Hillary Supporters: If Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party managed to poll higher than Clinton, would you flip to Jill or continue to vote for Clinton and risk a Trump presidency?

If somehow she were in the lead, I would vote for her. I like Jill better than Hillary, I am voting for Hillary because I do not think Jill stands a chance at winning.

Polls influence public perception. Most of our society will vote for whoever is leading in the polls, which is why someone like Stein will never lead the polls.

@SquirrelEStuff People thought that about Sanders, and yet he won a shocking number of states. It’s quite possible that he would have won the whole thing if not for election fraud and cheating. IMO this election is different. People are looking for a change more than in the past.

What? its ridiculous to even conduct that poll. Waste of time and money.

I don’t understand why people are grappling at hope of Hillary not being the candidate.

Voting for Jill Stein is an act of four years of absolutely nothing getting done.

Jill Stein has no party, no support, cannot get anything passed in Congress. And her threat to get it all done by Executive Action would lead to bipartisan veto proof legislation.

Jill Stein has done nothing to earn your vote.

The DNC is going to get its way. Bernie REMAINS my champion, but he rode into the tournament fully aware that the competition was fixed from the outset. He was only a Democrat because the actual contest is restricted to those wearing the taint of the party label. The process may be disgusting, but the argument mounted by the crooked party is valid, regardless of the fact that they are responsible for arranging things this way. In the end, disgust, disappointment, NOTHING supercedes the argument that Trump must be stopped. You just can’t get around it. Bernie knows it, even as he dumps his democratic credentials like dirty diapers, he praises and endorses Clinton all the way past the stinky dumpster.

@zenvelo Best case scenario for Hillary is that she will barely eek out a win. Congress will remain deeply red and nothing will get done. All passion and enthusiasm for the progressive movement will get suffocated in bureaucracy and stagnation. 2020 comes around and Republicans run another evil fucker (maybe the head of the KKK next time) and you’re going to be telling me to hold my nose and reelect Clinton. And again best case scenario is she limps through and nothing gets done for another 4 years.

The best case you can make with Clinton is 8 years of a lame duck presidency. 8 more years of fracking, of the TPP, of supporting Isreel illegally bulldozing Palestinian settlements, increased warmongering, the too-big-to-fail banks getting even bigger, increasing corporate mergers, the middle class continuing to evaporate as the 1% get an even larger percent of the wealth.

…And that’s the BEST case. That’s the “happy dream” you’re trying to pitch me.

I’m pretty convinced that the only hope of defeating Trump is Stein. The territory where Clinton was strong in the primary (her firewall) in the Deep South will all go red. The states in the North where Sanders crushed her could easily go to Trump. I’m CONVINCED that Hillary cannot win the Executive.

Given this, the only rational way to defeat Trump is to have a huge groundswell of progressive support for Stein, a genuine, progressive candidate, who has a platfom the American people want, and not the lodestone of a record-breaking disapproval rating weighing her down. I’m convinced that most progressives would switch to Stein if a vote for Hillary was seen as a vote for Trump. Stein is already polling at 7% in a general election and that’s with a near total media blackout.

If Stein can get that kind of support, there is a reasonable chance of flipping congress to Blue. A blue congress will never happen with a candidate that people are reluctantly voting for.

In my opinion, a vote for Jill Stein is a wasted vote. I’m voting for Hillary.

Of course, but that will never happen. Given the way that the American electoral system works, it is too late to hang a hope and a vote on Jill Stein. If you want to affect the outcome of the election, you have a choice between two candidates. This is real life, not a fantasy world in which wishes come true.

I don’t see that happening. The one thing I believe to be true about the American public is that they rather have the devil they know than the one they don’t. Three months is not enough for the public to suddenly trust her or feel they know everything she stands for, or to believe she will be a strong voice in Washington.
She wanted Bernie to lead her ticket and apparently he has declined it. Should tell you something. She ran in 2012 and got maybe a half a million votes.
Trump got traction because he already had a famous name. Bernie was in the front lines by using facebook, and linking with Elizabeth Warren who was also popular. I’ve barely heard of Jill Stein and I occasionally review what is going on in Politics. I consider myself a novice in what I know about politics, now consider how many people never bother to know who is actually running or how they are going to vote until they actually get to the polls.
Polls mean nothing in the general until the last two or three days. I’ve seen many people do a 180 when they were close to actually casting their vote.
If you believed polls during the Primary, Bernie should’ve killed it. Many people said they would vote for him but changed to Hillary because they felt she had the experience that Bernie lacked. But they trusted him more.

@gorillapaws So, do you consider yourself a Green? Are you registered as a Green? What Green is running for Congress or the Senate in your district?

And what office has she ever served in, or been elected to? She wasn’t chosen by friends and neighbors to represent them locally, nor at the State level, why should she be elected to President? She has no more experience than an editorial writer.

