41 Comments

1. I live in California. I knew my vote was not going to harm the election in 2016 or 2020. Who I voted for President would not have made a difference. So no, I'm not going to take the responsibility for Trump winning.

2. Thank goodness I live in California because I just could not vote for her. Just awful! Same for Biden. I don't expect perfection, but not being corrupt would be nice!

3. I realize that there are people that are mad that I even spoke up about how terrible they are, but I support democracy and I believe that is part of the democratic process.

I don't understand how most Americans can ignore that 68,000 Americans die every year from lack of healthcare. Really, how do they ignore it? Going to brunch is not more important than 68,000 Americans every year!

Expand full comment

We’re not a democracy. We’re a constitutional republic. As I’m constantly reminded by mouth-breathers whenever I argue for abolishing the electoral college. Bc of that, they don’t have to worry about our protest votes, they know CA will go blue. If we abolished the electoral college, our threat to withhold our votes from shitty candidates like Clinton and Biden couldn’t be ignored as easily.

Expand full comment

Totally agree with you 100%.

I was a kid when Clintons sexcapades became public. I was horrified that he would treat women this way, but even more horrified that a self described feminist would attack not her predatory spouse, but his victims. That was when i was first disillusioned by a prominent Democratic woman.

As secretary of state her foreign policy decisions affronted my understanding of human rights. She happily plunged country after country into civil war with virulently misogynistic religious factions, in order to steal sovereign rights of those countries, with no regard to the lives of the women and their futures that she sacrificed to do so.

And then in 2016, i tried to volunteer to help with the campaign of HRC. They only wanted money. I didn’t have any to spare as i was freshly unemployed, having been illegally fired for taking leave to care for my sick father.

Around this time, I discovered Bernie was running. I had long admired his resistance to the Iraq invasion, in which he was largely alone. And he needed volunteers, so I joined up. Apart from disliking Trump, I had felt the country had been in dire straits for years, especially as the Democratic party seemed hijacked by the same neocon warmongers who had mired us in endless conflicts, at the end of which, their personal bank accounts were the only victors.

Hillary was from being done with betraying us all though. She and her buddies Podesta and Blumenthal, among many others, conspired to tilt the primary for Hillary, while erroneously and viciously painting Bernie as sexist, ineffective and incompetent, with fairytale ideas, based in research and science, not industry propaganda, by the way.

My final disillusionment came from women voters themselves. Gloria Steinem quite sexistly declared young Bernie supporters as either sexist men or women so horny for them that they threw their principles out the window. And many women in general fell for this shtick and campaigned to bully, vilify and demean anyone who didn’t support this virulently misogynistic woman as virulently misogynistic themselves.

So yes, instead of reacting angrily to this dose of reality, do something constructive and pressure these Dems you so unapologetically worship despite their obvious lies, to support legislation that might help you, instead of funneling money to Lockheed Martin under the guise of humanitarian aid for Ukraine.

Expand full comment

Killary was a Goldwater Girl and President of the Young Republicans at Wellesley

Expand full comment

I guess they are all Bernie bros?? Cause a similar letter could be sent right back. "Hey, women who refused to vote for HRC, you're about to lose your autonomy, are you still happy about what you did? Now maybe you'll learn to vote your conscience in the primary but then get the fuck in line and vote your party, whoever it is, when the general comes. And what exactly did you do all this for? Not only did the opposing side not give you what you wanted, but they spent 4 years attacking the thing you had. Congratulations."

Also, the author tries to claim that the two scenarios, voting for Bernie in the primary and voting for HRC in the general, were equivalent in their ability to provide each camp their desired outcome. Nothing could be further from the truth. To vote for HRC causing her win is literally the end of what they would need to do to protect women's reproductive rights. Clinton could have sat on her hands for 1462 days and women in this country would have maintained the right to choose. Conversely, a vote for Bernie in the primary still would have needed him to win the general (which, by the way, also means that HRC supporters would have needed to not be self-destructive, vindictive little bitches like the "bros" were) and win enough seats in congress, likely still have to eliminate the filibuster (which we probably don't even have the votes for now), write the legislation, and get both the House and Senate to pass it. Not the same. Not at all. I know it sucks you didn't get your way. Maybe instead of throwing temper tantrums you can realize that the right gets the stuff they want by voting properly in the general no matter what happened in the primary, because no matter what, the candidate that makes it to your side of the ballot is ALWAYS going to be better than the other one. Remember what the candidates running against Trump were saying during their primary? Just awful stuff. But the minute he got the nod they ALL got in line, supported him, endorsed him, got their supporters to vote for him, and he won. Then he gave them more of what they wanted than any democrat ever would have (ostensibly huge tax cuts for the ultra rich and women dying from back-alley abortions). So, maybe you ought to look in the mirror, better yet, look at your sisters, daughters, wives, girlfriends, and female friends and loved ones, and decide if their humanity is worth choosing wisely yourself.

