Mulling my primary vote

[Lux Interior]

Pam wrote:
With Bernie, I see more possibilities.

I don't know. Republicans are still flipping out about Obama being a "Socialist."

What will they do when an actual self-identified "Socialist" is in office?

[deckeda]

Lux, they're already scared. Conservative friends of mine, with a very strong personal responsibility bent, see what he represents as 100% theft, plain and simple. Absolutely no one is owed anything and deserves no social help, at least not without puppet strings attached.

I'm sure there's a middle ground, but overcoming the scream fest of labels isn't likely.

[Pam]

Lux Interior wrote:
[quote=Pam]
With Bernie, I see more possibilities.

I don't know. Republicans are still flipping out about Obama being a "Socialist."

What will they do when an actual self-identified "Socialist" is in office?
Obama isn't a socialist but no matter how he countered the base will always believe it. With Bernie, he'll readily admit he's a socialist of some nature and then hammer them with it. He's not a shrinking violet and he's got the experience and facts to back himself up.

I felt the same as deckeda, that Hillary getting the nomination was the only way to keep check on the insanity that is congress. But I'm now of the belief that we didn't give Bernie enough credit. That he can pull in voters just as well as Hillary. Maybe even better.

[deckeda]

... I'm not saying I don't think Sanders wouldn't be effective, just that HRC is quite sane compared to who the R front runners are if she gets the nomination. I'd caucus for Bernie if my state knew what the D party was.

[Lux Interior]

Pam wrote:
Obama isn't a socialist but no matter how he countered the base will always believe it.

Most Americans wouldn't know what socialism is even if it snuck up behind them and seized their means of production.

[SteveG]

You'll need the shirt

[deckeda]

Lux Interior wrote:
[quote=Pam]
Obama isn't a socialist but no matter how he countered the base will always believe it.

Most Americans wouldn't know what socialism is even if it snuck up behind them and seized their means of production.
Then again, picking the right career has always been something to take seriously, especially when someone or someones can do it better.

[(vikm)]

deckeda wrote:
(vikm) I understand the logic but can't agree with the ideology. The pragmatic in me knows GWB for an example was a huge mistake, and if any of the R's get in, much of that insanity could return. I'll take another D president who's continually attacked and another do-nothing Congress over that. I don't think it's "your duty" to pull a lever anymore than I'd assume each person that does votes with the same level of eagerness.

Thanks at least for disagreeing without suggesting I'm being petulant or would only be doing it out of spite (I can assure you that's not it). Which is what many hardcore Clinton supporters have resorted to in other arenas :-)

[pdq]

Well, not to pick, (vikm), but do you think, say, Ted Cruz would make a better president than Clinton?

[deckeda]

(vikm) wrote:
[quote=deckeda]
(vikm) I understand the logic but can't agree with the ideology. The pragmatic in me knows GWB for an example was a huge mistake, and if any of the R's get in, much of that insanity could return. I'll take another D president who's continually attacked and another do-nothing Congress over that. I don't think it's "your duty" to pull a lever anymore than I'd assume each person that does votes with the same level of eagerness.

Thanks at least for disagreeing without suggesting I'm being petulant or would only be doing it out of spite (I can assure you that's not it). Which is what many hardcore Clinton supporters have resorted to in other arenas :-)
To be sure, petulance nor spitefulness never was a concern!

And I'm sure there's a fitting Smiths song that applies here (as usual) but that's not my immediate forte.