1 in 4 Sanders Supporters Won't Back Hillary in November

[ProudModerate2]

I will never vote for her.

Curious ....
If it ends up being Hillary vs trump, who will you vote for ?
trump or someone else ?
Not vote at all ?

[Oak Hills]

I will never vote for her.

Curious ....
If it ends up being Hillary vs trump, who will you vote for ?
trump or someone else ?
Not vote at all ?

Probably Trump.

Why?

[Lyin' Steve]

[Oak Hills]

I will never vote for her.

Curious ....
If it ends up being Hillary vs trump, who will you vote for ?
trump or someone else ?
Not vote at all ?

Probably Trump.

Why?

He's to her left on what matters, and he's not as dangerous as she is.

I'm not sure how one could conclude that he's to her left on anything.

[Lyin' Steve]

I will never vote for her.

Curious ....
If it ends up being Hillary vs trump, who will you vote for ?
trump or someone else ?
Not vote at all ?

Probably Trump.

Why?

He's to her left on what matters, and he's not as dangerous as she is.

I'm not sure how one could conclude that he's to her left on anything.

On campaign finance and Wall St., he's definitely to her left. She's a phony on all of those issues and nothing will change with a Clinton presidency. Oh, and Trump is to her left on most foreign policy issues too.

Granted, I'm not really a Democrat and think Bill Clinton is one of the worst presidents of all time.

Hillary is basically D-grade version of Bill so that sounds like 4 years of misery to me. I'd vote for anyone over her. She's a pathological liar, so it's not like Trump's grandstanding raises flags for me.

Hillary worked her butt off to help shepherd McCain-Feingold through the senate.  Her husband had worked hard to try to pass campaign finance reform during his administration but got blocked by the Republican congress.  Not sure what "Wall Street" means in terms of concrete issues, but remember this:  if you had $100 in 1992 and invested it in Wall Street, in 2000 you had $366.  That's prosperity for the lower and middle classes.  If Bernie's voters were old enough to remember the Clinton economy they would be Hillary voters.

[Oak Hills]

On campaign finance and Wall St., he's definitely to her left. She's a phony on all of those issues and nothing will change with a Clinton presidency.

Well, Trump is an even bigger fraud on those issues. I mean, campaigning on not having a superPAC or big-money donors when you are one of those corrupt big-money donors?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not really. Trump didn't oppose the Iraq War when it actually mattered, and he's way more hawkish than her on Iran. (I'm assuming you're using a lazy hawk=right-wing/dove=left-wing scheme here.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And Trump isn't? Are you seriously arguing Trump is more honest than her? He's the biggest phony I've seen in my (admittedly short) time following politics. And the second part doesn't follow from the first.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

On campaign finance and Wall St., he's definitely to her left. She's a phony on all of those issues and nothing will change with a Clinton presidency.

Well, Trump is an even bigger fraud on those issues. I mean, campaigning on not having a superPAC or big-money donors when you are one of those corrupt big-money donors?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not really. Trump didn't oppose the Iraq War when it actually mattered, and he's way more hawkish than her on Iran. (I'm assuming you're using a lazy hawk=right-wing/dove=left-wing scheme here.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And Trump isn't? Are you seriously arguing Trump is more honest than her? He's the biggest phony I've seen in my (admittedly short) time following politics. And the second part doesn't follow from the first.

Obviously both Hillary and Trump are massive liars.

[Third Party]

I'd say that the real percentage is more around 50% that will not vote for Hillary based upon the Sanders supporters that I work with. This will be a very good year for the Green Party. Hillary is going to get crushed.

[Oak Hills]

I'd say that the real percentage is more around 50% that will not vote for Hillary based upon the Sanders supporters that I work with. This will be a very good year for the Green Party. Hillary is going to get crushed.

Well, then the Sanders supporters you work with are not representative of Sanders supporters overall.

[Yank2133]

I will never vote for her.

Curious ....
If it ends up being Hillary vs trump, who will you vote for ?
trump or someone else ?
Not vote at all ?

Probably Trump.

Why?

He's to her left on what matters, and he's not as dangerous as she is.

