Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
If representative, it explains a lot. flor-de-jasmim May 2016 #1
Who are you going to vote for when Sanders is not the nominee? KingFlorez May 2016 #2
This is a news post, and you follow up with a loyalty pledge? How transparent. JonLeibowitz May 2016 #3
Nobody said anything about loyalty KingFlorez May 2016 #4
And one with a transparent purpose on this board. JonLeibowitz May 2016 #6
You don't seem to get what "loyalty oath" means in this context. merrily May 2016 #28
Is that a real question? NWCorona May 2016 #7
Yes KingFlorez May 2016 #8
First. I will never vote for Trump and will do everything in my power to stop him NWCorona May 2016 #15
Post removed Post removed May 2016 #9
Thank you KingFlorez May 2016 #10
I would rather vote for Jill Stein than Hillary. At least Jill Stein opposes the FTAS. Baobab May 2016 #20
At least the Green Party advocates progressive ideas. EndElectoral May 2016 #54
Is dishonest for you to say LoverOfLiberty May 2016 #74
The question is out of order, and inappropriate, especially on DU. merrily May 2016 #30
Yes, because nobody here ever talks about who they vote for. CorkySt.Clair May 2016 #66
Talking about it on your own initiative is one thing. Asking others how they will vote is merrily May 2016 #68
This message was self-deleted by its author artislife May 2016 #45
ZING!! n/t JimDandy May 2016 #64
Yes it is. And anyone who is being intimidated or punished for stating how they want to vote JimDandy May 2016 #60
If Clinton is the Democratic candidate I will just write in Bernie. I will support good people. Baobab May 2016 #14
You want to check the laws in your state before writing in anyone. In some states, merrily May 2016 #31
Those Republicans will just throw it away scscholar May 2016 #56
Which Republicans? Please don't post things that just make you seem silly. merrily May 2016 #58
Neither. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #26
8% say the issue makes them more likely to vote for the former first lady. ucrdem May 2016 #5
That's political suicide AgingAmerican May 2016 #16
What does Issa have to do with this? Matt_in_STL May 2016 #18
He was the bag man back in 2012: ucrdem May 2016 #23
He's not running the investigation, the FBI is. Matt_in_STL May 2016 #24
"That's loyalty! " No, that is paid posters voting in online polls J_J_ May 2016 #19
If only she'd knock over a bank or something. Orsino May 2016 #32
Issa. Marr May 2016 #55
Thanks! Interesting and a little unsettling. floppyboo May 2016 #11
Not even a little Joob May 2016 #36
It's like watching a fatal car crash in slo-mo. floppyboo May 2016 #49
Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I can't imagine any major political party running an unindicted felon leveymg May 2016 #62
Republicans and her supporters want her to run Robbins May 2016 #12
Of course they do. Orsino May 2016 #38
So 71% of Dems are so asinine they won't budge no matter what, and 31% of Repugs are laughing at us. reformist2 May 2016 #80
huh... elana i am May 2016 #13
The investment that people have in Hillary Clinton can’t be overlooked. NWCorona May 2016 #17
They made the wrong investment. Baobab May 2016 #34
And there is the number that proves the party has left me. 71% of Dems are okay with indictment. Matt_in_STL May 2016 #21
The majority of democrats Abouttime May 2016 #35
This isn't a Republican witch hunt, this is an FBI investigation. Matt_in_STL May 2016 #39
The head of the FBI was appointed by GW Bush philosslayer May 2016 #71
Oh yes, it's all a conspiracy against Hillary. Matt_in_STL May 2016 #72
No, he was appointed by Obama in 2013. DesMoinesDem May 2016 #92
well said. nt grasswire May 2016 #51
Sixty-five percent (65%) consider it likely that Clinton broke the law. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #22
This is the upside of identity politics. lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #25
If indicted, she should end her White House bid bigwillq May 2016 #27
A land line pole. Might as well invent the numbers. The_Casual_Observer May 2016 #29
We know she broke the law, the OIG said it. The only question left is whether her and/or her inner morningfog May 2016 #33
The OIG says she broke State Department regulations, not COLGATE4 May 2016 #41
Administrative laws are still federal law. She broke them. morningfog May 2016 #43
We'll have to see if anyone pursues the destruction of records meme. COLGATE4 May 2016 #46
By anyone, of course you mean "FBI" and by meme, of course you mean "evidence." morningfog May 2016 #50
When we see some facts we can talk about this more COLGATE4 May 2016 #75
We have facts. At least four federal public records were not produced by her morningfog May 2016 #81
And? COLGATE4 May 2016 #83
18 U.S. Code § 1519 morningfog May 2016 #85
Well, aside from having to prove that there was destruction with an "intent to impede, obstruct COLGATE4 May 2016 #86
The "knowingly" element goes to the destruction, which is already a proven fact. morningfog May 2016 #89
I assume you have proof that they weren't destroyed by accident? COLGATE4 May 2016 #90
No, the conclusion dfrom the OIG says this: floppyboo May 2016 #69
Rules are not laws. Calling them legal requirements begs the issue. COLGATE4 May 2016 #73
That's what I guessed. But can 'rules' have 'legal requirements'? Or just recommendations? floppyboo May 2016 #76
They are requirements without any mechanism for enforcing them. I.e. closer to COLGATE4 May 2016 #77
I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying the OIG is begging the issue? That she broke the law? floppyboo May 2016 #78
The OIG did not say she broke the law. COLGATE4 May 2016 #79
Well that's bull shit! bkkyosemite May 2016 #37
Sounds good to me. kstewart33 May 2016 #40
It proves there really is a cult of personality with Hillary Arazi May 2016 #42
Rasmussen? progressoid May 2016 #44
That is disgusting. highprincipleswork May 2016 #47
They must all be Trump supporters. n/t Binkie The Clown May 2016 #48
Of course Republicans want her to run if she's indicted. Got to be kidding me. EndElectoral May 2016 #52
And 70% of Dems B2G May 2016 #57
Yup. Surprised it's only 30%. (n/t) thesquanderer May 2016 #67
Not surprised nadinbrzezinski May 2016 #53
I weep for our country n/t JesterCS May 2016 #59
I bet the Republicans sure said so. Jester Messiah May 2016 #61
This has to be the "Onion." Vinca May 2016 #63
Well, it's official. lagomorph777 May 2016 #65
I don't think an online pollwould be scientific trudyco May 2016 #70
I'll take it a step further. If the 71% prevail, I will drop them like a bad habit. reformist2 May 2016 #84
Great, we have a culture of corruption now. Waiting For Everyman May 2016 #82
Exactly, people accept it, especially if it someone they support. Very sad. BillZBubb May 2016 #88
71% say someone under indictment for a felony should keep running? That is disgusting. BillZBubb May 2016 #87
very stupid idea. Cobalt Violet May 2016 #91
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Poll: 50% Say Clinton Sho...»Reply #26