Clinton Takes on Sanders Hecklers in NY

[°Leprechaun]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owEP2mE_8VE

[Virginiá]

I'm not listening to 4 mins of the harpy much less 40... but from what I can take away she had peaceful protestors forcibly removed from her little pow-wow?

Well, look, what should she have done? Let people who most likely have no desire to have a rational, thoughtful debate with her hijack her event? That would be like her inviting jfern up there. Even if they did, that is neither the time nor the place for such a discussion. And when you say forcibly, that really gives the implication that they picked them up by their underwear and tossed them onto the street - After taking their coats, obviously. How else do you address the situation? Let them stand there disrupting her speech with their chants the entire time? Even for seasoned public speakers, it's hard to deliver your speech when there are people heckling you nonstop.

Frankly, she had a point - She has won more votes than him. Bernie is outspending her, too, so if they want to blame anyone for not getting what they want, then maybe they should blame Sanders. He's a good politician, a good man, has massive public support and more money than Clinton, yet he is still not winning. IMO his strategy has been less than stellar and with more compromise on his message and platform, maybe he could have sealed the deal with the rest of the Democratic party.

That's the problem with ideologues - A lot of the time they really don't know when, or even how to compromise. That will cost them support, as we are seeing with Bernie's campaign.

Yeah, but they don't really count because most of them are Confederates.

God, I really hope you're joking. Southern Democratic voters count just as much as anyone else.

[Landslide Lyndon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

WRECKED.

Yeah, but they don't really count because most of them are Confederates.

God, I really hope you're joking. Southern Democratic voters count just as much as anyone else.

Not according to Sanders' campaign.

[This account no longer in use.]

Yeah, but they don't really count because most of them are Confederates.

God, I really hope you're joking. Southern Democratic voters count just as much as anyone else.

He's joking. It's not very funny, but it's a joke.

[RaphaelDLG]

Yeah, but they don't really count because most of them are Confederates.

God, I really hope you're joking. Southern Democratic voters count just as much as anyone else.

He's joking. It's not very funny, but it's a joke.

Seriously, it's democrats in mostly white states that are the ones that don't count

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Remember guys, ONLY Bernie supporters are the TRUE Democrats! Everyone who supports the harpy, warmongering neoconservative, corporatist is a DINO who just wants to see the Establishment win

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

When Hillary gets briefly interrupted: bad protestors
When Bernie gets his event shut down by protestors: bad Bernie

Yeah, no double standard there.

[Averroës Nix]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

[Ebsy]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

[RaphaelDLG]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

If his state is not competitive, how is he allowing that?!?

[Averroës Nix]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

If his state is not competitive, how is he allowing that?!?

Don't worry about Ebsy, he's just eager to mete out verbal abuse. That's not an attitude that lends itself toward nuance, or even coherence.

[Averroës Nix]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

[Ebsy]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

You whining about maybe voting for Clinton just confirms everything I suspect to be true about you. Feel free to keep disliking my posts on AAD and flouting your undeserved and smug intellectual superiority. She wins, you lose.

[henster]

Hillary lost me a long time ago, I will probably be voting Green this fall or not at all.

[Higgs]

https://youtu.be/8qRT1NjmelU?t=11m32s

Some Sanders supporters started chanting, "She wins, we lose."

Clinton responds, "I know the Bernie people came to say that; We're very sorry you're leaving!"

It gets increasingly high energy from there.

I'm not listening to 4 mins of the harpy much less 40... but from what I can take away she had peaceful protestors forcibly removed from her little pow-wow?



^ Learn some respect from da big dog you arrogant wench.  

She should learn to let people hijack her events and insult her supporters? I think Bernie should learn from Clinton and grow a pair.

[Ebsy]

Hillary lost me a long time ago, I will probably be voting Green this fall or not at all.

I mean, you've been one of the most consistent peddlers of the Clinton email scandal, so no one is exactly fooled.

[The Other Castro]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

You whining about maybe voting for Clinton just confirms everything I suspect to be true about you. Feel free to keep disliking my posts on AAD and flouting your undeserved and smug intellectual superiority. She wins, you lose.

Crazy thought: People don't have to support candidates they don't like.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

You whining about maybe voting for Clinton just confirms everything I suspect to be true about you. Feel free to keep disliking my posts on AAD and flouting your undeserved and smug intellectual superiority. She wins, you lose.

Even taking out anything related to this election, you're still not 1/1000th of the poster Averroes is. I'm pretty sure he doesn't give a sh*t what you "suspect" about him, nor should anyone else.

[Ebsy]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

You whining about maybe voting for Clinton just confirms everything I suspect to be true about you. Feel free to keep disliking my posts on AAD and flouting your undeserved and smug intellectual superiority. She wins, you lose.

Crazy thought: People don't have to support candidates they don't like.

Well, by that logic, Clinton has the most votes so she must be the most liked.

[The Other Castro]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

You whining about maybe voting for Clinton just confirms everything I suspect to be true about you. Feel free to keep disliking my posts on AAD and flouting your undeserved and smug intellectual superiority. She wins, you lose.

Crazy thought: People don't have to support candidates they don't like.

Well, by that logic, Clinton has the most votes so she must be the most liked.