So you rather let Trump pick the next two justices over Hillary?

My goodness, Liberals can be stupid.

[Adam Griffin]

Sanders' supporters in Wisconsin were pretty worthless in the Supreme Court race.

County results say otherwise.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/04/06/1511467/-Hmmm-Did-Sanders-Supporters-Not-Vote-For-The-Supreme-Court-In-Wisconsin-A-Look-At-Some-Numbers

I saw it mentioned somewhere else that 15% of Sanders voters "did not remember who they voted for, or voted for Bradley" according to some exit polling; 4% for Clinton voters. The math, however, suggests that if less than 50% of those Sanders voters voted for Bradley, then the overall result wasn't altered.

Additionally, Bradley won by 91,000 votes; the GOP primary had 98,000 more voters. The result - regardless of the finer points - was effectively spot-on in terms of expectations from turnout.

[Yank2133]

I will never vote for her.

Curious ....
If it ends up being Hillary vs trump, who will you vote for ?
trump or someone else ?
Not vote at all ?

Probably Trump.

Why?

He's to her left on what matters, and he's not as dangerous as she is.

So you rather let Trump pick the next two justices over Hillary?

My goodness, Liberals can be stupid.

I'm not a liberal!

You would pick Trump over Clinton, because he is to the left on things that matter?

But you aren't a liberal.

Ok then.

[Virginiá]

Additionally, Bradley won by 91,000 votes; the GOP primary had 98,000 more voters. The result - regardless of the finer points - was effectively spot-on in terms of expectations from turnout.

Which really makes me wonder just why they had that during a low turnout primary election? Seriously this country's patchwork of various elections at various dates needs to be consolidated into higher turnout elections.

Though at this point I wonder why anyone would think judicial elections are a good idea at all. How can a judge be impartial? The whole idea is completely bogus.

[dax00]

You can't assume Hillary's ideology is equivalent to her husband's - for one, because it's a fallacy, and also because it's flat out wrong.

Would vote Trump over the snake - no question.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

If Trump were more stable as a candidate and not prone to so many errors, this could be seriously detrimental. Picture a Trump the was more of a nimble navigator not just in fighting candidates but staking issue positions. To some extent it was (Planned Parenthood for instance and social security), and stayed focused on his two primary issues, threw in a couple of reform oriented things (term limits are big. I here them everywhere from disengaged voters. And maybe something to do with campaign finance), meanwhile hammering everything about the Clintons that Bernie supporters hate (War, Wall Street, trade, etc etc). You could see a significant chunk of Bernie Indies voting for Trump in the general.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Bold Prediction - Vermont GE Results:

Clinton - 54%
TRUMP - 33%
Stein - 12%

[Landslide Lyndon]

Sanders' supporters in Wisconsin were pretty worthless in the Supreme Court race.

County results say otherwise.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/04/06/1511467/-Hmmm-Did-Sanders-Supporters-Not-Vote-For-The-Supreme-Court-In-Wisconsin-A-Look-At-Some-Numbers

I saw it mentioned somewhere else that 15% of Sanders voters "did not remember who they voted for, or voted for Bradley" according to some exit polling; 4% for Clinton voters. The math, however, suggests that if less than 50% of those Sanders voters voted for Bradley, then the overall result wasn't altered.

Additionally, Bradley won by 91,000 votes; the GOP primary had 98,000 more voters. The result - regardless of the finer points - was effectively spot-on in terms of expectations from turnout.

The fact is that the difference between Clinton and Sanders regarding downballot races was stark again.
Clinton endorsed Kloppenburg, attacked Bradley as a bigot, and urged her supporters to vote for that race.
Sanders completely ignored it and I doubt even if he released a token press statement endorsing the Democratic candidate.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Sanders' supporters in Wisconsin were pretty worthless in the Supreme Court race.

County results say otherwise.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/04/06/1511467/-Hmmm-Did-Sanders-Supporters-Not-Vote-For-The-Supreme-Court-In-Wisconsin-A-Look-At-Some-Numbers

I saw it mentioned somewhere else that 15% of Sanders voters "did not remember who they voted for, or voted for Bradley" according to some exit polling; 4% for Clinton voters. The math, however, suggests that if less than 50% of those Sanders voters voted for Bradley, then the overall result wasn't altered.

