It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Throughout the last few weeks, mainstream media outlets and political pundits alike have incessantly derided the many supporters of Bernie Sanders who claim that they will not be voting for Hillary Clinton in November, should she win the Democratic nomination. Pundits argue that if they effectively fail to rally behind Hillary, Bernie’s supporters will be to blame in November if Donald Trump is subsequently elected. Here is why the pundits are definitively wrong, and why this rhetoric is not only misleading, but incredibly offensive to the democratic proces
Second, it is fallacious to assume that those who are claiming “Bernie or Bust” (i.e. those who refuse to rally behind Clinton if Bernie is not the nominee) are staunch Democrats to begin with. It is even more fallacious to believe that Hillary Clinton is somehow entitled to the support of Bernie’s voters, just by her very nature of running for President as a Democrat. Bernie is posing such a significant threat to Clinton and the Democratic Party establishment because of the fact that he is able to effectively accomplish something that Hillary Clinton has proven time and time again that she cannot: expanding the base of the Democratic Party. Throughout the last few months, it has become increasingly more clear that Bernie Sanders is succeeding precisely because he is bringing in new voters to the Democratic Party’s primary elections, including (but certainly not limited to) first-time voters, Independents, moderate Republicans, Civil Libertarians, Green Party voters, and the politically disenfranchised. It is arguable that these Bernie supporters, who by many accounts do not consider themselves to be bogged down by a staunch alignment to our two-party system (a trend that is becoming increasingly-popular amongst Americans) would not have been Clinton supporters in the first place. In fact, we now know that many of Bernie’s supporters would have instead opted out of voting in their state’s primary elections, had it not been for his presence in the race, which explains the record-breaking voter-turnout in many of the primary elections won by Bernie thus far, and the devastatingly low voter-turnout in the states won by Hillary.
it has become increasingly more clear that Bernie Sanders is succeeding precisely because he is bringing in new voters to the Democratic Party’s primary elections, including (but certainly not limited to) first-time voters, Independents, moderate Republicans, Civil Libertarians, Green Party voters, and the politically disenfranchised. I
originally posted by: AlaskanDad
a reply to: IAMTAT
I would not vote for a Clinton Sanders ticket, I am sure some would, but not all!
It makes me sad, to think the hilley corp could be in charge of America.
When there is a R or D in front of the candidate they always suck! unless you're a lobbyist!
I've not seen an R or D that I wanted to vote for, since I foolishly voted for Billy boy way back when!
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: AlaskanDad
At least I'm not regurgitating some asinine ideology created by Marx, and trying to pass it off as my 'own'.
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money [to spend]." or "Eventually, Socialists run out of other peoples' money [to spend]."
originally posted by: MountainLaurel
a reply to: neo96
If only you had this much outrage at the REAL people who are trying to take your money...oh wait, that already Have stolen your money.
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Boscowashisnamo
Recycling the same old ideas homing the next generation would be dumb enough to buy it.
TextRecycling the same old ideas homing the next generation would be dumb enough to buy it.