Expand full comment

Clyburn and Pelosi just flew to Texas to support anti-choice Cuellar (against pro-choice Cisneros). Hillary's running mate (Tim Kaine) was anti-choice. Dems would rather fund-raise for this "problem" (abortion rights) than solve it, as they've shown time and time again. if people don't believe them (Dems) anymore, they've only themselves to blame.

Expand full comment

If I had to guess it's because Texas is a backward shithole that would never elect a pro-choice Democrat. Maybe the ONLY shot of getting democratic representation in the state with the most restrictive abortion laws on the books is to put up a pro-life person? As much as it sucks, I'd rather have a pro-life Democrat than a pro-life Republican (because it sure as he'll won't be a pro-choice Republican on the ballot). This is what I'm talking about, people don't think at all. They're playing 3D chess, you're trying to figure out a Sit 'n Spin.

Expand full comment

Isn't this a relatively safe blue district? Also, I think that's the last thing that Pelosi is taking into consideration. Cuellar won't stop their gravy train of cash rolling in from big donors like Cisneros would .

Expand full comment

you're a clown. the dem party dgaf about abortion or healthcare or any other thing that would help people. look at california.

Expand full comment

Oh, that must be why they didn't pass and continually try to protect the Affordable Care Act.

Expand full comment

a massive giveaway to their insurance and pharma industry donor/owners.

Expand full comment

Oh, you mean the right wing healthcare plan formerly known as Romney Care?

Expand full comment

aka "romneycare" which was written by the heritage foundation, leaves 28.9 million uninsured and many others underinsured with deductibles and copays so high they can't use it.

Expand full comment

you're a bluemaga clown.

Expand full comment

the dems had decades to codify roe. why didn't they?

Expand full comment

There were/are significant risks associated with codifying Roe, at least for the past 42 years minimum because they would have had to eliminate the filibuster to do so. Plus, the court could strike down federal law as unconstitutional the same way they can overturn judicial precedent. The only thing that would have been stronger than what we had was a constitutional amendment, but there is a zero percent chance that would ever get ratified...

But what does that have to do with the price of eggs? I could say the same thing to you: why didn't the Dems codify whatever thing you wanted to have happen. It's a baseless, Red Herring argument that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. The question is: will the left remain fractured and let the Republicans do whatever they want, or will they refrain from being butthurt primary losers that intentionally throw the election to a party that quite literally wants to change control of our country to an authoritarian regime?

Expand full comment

Dems should quit making promises they never intend to keep, and stop supporting candidates that go against their (supposed) values. If Dems want votes, they need to stop being barely indistinguishable from their opponents. If you are worried about an authoritarian regime being in power then you should stand up to the administration which is promoting censorship and keeping a journalist in prison for exposing war crimes.

Expand full comment

dems can't get rid of the filibuster to codify roe because, if they did that, everyone, even the shitlibs, would see the filibuster is not the reason dems don't pass legislation to materially improve people's lives.

Expand full comment

Actually, that's not true. For 8 months during Obama's presidency, the Democrats had a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and huge majority in the House. Obama had promised during the campaign that codifying abortion rights was his top priority. So what happened when he got that super-majority? He was quoted in the media as saying that abortion rights was no longer that big a priority. And so Democrats did not pass legislation to ensure that a woman's right to choose was enshrined in law, as SCOTUS had suggested was needed for a long term solution.

Also, if you want to talk about butt hurt primary losers, look at your own kind first - a much higher percentage of Hillary losers in 2008 chose not to vote for Obama than Bernie voters in 2016 who chose not to vote for Hillary. Additionally, the Democratic Party does not own those votes. You can't say with any certainty that Bernie voters would ever have voted for Hillary. In fact, you don't even know how many Bernie voters that chose not to vote for Hillary were Independents or Republicans. And if you're going to play that game, then you also need to give Trump all the votes that Gary Johnson won. He got 3.3% vs. Jill Stein's 1.1%. Do you want to play that game?