Your “best case” is not at all close to the reality of what having Trump at the head of the GOP means. FiveThirtyEight has Democratic control of the Senate as a real possibility. And, there is even a chance of the House flipping out of GOP control.

Even as much as I prefer Stein over Clinton, I would vote whichever way I thought would keep Trump out of office. Right now that’s the priority. Everything else is on hold.

@zenvelo I’m a registered Democrat. After seeing their betrayal of progressives, I’ve lost all faith that they can be trusted to do what’s right. I honestly think a party that PRETENDS to be progressive while actually being pro-corporate is actually MORE DANGEROUS than one that’s honest in it’s conservative positions. It channels productive energy into electing people that aren’t having our backs.

Stein is an intelligent, Physician who graduated from Harvard’s Medical School. Her positions are inline with mine, she seems honest in advocating for those positions. Ultimately I trust someone like her to lead us instead of someone who wants to be President, not because they have some issue they’re passionate about, but because she wants the title, to see her name in the history books.

@gorillapaws

I don’t disagree, although our society is still influenced too much by mainstream media. There are a lot of smart people who see through the BS, unfortunately, as long as the majority doesn’t, it isn’t enough to change anything.
Bernie Sanders is this elections Ron Paul.

We can not deny that our media has an enormous influence over our society’s throughout process and do not think it’s by accident.
Edward Bernays (Freuds nephew) wrote a book called Propaganda and it begins with this,
“THE conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.”

@gorillapaws yeah, right. A party that’s honest in it’s conservative positions. Like the ones who want government out of your life, but want to tell you who can and cannot to fuck? Or the ones who want smaller government and lower taxes, but in their last administration started two wars that grew the government and will have to be paid for? That lied about the WMDs and got us into this fucking mess? That advocated torture of prisoners? That allowed the first Rendition flights? There is nothing conservative about any of this shit. It’s all very radical and has no ideological basis in America.

WHERE THE FUCK HAVE YOU BEEN?

The progressives (and I am very familiar with them here in San Francisco) always seem to come from a place of self-righteousness, with a fervor only matched by the stringent Ted Cruz type Dominionist evangelicals.

Progressives refuse to compromise, as if that is a betrayal of their position. Yet politics is the art of compromise.

Extremists in both ends of the political spectrum view anyone in the middle as dishonest and not true believers.

@gorillapaws I would have agreed with your assessment
prior to Trump & Sanders. But what the 2 of them have provided is the announcement that THINGS HAVE CHANGED. For the Republicans the change amounts to a catastrophe. But Bernie is the BIG warning for the democrats who managed to screw him out for of a legitimate chance at the nomination. The only thing guaranteed to get the whores to move off the dime is the threat of being voted out of office. Up until now the decision as to the likliehood of that has been in the hands of monied interests. The populist rage puts a severe crimp on the efficacy of “business as usual”, and if Clinton prevails she will govern with a populist gun to her head, threatening a single term and as with the elephant, the collapse of the entire sleazy house of cards.

100% with @zenvelo ‘s first post on this thread.

I dabbled with voting Green here in Canada as their leader is almost undoubtedly the smartest, wisest politician we’ve had here in decades. However, there is absolutely nothing behind her that would allow her to move any policy forward. Stein looks similar to me, if not as wise.

@gorillapaws “I’m pretty convinced that the only hope of defeating Trump is Stein.”

El-Oh-El

In order to get anything accomplished Stein would need to have a real party behind her. The Green Party has no seats in the House. No seats in the Senate. No governorships. No seats in any state legislature. They’re not even on the ballot in many states. No real backing to speak of. They’ve got a few folks in office at the local and county level. That’s it. Stein’s a wannabe Nader.

I’m a team player. If the polls suggested that Stein was leading ahead of Hillary, and on the ballot, I’d vote for her.

Roll call today. A vote for Clinton is a vote for Trump.

GQ @gorillapaws

@zenvelo Yes! That is what is bugging me. You said it beautifully. I’ve watched the Republicans and then watched the Democrats and I find myself wishing I was a giant that could pick up the extremes on either side and shake them like a rag doll. They are the very reason that nothing gets done. Compromise is a dirty word. If I ran my home like they run the country I would be living out in the streets and my kids would’ve been thugs.
You have to give to get but they all whine like spoiled brats wanting to throw their arms around the worlds toys and not sharing or compromising. What the f has happened to all the adults in the world? Were their ever any?

@Pandora Obama tried to compromise with the Republicans, and they spent the last 8 years cooperating on nothing, and setting records on how impossible they could be.

@Zaku For compromising to exist both parties have to willing to compromise. I remember Cruz and his party of racist birthers of knuckleheads determined before he even started to never give into anything. Yeah, there was no compromise. They were determined to make sure nothing got done. So like anyone. The President saw there was no compromising. He was going to have to shove his agenda down their racist throat when he could.

Jill Stein is a horrible choice for President. Just read her Reddit interview. It reeks of psychobabble.

