history and America's place in it today. She does the best she can, but it's not enough to save us, I fear.

[GoneFishin]

30. Yep. She's play acting. While Bernie is sincere. It's sickening to watch.

[msongs]

7. voters are watching bernie build castles in the air and saying no thanks nt

[BigBearJohn]

8. yeah, "no thanks. The Voice is on now, can we talk in the morning?"

[Contrary1]

9. President Donald Trump n/t

[snowy owl]

14. "Voters" - no, almost half the voting electorate said yes in many of those states

[marew]

15. Robert Browning wrote-

'Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?'

Real income declines for 30-40 years, ballooning college costs, lower or non-existent taxes on the rich and corporations, declining home ownership, the wealthy hide billions of income offshore, etc.

As the American middle class continues to decline, could there ever be a time you said enough and would stand up for yourself or future generations?

[Ken Burch]

22. Your candidate won't build anything at all.

If he hadn't run, HRC would be running on Bill's 1996 platform, and you'd STILL unquestioningly support her.

What is it about activism and ideals that you so utterly despise?

And when have we ever really prospered as a party by telling activists and dreamers to go away?

[GoneFishin]

36. Interesting isn't it?. If Bernie had radically changed his positions 1147 times I would have

serious doubts about what the hell he really stands for. And if he was taking large amounts of money from groups that he pretended to admonish I would throw him under the bus in a heartbeat.

Sometimes there is an objectively correct position. Being a hypocrite and liar is not it.

[Garrett78]

10. The real work must be done between elections.

Attending rallies, donating some money, posting on a message board, volunteering with a campaign and voting isn't what will bring about systemic change.

As I've written several times before, Bernard Chazelle wrote years ago that "American has lefties but no left." Lefties/leftists haven't laid the groundwork necessary to bring about systemic change. This is why I never for one second believed Sanders would become the nominee (and figured the race would essentially be over by mid-March), a point I made even while debating Clinton supporters on this site last year. You can't just wait until a presidential election rolls around and throw your support behind the most progressive candidate. The hard and necessary work must be done between elections. At the local level.

And the movement to change the culture, change systems, absolutely must involve persons of color. I encourage folks to get involved in a local chapter of Black Lives Matter or the NAACP or an organization such as this one in Seattle: https://carw.org/.

The time has come to accept reality and move on.

[bettyellen]

21. Yes, and pinning all your hopes on a president to change everything from the top down is never

going to be enough. I hope the national conversation starts to acknowledge that reality. It is disheartening to see people for the revolution deciding to give up already. That was never how things were going to work.

[Ken Burch]

23. You know perfectly well we never pinned all all our hopes on electing Bernie.

It's just that there's no hope that anything can really change under HRC.

Why should we prefer a nominee that hates activists and activism? There's no way to make change without organizing and protest.

[bettyellen]

24. Not here- but in the real world I have met some people really new to the whole thing...

and they had no idea about the obstructionism we face in the other branches. And only a vague idea of why the SC is particularly important this election.

I don't believe she hates activists and activism. I think people are inexplicably holding her to standards that never existed before. She literally can't campaign, laugh, appear friendly with an opponent without huge CTs being spun on it. I do not believe she is the "same as a republican" and I don't respect anyone who pushes that sort of nonsense.

[Ken Burch]

25. I didn't say she was "same as a republican"

The problem is, we have no reason to trust that she won't lower herself to Bill's 1996 platform once she is free of primary opposition.

And that platform could never be worth voting for again.

[bettyellen]

26. I thought we were talking in general terms about things said here? I get there is a lack of trust

both ways. Some do not trust Sanders to be more than a two issue president, or to handle foreign policy, or get things done and we both know exactly the many reasons we have read here that Hillary is not trusted. To me, it is a wash.

[JonLeibowitz]

27. Obstructionism? Like the Florida Democratic party blocking a progressive challenger to DWS

from accessing their voter files? The Congresswoman who is fighting against Elizabeth Warren on key parts of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau?

Gee, when thinking about the obstructionism we face perhaps we should be a bit more introspective.

[bettyellen]

31. No, I meant they are unaware of the BASICS of the three branches of govt, sadly.

Many first time voters haven't been paying attention, and think a president has a lot more power than they actually do.

[handmade34]

28. ...

[ebayfool]

11. I am NOT giving up on BERNIE til the convention, either.

I don't give up that easy.