And then there were the tens of thousands of non-Bernie supporting registered Democrats who voted for Trump - a far larger number than the Bernie voters who chose not to vote for Hillary. I wonder why all you #BlueMAGA types focus your blame solely on Bernie voters? I wonder why you don't focus your ire on Democrats picking a highly unpopular candidate who ran a terrible campaign and picked a pro-birth Republican posing as a Democrat as her running mate.

Is it because you think it helps the party to bully and abuse people to your left who voted differently than you demanded? Do you think that's going to whip us in line for future elections? Do you think by taking out your anger on people who had nothing to do with Hillary's loss rather than the party who selected her and ran such a terrible campaign is going to help Democrats do better in the future?

Apparently we already know the answer. It's called Joe Biden whose favorability rating is now worse than Trump's, who has done nothing worthy of re-election other than not being Trump, and whose horrendous job as president could get us nuked, but at the very least will lose all of congress in 2022 and the presidency in 2024. We could have had a good man like Bernie pushing progressive policies, but thanks to #BlueMAGA's "Vote Blue No Matter Who" mantra, the party learned nothing and we ended up with an addled brain right winger as president.

You want to know who to blame? Look in the mirror.

Expand full comment

you are aware that dems could beat the gop in every election if they wanted to? all they'd have to do is sign executive orders and pass legislation that helped people instead of corporations.

Expand full comment

They do do stuff that helps people, people are generally too stupid in this country to realize though.

Expand full comment

the dems are sending billions of dollars to ukrainian nazis to fight a proxy war for MIC capitalists while claiming there's no money for covid tests during a pandemic.

Expand full comment

you are in no position to call anyone else stupid especially voters immiserated by your corrupt dem party.

Expand full comment

the biden admin gives gov contracts to union busting corps, has increased fossil fuel extraction, dropped the public option and free community college and $15 min wage and climate change action all while inflation has lowered wages.

Expand full comment

biden could cancel all student loan debt with an executive order. his admin has been sitting on an entirely redacted memo for over a year that obviously says he can because now the mfer is finally talking about cancelling a means tested pittance that will have nearly zero effect since his party's numbers are in the toilet.

Expand full comment

you're too stupid to realize the democratic party chose rich people over the working class back during the dlc/clinton admin. the reason people hate the democrats is because they correctly recognize the dems dgaf about them.

Expand full comment

Here, here. The idea that a vote for a third party candidate is a waste of a vote or a way of letting the other side win, is not only dispelled by looking at actual election results when Democrats win, eg Obama beat McCain even though third party candidates ran, but it's a transparent attempt (which has so far been successful) of convincing people who want other than what the two parties have to offer, that they have NO OTHER CHOICE. Isn't a democracy, even a democratic republic, supposed to be based on choice?

Expand full comment
May 6, 2022·edited May 6, 2022

They dont have the fucking power- for It's two dems holding up the change to filibuster . TWO. and there is nothing we can do about it except vote them out - and that vote is after they take away Roe. so you need a better strategy.

Expand full comment

you couldn't be more wrong.

Expand full comment

then what should they do? to get rid of filibuster?

Expand full comment

it's not 2 holding it up. it's the entire party. dems have no intention of solving any "culture war" issue (any issue that doesn't affect oligarch $$$ which dems use to pretend they aren't gop).

Expand full comment

you didnt give a strategy - nada.

Expand full comment

Here's your strategy. Biden calls Munchin into his office. He says "Joe, I've ordered the EPA to investigate your coal interests. I hope you're in compliance with absolutely every last iota of existing regulations, because if you're not your going to court. And before you get to trial, the party will be blanketing the state with ads reminding everyone in the potential jury pool that your daughter is the reason epipens cost $400. Oh, and your wife's already been caught using her position on the infrastructure board I appointed for enrich herself, so she'd better lawyer up to."

And then Joe says "Lets make a deal", and Joe says, "No, I've already asked the governor to replace you with a team player once your impending indictment leads the state legislature to remove you. I'm just using you as a example to Sinema."

Expand full comment

you need to first understand and accept that dems only work for the oligarchy, same as the gop. you're still invested in your delusion. i can't help you.

Expand full comment

there is no logical reason for the d party to get rid of the filibuster. their agenda is not your agenda.

Expand full comment

that is as bad as a trumper. no logic.conspiracy thinking. thinking they are in back rooms saying ok- sinema and manchin - you say No to change of filibuster- meanwhile... Jesus christ.

Expand full comment

they had decades to codify roe. why didn't they? go ahead and keep ignoring reality.

Expand full comment

you are right about that- that they had decades. and that is fucked up.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

it was until you arrived.

Expand full comment