Low Dem turnout is a huge theme this primary and, because an unknown old white man isn't delivering, he's to blame. But with the first woman president in the balance, why isn't the Clinton campaign inspiring? Before you can scapegoat Bernie in November, you better figure out why your candidate, on the precipice of making history, has fallen flat as evidenced by turnout. Now, you could argue and might be correct to do so, that the DNC doesn't want high turnout. Less exposure - a small number of strategically hidden debates - makes it difficult for an unknown to simply introduce himself. John Lewis and Rachel Maddow were still litigating his participation in civil rights movement last night. That's just one example of how unknown he is and how easy it is for the establishment to turn it against him. So low voter turnout is by design. GE debates will expose Trump and history will bring Dems to the polls come November. Otherwise, low primary turnout is a function of Bernie's obscurity and Hillary's unfavorables. Each poll indicates the electorate cares most about a politician's honesty. And every poll indicates Hillary's biggest problem is people don't find her trustworthy.

Hillary supporters, you only have a flawed, uninspiring, untrustworthy, Republican lite candidate to blame if Dems don't turnout in November.

the Dems are about a cycle, maybe two, behind. It doesn't appear likely at this time, but a couple of weeks ago, it was conceivable that two independents would be vying for the presidency come November.

She's a gaffe factory, 20 years and going strong. There's always something new uncovered. We need Bernie there. Don't be so eager to see him go.

Gottit!

Edit: "the game"

but the Clintons kept them close all of these years. That's why HE! was infuriated in 2008. He felt betrayed.

South Carolina is THE most important state politically. It's part of the Clinton long game. Keep them close.

Duh...

rounds. I saw her on IIRC the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. She's pretty bold and had no problem speaking her mind even if it meant making DWS and the DNC look bad.

Keep an eye on her

After Rahm Emanual won re-election by the narrowest of margins in a run off, I was beside myself. I had to find out who carried him to re-election. What I found, I couldn't believe: poor blacks overwhelmingly voted for Rahm.

Rahm Emanuel doesn't care about the south side of Chicago. He's Chicago's real estate developer in chief and none of that development happens south of downtown. Nope, close 50 schools and he's done with the south side. He spends his afternoons trying to lure big investors. The money never gets to the most neglected neighborhoods. Police abuses? Never stuck until after he was re-elected and the city was forced to turnover the Laquan McDonald video. That's when BLM showed up and demands that Rahm resign immediately for past sins and neglect.

All of this is common knowledge. So why did poor blacks vote for Rahm? This article helped a lot, and I think it's in line with your thinking. The article refers to preachers and community leaders, but not by name. For the record, Jesse Jackson broke with them and endorsed Rahm's opponent.

Blame the Black Political Class For Re-Electing Obama's Mayor Rahm Emanuel in Chicago
http://www.blackagendareport.com/black-misleaders-re-elect-rahm

All votes carry equal weight, so, based on her votes, she's the 3rd (or whatever) most liberal Senator in Congress. Unfortunately, Bernie is not challenging this idiotic argument.

All votes are NOT equal, and this is what Bernie should do, because Americans need to be reminded about the consequences of this 1 vote. Rather than merely mentioning that Hillary voted for the war, he could filibuster for 5 minutes:

First, Hillary was told by Bush 41 that it would be idiotic to remove Saddam because he's the only thing holding the ME together.
Second, she naively trusted BushCo.
Third, X thousand Americans have been killed
Fourth, X hundred thousand Americans have been maimed physically and psychologically, lives and homes destroyed
Fifth, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis have been killed and displaced
Sixth, just as Bush 41 cautioned, removing Saddam destabilized the ME
Seventh, we've now spent $X trillion on the war
Eighth, we're now in a perpetual war
Ninth, trillions and trillions of dollars will continue to flow to the ME as a result, money we should be spending here
Tenth, it created ISIS

No, I do not accept that this was "just 1 vote." When you unravel it as I have done, you can understand it as a series of neocon votes. No one who made this vote should be rated as "liberal."

This is why I insist Bernie is giving Hillary a pass. He can destroy her on both of her idiotic wars and the (news to me) dog whistle language and policies from the past.

will do to her. We're doing our best to warn her supporters of the tsunami that's coming.

Obama proved that America will elect, then re-elect a black, socialist, Kenyan, Muslim, with a Reverend talking crazy. Labels work on Fox viewers and old people. It's been proven. People falling into this trap are either Fox viewers or old.

Now, Hillary is a different story. Over 20 years in the public eye and she still doesn't know who she is or what she stands for. That's what will leave a lasting impression. Americans thinking she's a liar and disingenuous will stick. No one needs to make up shit about Hillary. She's been her own worst enemy for more than 2 decades. By contrast, the Rs will have to demonize Bernie like they did with Obama. People don't care about that shit, today. They see through it. And moreover, socialist polls favorably today.

It's going to be an ugly GE if Hillary is the nominee. She should be ahead of any R by double digits.