Reply #84: But can't you see "we will barely survive HRC" is not attracting to voters?

[DutchLiberal]

You're not exactly selling me the 'product' Hillary Clinton.

I take issue with: If you choose not to vote for a Democratic candidate, you must accept responsibility for helping the Republicans. That's bullshit. That's a scare tactic and a way of bullying progressives into voting for a corporate-owned Democrat whose similarities with the Republican candidate are bigger than the differences. What about turning it around? "If you nominate a corporate-owned status quo DLC Democrat, you must accept responsibility for helping the Republicans." You need to stop acting like the Democratic nominee is automatically entitled to our votes. No. He or she has to earn them. So instead of bullying us into voting *against* a Republican, persuade us to vote *for* the Democrat.

So far you haven't done a very effective job.

Yes, HRC has a health care plan. So does Mike Huckabee. And Mitt Romney. I'm sure even Duncan Hunter has a health care plan. What does it matter as long as it is still a disastrous plan? A plan in which the insurance companies, the HMO's, are still the ones who get to decide and they keep screwing the average people over and over again?

She is finally coming around to the idea of ending the Iraq war. This is going to convince me... how? *Now* she's coming around? It's 2008, for the love of God! She voted for the war! She voted to fund the war! She stood by her vote and cheer-leaded the war until at least March 2007!

How many times have we said it on DU that if the one-issue Republicans would just stay home, Democrats would win? That's all it takes--get your opponent to stay home. Then why are so many people arguing that a HRC nomination will bring out all the Republicans who would have normally stayed home?