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
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: So first faithless voter is voting for Sanders in Maine [View all]bettyellen
(47,209 posts)78. I think the coming years will provide many opportunities for strong leadership in opposition
And I also think the nation's priorities and mindset will be way different than they are today. We are going to need people who can break through the media bullshit and stand up for us.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
155 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Are we not suggesting that electors vote their conscience? Apparently his conscience
kelly1mm
Dec 2016
#5
Exactly. This was the bullshit logic some self-identified progressives used not to vote for Hillary
still_one
Dec 2016
#56
People should vote their consciences as long as we agree with what their consciences tell them.
The Velveteen Ocelot
Dec 2016
#21
if the issue is to stop trump, voting for anyone but HRC does not achieve the goal
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#34
FWIW i have never said anyone should vote their conscience. they should vote for most good least
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#40
yeah, i think people think too often of their individuality as being more important than the common
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#47
I personally, would not have switched my vote. But i noticed something interesting. As mentioned,
dionysus
Dec 2016
#143
His "conscience" tells him allow Trump to add one more vote to his small "majority"?
George II
Dec 2016
#108
Yeah pretty much. That is the risk you take when promoting unbinding electors. nt
kelly1mm
Dec 2016
#112
If that was the point then it seems to have failed spectacularly since the news is of Democratic
kelly1mm
Dec 2016
#132
Hm. Claims to be a Democratic Elector and casts his vote for an Independent. Yeah.
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2016
#2
Third party, so we know exactly where he stands. He already got a shot at using Dem infrastructure
Hekate
Dec 2016
#114
Bernie lost the primaries on solid numbers. Hillary got 3 million more votes than Trump in the GE.
Hekate
Dec 2016
#113
i said none of the THREE you mentioned. which includes HRC. i have nothing to get over
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#31
I think O'Malley had a lot of potential, under different circumstances, in 2016.
StevieM
Dec 2016
#36
honestly, if we have learnt one thing from this election, is that we need people without long track
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#67
i think everything should be taken in context. in 2004 we were 4 years into a bush presidency
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#73
I think the coming years will provide many opportunities for strong leadership in opposition
bettyellen
Dec 2016
#78
I don't think he'll get another shot at using Dem infrastructure and the Dem brand, tho
Hekate
Dec 2016
#121
How about electing thirteen year olds....? New blood. Fresh ideas. Idealistic.
LanternWaste
Dec 2016
#148
Everybody here has been saying that electors can choose. Well, he chose.
hellofromreddit
Dec 2016
#42
Welcome to democratic politics where people will do things you disagree with every single day.
hellofromreddit
Dec 2016
#105
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?comview_post&forum1251&pid2661366
hellofromreddit
Dec 2016
#133
you know the primary ended a while ago, right? where hillary won both super delegates and elected
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#18
And people like him wonder why longtime Democrats fight them tooth and nail...
SaschaHM
Dec 2016
#22
In the rare event that some of the electors change their vote from Trump to Hillary
mtnsnake
Dec 2016
#23
single most ridic thing i have read today. she won cos she got 4 million more votes than sanders
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#41
a man who couldn't even win the primary, was not about to win the election.
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#52
Your bias is almost as obvious as your lack of evidence supporting your prophecies.
LanternWaste
Dec 2016
#149
Sanders loses primary: _HE_ lost! Clinton loses general: _THEY_ cheated!
hellofromreddit
Dec 2016
#62
However, the post you were responding to did not make that "general argument"
emulatorloo
Dec 2016
#141
both can be true. Russians and Comey did not interfere with these primaries
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#66
Nope. Either all candidates are in charge of their fates, or they are not.
hellofromreddit
Dec 2016
#76
that is a non-sensical comment. Russia could have interfered in the primaries, but did not
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#80
The DNC did not interfere, which is why it is not the same thing at all
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#101
i think she quit because the left bought into assange's conspiracies
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#74
This is a steaming pile of barnyard byproduct. 3 million votes over Trump's total went to HRC.
Hekate
Dec 2016
#117
interesting how the BLUEST states voted overwhelmingly for her, MA, CA, and NY
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#84
I'm not rehashing the primaries. In fact, I think it's time to shut this forum down.
Vinca
Dec 2016
#85
sure, but since you mentioned where you lived, i wanted to mention how blue states went
La Lioness Priyanka
Dec 2016
#87
Many other blue states went for Bernie, but please . . . let's not torture ourselves anymore.
Vinca
Dec 2016
#90
Agree. Not the time or place for a protest vote. This is the GE, not the primary. Wrong-headed!
riversedge
Dec 2016
#100
One from MN who was dismissed and replaced and another from HI. Bernie is dead to me. n/t
seaglass
Dec 2016
#91
Oops nevermind. His vote was deemed improper and he switched to Hillary. Bernie still
seaglass
Dec 2016
#104