[snowy owl]

13. You and most of us are listening and thinking...

most people are not. I am older. I work with and know a lot of people who don't read or inform themselves. They just don't. They are apathetic and until something shakes them loose from that apathy, they will not pay attention or really care. So many stories of people who think one way until a catastrophe happens to them and then suddenly they see the light. Bernie was showing a bright light on our deficiencies and many of us learned - almost half the electorate! These people that I know are good people who think they do the right thing when they vote. But they do the lazy thing. That's their failing. They look at the current front-runners and choose. If they are on the left, they choose the left front-runner and think that's the best choice. On the right, they do the same. They think they are supporting their values as defined by a trusted party system. They couldn't be more wrong.

Too many people were too far from the light. Their apathy keeps them in the dark. They never see it. Florida - old Cuban grudges. The old South - blacks who love the Clintons why I still don't understnad and don't know how the Clintons have set the stage for all of our current woes. And Latinos who seem to emotionally fall for Clinton I think because she is a woman and many Latino women are grieving their missing husbands and families. How many Hispanic men did you see at these town halls and debates - regular working men. They were hand-picked Latino women.

Yet Bernie attracted almost half the vote in most primaries. That is a really big deal. In only a few states was he overwhelmed and by a woman with name recognition beyond almost anybody elses and with an organization that has been on the ground far longer than his and with a media and establishment that was in her pocket almost all the way. Imagine, MSNBC was her own pet cable outlet.

No, this country would have voted Bernie had there been full transparency and an even playing field. We know that with doubt.

[marew]

16. A very enlightened comment! Thank you.

You could not be more accurate in your assessment.

I am older also but I had a father, Army career Major, who drilled into me from the time I was a small child to plan ahead, be aware, set your priorities, do what's right especially when no one is looking, etc.

You are so correct- there are so many unaware of what is going on around them.

On Youtube there are some outrageous videos. These are interviews of people on the street who said Hillary or Trump is their candidate. The interviewer then says their candidate wants to implement Sharia law or wants Karl Marx to run with them as their vice president. And the vast majority of those with blind allegiance to Hillary or Trump go right along with with all of it! They think its great! These people are so very ignorant and, as you said, apathetic. This is what we are up against! And when their house of cards implodes, they will have no comprehension of what happened. Bernie tried to warn them but they refused to listen.

Did you notice the Hillary supporter comment here, "If Bernie supporters truly believe in economic justice, why do they oppose free trade?" The lack of insight and comprehension here is mind boggling?

As a friend of mine used to say so many years ago, "I've had all I can stands, I can't stands no more."

[BigBearJohn]

19. Thank you for such a well reasoned response. Love it

[pdsimdars]

17. Amen to that.

[My Good Babushka]

18. I may write-in for the general election

I won't vote for arms proliferation. I won't vote for a war with Iran.

[PonyUp]

20. Same. nt

[Trust Buster]

29. Republicans have obstructed the President's less ambitious agenda for 7 years.

Sanders' trillions in new entitlement spending is DOA. To risk the Supreme Court with ZERO hope of a return is just not prudent.

[Starry Messenger]

32. OR--stay with me--people need to GOTV for their candidate.

[Maedhros]

33. Nah. I think they're "liberal" only when it provides convenient leverage against Republicans.

When Republicans are in office, they can use things like Citizens United, warrantless surveillance, and the Iraq War as talking points to undermine support for the incumbent.

When Democrats are in (or running for) office they find innumerable excuses for things like campaign finance shenanigans, the surveillance state, and elective wars of aggression.

Their liberalism is a fashion accessory. It makes them look good, but they can discard it anytime it gets uncomfortable.

[anotherproletariat]

34. It was the wrong messenger at the wrong time.

A revolution will not occur following a successful Democratic President. Part of the credit for Obama's 2008 victory was due to a revolt spurred by the W admin. A significant number of people need to be dissatisfied for any big change to take place. I think many Democrats see things going in the right direction, albeit slowly, and that most of the sluggishness has to do with the repubs in congress. The revolution will also require a long-term Democratic leader who is well-known and trusted. Many people are skeptical of someone who just joined the party to run for president, no matter how sincere he may appear.

[KT2000]

35. Fear

the people doing OK under the status quo are afraid they may not if things change. A better country is not n the equation. For many it is all about "me." More people than I ever realized want to see people fail and suffer because I guess it makes them feel safe.

Other industrialized nations are outpacing us in healthcare, education and more, and that is common knowledge in the US. Who cares?
We are the strongest militarily for the benefit of the 1%.