More like I'm assuming the people that have voted for Clinton so far do not dislike her. With recent comments like this, it is understandable that some people dislike her. That is not good for her because people are probably less likely to vote for someone they dislike. Clinton is not entitled to a single vote, and she must earn every single one. She really shouldn't be making comments like this that are turning off the people she needs to win over, and comments like yours directed to disaffected Democrats certainly do not help.

[Ebsy]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

You whining about maybe voting for Clinton just confirms everything I suspect to be true about you. Feel free to keep disliking my posts on AAD and flouting your undeserved and smug intellectual superiority. She wins, you lose.

Crazy thought: People don't have to support candidates they don't like.

Well, by that logic, Clinton has the most votes so she must be the most liked.

More like I'm assuming the people that have voted for Clinton so far do not dislike her. With recent comments like this, it is understandable that some people dislike her. That is not good for her because people are probably less likely to vote for someone they dislike. Clinton is not entitled to a single vote, and she must earn every single one. She really shouldn't be making comments like this that are turning off the people she needs to win over, and comments like yours directed to disaffected Democrats certainly do not help.

Clinton is scoring better on Pew's party unity metric that Obama did in 2008, and he had little to no trouble consolidating support among Democrats outside of places like Arkansas and West Virginia. She is not going to have trouble getting the vast majority of Democrats behind her, and general election polls clearly show.

I do have a question though, and that is why you don't apply the same standard to Sanders? He and his supporters constantly guttersnipe us as paid for shills who obviously must be in the pocket of the big banks or whatever. He insinuates everyone that disagrees with him (a clear majority of Democrats) is corrupt. Don't you think that is more of an obstacle to consolidating support than Clinton calling out some hecklers for being idiots?

[Xing]

Fortunately for the Hillary folks, my opinion if Hillary Clinton has not been influenced by her most obnoxious supporters. (Not that it matters a lot in a state like WA) For the record, I don't think she acted out of line in that clip. What I do take umbrage at is the assumption that Sanders supporters are all reactionary fools who would be supporting Clinton if they were actually politically active and cared about the Democratic Party.

[The Other Castro]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

You whining about maybe voting for Clinton just confirms everything I suspect to be true about you. Feel free to keep disliking my posts on AAD and flouting your undeserved and smug intellectual superiority. She wins, you lose.

Crazy thought: People don't have to support candidates they don't like.

Well, by that logic, Clinton has the most votes so she must be the most liked.

More like I'm assuming the people that have voted for Clinton so far do not dislike her. With recent comments like this, it is understandable that some people dislike her. That is not good for her because people are probably less likely to vote for someone they dislike. Clinton is not entitled to a single vote, and she must earn every single one. She really shouldn't be making comments like this that are turning off the people she needs to win over, and comments like yours directed to disaffected Democrats certainly do not help.

Clinton is scoring better on Pew's party unity metric that Obama did in 2008, and he had little to no trouble consolidating support among Democrats outside of places like Arkansas and West Virginia. She is not going to have trouble getting the vast majority of Democrats behind her, and general election polls clearly show.

I do have a question though, and that is why you don't apply the same standard to Sanders? He and his supporters constantly guttersnipe us as paid for shills who obviously must be in the pocket of the big banks or whatever. He insinuates everyone that disagrees with him (a clear majority of Democrats) is corrupt. Don't you think that is more of an obstacle to consolidating support than Clinton calling out some hecklers for being idiots?

I would be saying the same things if there was a clip of Sanders yelling at someone that Clinton was a liar, and if a poster here was being attacked for saying they would not vote for Sanders should he win the nomination. I have not yet witnessed such a case on this forum of a Clinton supporter being attacked for not hypothetically supporting Sanders (not saying it hasn't necessarily happened though, just that I haven't seen one and thus haven't responded to such a situation).

Furthermore, I am of the opinion that Clinton has been running a more negative campaign than Sanders in terms of attacks directed towards their opponents specifically. It is much more negative to call someone a liar than to point out facts about donors and voting records. It's also pretty hyperbolic to say that Sanders has been calling every Democrat that disagrees with him corrupt and I think you're aware of that. Bottom line however, people are free to support whomever they please, even if that leads to negative consequences. I'll most likely be voting for Clinton come November, but I wouldn't hold anyone in contempt that refused to do so.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I am inching closer every day to pulling the level for Hillary. If she's keeps up this energy and puts people on their place, I may rejoice in victory once again. I used to think I'd have to go the 3rd Party route, but she's making it palatable.

[Eraserhead]

Meh... not "presidential," to say the least. For a lot of reasons, I am increasingly glad that I'm not voting in a state that will be competitive in the general election,

I wish we were all as privileged as you to allow Republicans to criminalize abortion and roll back gay marriage.

You don't know me, and your candidate is not entitled to me vote. Spare me the condescending pieties.

I can tell you this: My vote isn't going to change because of how anyone's online supporters have treated me, but if I do choose not to vote for Clinton, the behavior that we've seen throughout this election from posters like you, Lief, Mondale, and bedstuy will have made me feel markedly more comfortable about doing so. Reflect on that before assuming the worst about anyone who disagrees with you.

You whining about maybe voting for Clinton just confirms everything I suspect to be true about you. Feel free to keep disliking my posts on AAD and flouting your undeserved and smug intellectual superiority. She wins, you lose.

This from the guy who dislikes posts with poll results he doesn't care for.