Home | About | Donate

This Ain’t the Kentucky Derby, Y’All


This Ain’t the Kentucky Derby, Y’All

Barbara Burt

Ok, everybody, just calm down.

At this point in the Democratic presidential primary “horserace,” things are getting tense. Some Clinton supporters clamor for Sanders to drop out. Although their voices may seem loud, in reality it’s surprisingly few people: results from the latest NBC News/SurveyMonkey poll says only 16 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaners want Sander’s exit. Even almost a third of declared Clinton supporters want him to stay in until the end.


"A full 89 percent of Sanders supporters say they would like to see him stay in the race until July."

A full 100 percent of Sanders supporters would like to see him stay in the race until NOVEMBER.

There, fixed it.


"We don’t have to love a President Clinton but we do need to vote for one, to make sure that the vision laid out by Bernie Sanders isn’t squashed in its infancy." Right there is where Ms. Burt lost me. What makes her, or anyone else, believe that "the vision laid out by Bernie Sanders" will not be "squashed in its infancy" by a "President Clinton" in the same way that candidate Clinton is attempting to squash it now?


As with most popular conspiracy theories, there is some truth to that."

Not necessarily most such theories. The most rigged thing about the Democratic primary was that the only six debates were originally scheduled and the first one did not occur until the Republicans already had a couple of debates. Overall the process favored Sanders because so many states have caucuses rather than primaries. That is isn't rigging, the decision is left up to the states. The Superdelegates can choose to support any candidate so that isn't rigging. In 2008 many switched from Clinton to Obama. Whether primaries are open, closed, or mixed is also not rigging because that also is left up to each state. The main reason Clinton is doing well is that she is getting so much support from African American and Hispanic voters. That isn't rigging, that's voting.


"Sanders brought a gift to the party and unwrapped it in front of our eyes. And now that we’ve seen his offering of higher aspirations, we can’t go back."

Want to bet? Watch and learn. The bulk of the party establishment still wants nothing to do with Bernie and his ideas. The DNC and party hacks are currently on a fishing expedition to see how they can get Bernie's supporters without Bernie. Prepare yourselves for talk of platform changes and inclusiveness, all with big smilie faces. Then watch as the status quo party machine rolls right over it all after November.


Yours is not commenting, yours is lying.


I fear CD is preparing to declare that, "That awful fascist Trump is so dreadful, he must be stopped at any cost," by voting for a much worse fascist, Clinton of course ...


" There's no defense of the DNC's anointment of Clinton before the primaries even began."

This may not be the Kentucky Derby, but it certainly has been, and is a fixed horse race! The DNC's covert mantra is: ANYONE BUT BERNIE!


I do not have to vote for President Clinton.
I do not have to vote for Hillary Clinton.

I am extremely tired of reading that I do. The salesperson's foot-in-the-door presumptive close aspect of it all is disturbing.

Why would anyone vote for any Clinton to protect Sanders' policies? She opposes them, and quite competently.


"We don’t have to love a President Clinton but we do need to vote for one"

Ha ha, these people think we are stupid.

My message to all the Barbara Burts of the world:

If Bernie Sanders is not the Democratic nominee, I will face a fundamental choice: do I vote lesser of two evils, or do I vote positively?

If I decide to vote positively, I will (most likely) vote for Jill Stein of the Green Party.

If I decide to vote lesser of two evils, I will vote for Donald Trump (holding my nose, of course).

No DNC manipulation will make me vote for the establishment candidate, got that?


Yes. Readers here must be prepared for lots more articles along this line. The danger is that Bernie and/or those around him might fall for such sugar-coated poison. All of us here must expose the trap.


Thank you but no thank you, Barbara. Been there, done that. :hourglass:


..and there are more just like her coming, too! WATCH OUT! :lipstick::spy:


If the people supporting Bernie all decide they must vote HRC should she prevail than absolutely nothing was accomplished and Bernie might just as well never have run.

The DNC establishment has to know that all of those new peoples that went out to rally behind Bernie do not belong to them. They belong to the message that Bernie carried for them and have no obligation whatsoever to the Democratic party.


This is another of those "vote for the least worst candidates" oped. Let's show both parties that we will no longer accept their mediocrity which supports the 1% and vote for a third party candidate if Sander's does not win the nomination. If enough of us vote third party, they will have to hustle to complete building the required prisons and arming the police. I've died and woke up in the Roman Empire.


Here you go again CD.
Watch for it! Aw schucks, Hillary has moved the party to the left, so she is not so bad after all; especially compared to Trump! And after all, the DNC will adopt many of Bernie's ideas into their platform. What a crock of BS!


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


The chances I'll vote for Hillary Clinton are zero. Sorry, Barbara.
Your apparent belief that a vote for Sanders is merely fungible, convertible to a vote for a neocon Wall Street Republican betrays a thoroughgoing misunderstanding of what is at issue.

Clinton's willingness to sacrifice the people of Iraq merely in order to pad her resume to run for president, her deranged proposal for a no-fly zone when Russia was active in Syria, her laughing over the brutal butchering of Qaddafi, her pressing Obama to destroy the Libyan state, her support for the military coup d'etat in Honduras then lying about it, her opposition to the Iran deal, her support for the Iraqi sanctions that killed half a million young children, her using Kissinger as an advisor then actually, voluntarily vacationing with him... that last more than anything is evidence of Hillary Clinton's madness.

We treat it as an impoliteness to bring up a candidate's support for mass murder, but there it is. Clinton views mass murder as simply one more tool of politics.

So, no. Never.


Made my day. Many thanks.


Your wholesale deceit is unimpressive. Everyone in these parts is well aware that in concert with the GOP the DNC writes the rules that make it effectively impossible for an Independent who is not independently wealthy to run outside the two-party system. Then, having forced a candidate inside one of the major parties, that Independent's likeliest voters find it impossible to vote for their preferred candidates.

This is vote theft and vote suppression on a massive scale, as you doubtless know. In addition the DNC in concert with state parties front-loaded the schedule with Southern states (compare with 2008--other than the first four primaries, which are essentially unmovable, the difference is marked), which were known to favor Clinton. These were even made popular vote primaries in order to create the ongoing appearance of substantial popular support for Clinton, while debates were absolutely minimized during this portion of the theatrical production that has been the Democratic primary season for the nomination.

You're fooling no one. The only way to foist a dismal candidate like Clinton on the electorate was through vote fraud, vote suppression, debate manipulation, vote rigging, superdelegate fraud, schedule rigging, fraud in funneling money from state parties to the Clinton campaign, and on and on and on.

The result? A candidate so weak, and so obviously the production of a machine, that she may ACTUALLY lose to a buffoon like Trump. That's impressive, in its way.