Privilege is what allows Sanders supporters to say they’ll “never” vote for Clinton

[evilnel]

The latest installment of “The Internet Explodes with Hatred for Hillary Clinton” happened earlier this month. The Democratic presidential candidate, whose own record on AIDS research and funding is better than any other candidate, mistakenly said that former US first lady Nancy Reagan was a key supporter of AIDS research. Reagan was, in reality,

Comments

[lone_concertina]

With the exception of 2008 when I voted for Obama because I lived in a swing state that year, as a liberal in Texas I've always voted for Jill Stein. It's not privilege keeping me from voting for Hillary as a Bernie supporter--it's that I fundamentally disagree with her on too many of the big issues and my vote doesn't count that much in Texas anyway.

[calinewarkwc69]

+1

[celtic_thistle]

If I didn't live in a swing state I'd be doing the same. I'm going to have to seriously wrestle with my conscience if she is the nominee.

[mutive]

I think it's a bit overblown, but I've definitely seen on my Facebook feeds (and here) people stating that they won't vote at all vs. voting Clinton. (Occasionally I see the converse, although it's more unusual.) Either way, I agree - you LOATHE Clinton, don't vote for her. But considering that she and Sanders agree on a massive number of issues, I do think it's fair to examine why you hate one vs. the other. (Assuming you do and all that. I'm honestly pretty neutral between the two.)

[mutive]

I'd argue it's more on how to handle the issues that Clinton and Sanders have the primary disagreement. But considering how similar most of their voting records are, I'm disinclined to see *that* huge a difference. (And I suspect that, once dealing with the realities of office, both would *probably* handle things similarly. Again, though, that's very clearly an opinion.) Regardless, I feel fairly certain that *either* would act more like the other than they would like either Trump or Cruz

[lovedforaday]

Well, yeah I think it's true to a certain extent, but no one is owed anyone's vote. Like how *some* Sanders supporters love to go around and wag their fingers at "stupid people who vote against their best interests", Democrats and Clinton supporters shouldn't do the same.

I think most Sanders voters will vote for Clinton anyway. Sanders will most likely endorse her and the vocal minority of people who vow to never vote for Clinton will do whatever they want no matter want.

[moonshaz]

I think most Sanders voters will vote for Clinton anyway. Sanders will most likely endorse her and the vocal minority of people who vow to never vote for Clinton will do whatever they want no matter want.

I think it will be very interesting to see what happens when/if that day comes. (I say "when/if" because the odds are greatly in favor of Hillary getting the nom right now, but there is at least an outside chance that Bernie could still pull off a miracle or something. Personally, I don't THINK he will, but I still acknowledge at least the outside possibility.)

I just wonder what all these people who have been preaching that Bernie is the second coming of whatever and Hillary is pure evil going to do when/if she actually gets the nom and Bernie endorses her. (Assuming he does endorse her, but it's kind of hard to imagine that not happening.) If I really, really hated Hillary as much as some Bernie supporters seem to, I can't help thinking it would be hard to stomach him telling me that I should vote for her.

[mutive]

I’m here to say that I’m sick of seeing her reviled for the same things people forgive easily when they’re done by men, and that the stakes are too high this election cycle to indulge that or leave it unexamined.

Pretty much this. Clinton isn't a saint. Nor is Sanders. But yeah, reviling her for stuff that's overlooked when it's done by a man *is* straight up misogyny.

There is no perfect candidate. There never will be. I wish people would accept this.

[eveofrevolution]

[sweetmizre]

Totally agree with you

[spyral_out]

But who is overlooking stuff when it is done by men? I hate the shit I dislike her for doing regardless of who does it.

[ponyboy]

The Democratic presidential candidate, whose own record on AIDS research and funding is better than any other candidate, mistakenly said that former US first lady Nancy Reagan was a key supporter of AIDS research. Reagan was, in reality, horrible about AIDS in every possible way. Clinton immediately apologized, then apologized again, at length. Yet we’re still seeing a wagonload of “I’ll never vote for her” claims from progressives, as if her words about Reagan trump-and I’m using that verb deliberately-her actual record on AIDS research and funding. Why?

i'm sorry but as someone who is queer, who knows queer history, and actively discriminated against as a queer person: that gaffe is more than enough for me or other queer persons to say no to hillary. her making this "gaffe" was at best, a clumsy pandering error and at worst, a calculated move to pander that backfired spectacularly. she's a white straight woman. she hasn't dealt with this discrimination and if she is a candidate who is trying to be president, she should be held

[cassiopeiaah]

Yes this! Like Hilary is a hawk

[koushiba]

I love this comment! Your second point was way more eloquent then I could've written.

[fishphile]

Yes. This.