Additionally, Bradley won by 91,000 votes; the GOP primary had 98,000 more voters. The result - regardless of the finer points - was effectively spot-on in terms of expectations from turnout.

The fact is that the difference between Clinton and Sanders regarding downballot races was stark again.
Clinton endorsed Kloppenburg, attacked Bradley as a bigot, and urged her supporters to vote for that race.
Sanders completely ignored it and I doubt even if he released a token press statement endorsing the Democratic candidate.

Bernie urged his voters to vote Kloppenburg also, and Kloppenburg underperformed the Democratic voters the most in Milwaukee, which just happened to be the only county Hillary won.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Bernie urged his voters to vote Kloppenburg also, and Kloppenburg underperformed the Democratic voters the most in Milwaukee, which just happened to be the only county Hillary won.

And which proves exactly what, besides the fact that brown-nosing Sanders is a full-time job for you?

[izixs]

Bernie urged his voters to vote Kloppenburg also, and Kloppenburg underperformed the Democratic voters the most in Milwaukee, which just happened to be the only county Hillary won.

And which proves exactly what, besides the fact that brown-nosing Sanders is a full-time job for you?

Coming back with personal attacks doesn't help your argument. Try it again, this time with an actual counter argument.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Bernie urged his voters to vote Kloppenburg also, and Kloppenburg underperformed the Democratic voters the most in Milwaukee, which just happened to be the only county Hillary won.

And which proves exactly what, besides the fact that brown-nosing Sanders is a full-time job for you?

Coming back with personal attacks doesn't help your argument. Try it again, this time with an actual counter argument.

You can't counter-argue a non-sequitur post.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Hillary isn't entitled to anyone's vote and it's really past time she and her supporters acknowledged that and worked to win over Sanders supporters instead of throwing temper-tantrums over stuff like this poll or the fact that Sanders is still in the race.

[°Leprechaun]

Well, if true, they can vote Green.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

I will never vote for her.

Curious ....
If it ends up being Hillary vs trump, who will you vote for ?
trump or someone else ?
Not vote at all ?

Probably Trump.

Why?

He's to her left on what matters, and he's not as dangerous as she is.

I'm not sure how one could conclude that he's to her left on anything.

On campaign finance and Wall St., he's definitely to her left. She's a phony on all of those issues and nothing will change with a Clinton presidency. Oh, and Trump is to her left on most foreign policy issues too.

Granted, I'm not really a Democrat and think Bill Clinton is one of the worst presidents of all time.

Hillary is basically D-grade version of Bill so that sounds like 4 years of misery to me. I'd vote for anyone over her. She's a pathological liar, so it's not like Trump's grandstanding raises flags for me.

This is actually the honest-to-god opinion of EVERY SINGLE Berniebro I've spoken with.  Either this, or "I'm voting for Trump because at least he'll blow the whole thing up and we can have a revolution."

[Yank2133]

I will never vote for her.

Curious ....
If it ends up being Hillary vs trump, who will you vote for ?
trump or someone else ?
Not vote at all ?

Probably Trump.

Why?

He's to her left on what matters, and he's not as dangerous as she is.

I'm not sure how one could conclude that he's to her left on anything.

On campaign finance and Wall St., he's definitely to her left. She's a phony on all of those issues and nothing will change with a Clinton presidency. Oh, and Trump is to her left on most foreign policy issues too.

Granted, I'm not really a Democrat and think Bill Clinton is one of the worst presidents of all time.

Hillary is basically D-grade version of Bill so that sounds like 4 years of misery to me. I'd vote for anyone over her. She's a pathological liar, so it's not like Trump's grandstanding raises flags for me.

This is actually the honest-to-god opinion of EVERY SINGLE Berniebro I've spoken with.  Either this, or "I'm voting for Trump because at least he'll blow the whole thing up and we can have a revolution."

You have to remember that the vast majority of Sanders supporters are well-off white people. So they can afford to vote for Trump and not feel the effects of his presidency.