Gary Johnson is a horrible choice for President, because he’s a Libertarian and we don’t live in Ayn Rand’s wet dreams.

There are no good choices. We are boned.

@Espiritus_Corvus My point isn’t that conservatives are honest, but you know where they stand. You know when you elect a conservative they will support big business, fight against women’s reproductive rights and labor rights, destroy the social safety net, try to expand the military, start new endless wars, tax the poor and more tax cuts for the wealthy, etc.

Lately the Democratic party has been pretending to be progressive, but actually being very conservative in their votes and closed-door committees. It’s this insidious dichotomy that I’m pissed about and think is dangerous for the country’s future. You’ve got Feinstein trying to sneak through SOPA, PIPA etc. Schultz taking stacks of money from the private prison industry, Clinton from Wall Street, etc. I find it disgusting.

I have never heard of this person before. Who is she?

@trolltoll This is a decent interview.

@Darth_Algar “In order to get anything accomplished Stein would need to have a real party behind her.”

If a huge tide of progressives managed to elect Stein, and turn Congress blue, I guarantee those blue legislators would abso-fucking-lutely take notice of what the voters want and work with Stein.

Anone who thinks that Clinton is going to be able to forge compromise with a Republican congress to push a progressive agenda is a total fucking moron. The only hope of getting a progressive agenda is to have a blue Congress, and that won’t happen with a candidate that is despised by a majority of Americans.

@gorillapaws Anyone who thinks the Republicans are capable of compromise is a fucking moron. Anyone who doesn’t think the Republicans want a government run by a single party (theirs) is a fucking moron.

Null hypothesis. Stein is a nonentity.

@gorillapaws “If a huge tide of progressives managed to elect Stein, and turn Congress blue, I guarantee those blue legislators would abso-fucking-lutely take notice of what the voters want and work with Stein.”

If…if…if…if….

You can dream about “if” all you want. At some point, however, you gotta to face what is. Stein is a candidate with no experience, who’s never held public office, who fronts a party that has never been able to gain any real traction on any level, and a party that tends to alienate potential allies and supporters who do not unwaveringly, fanatically, absolutely support any and every position on the party platform. You might agree with and support every other position but disagree with, say, the party stance on nuclear energy and you’re a heretic to them. Stein has not a snowball’s chance in Hell of ever getting within sniffing distance of the White House (except maybe as a tourist).

Your notion that legislators would work with her is also mistaken. Particularly when she would have no fellow Greens in Congress. Maybe enough voters across the country vote Stein in, but Congressmen don’t answer to national voters. They only answer to the small, often largely homogeneous, voting population of their district. A Congressman representing Alabama’s 1st might piss of millions of progressives around the country but he only has to satisfy his party and 100,000 or so people in his district.

@Darth_Algar Here’s the real, honest, brutal reality check: Hillary can’t win.

More than half of Americans don’t like her and very few adore her. Conversely Trump is a maniac, that a lot of people hate, but he has more people who do love him than Hillary has that love her. Trump will sweep the rust belt and the South. That’s all he needs to do to defeat Clinton.

Your point that Stein is a nobody, is largely irrelevant. Stein has something going for her that Clinton doesn’t: She has a genuine progressive anti-Wall Street platform that over 70% of Americans want, meanwhile Clinton has taken over $40M dollars from them (it’s only July), and nobody has faith that she’ll hold their feet to the fire in the way it needs to be done to prevent another thermonuclear economic meltdown/bailout.

Look, I agree that Stein is a long shot, but I’m convinced that Clinton, and the politics of lesser of two evils is almost certainly guaranteed to end in a Trump victory. Despite your point that I’m some unwavering fanatical ideologue, I’m not in love with all of Stein’s views (e.g. homeopathy), but she is intelligent, articulate, and in line with what American people actually want. Bernie was a nobody (I hadn’t even listened to one of his speeches until as late as February). Stein went from 2% to 7% in a month. With all of the bullshit at the DNC, the pick of a pro-corporate VP, the harassing of Sanders Delegates, Giving Debbie Wassermann Schultz a fucking job after she resigned for rigging the fucking elections, etc. There will be enough people like me who are fed up with the lying, cheating, and the bullshit to where that percentage of Stein supporters could continue to rise.

As that happens, Stein will get more coverage (even with the media trying to black her out). If she can hit 15% then she will be allowed to participate in the national debates, and that would be a game-changer. Clinton will be under fire from the left and the right, and I suspect more will siphon off to Stein. At that point Clinton supporters could be faced with the very dilemma I’m asking about in this question. Do you vote for Clinton and split the vote? or vote for Stein to prevent a Trump presidency.

Yes it’s a long-shot, but I honestly believe that it’s MUCH more likely of a scenario than Clinton winning the South and the rust belt. She’s turned her back on working class, blue collar, Americans—and they know it. It’s the prisoner’s dilemma: Clinton voters are more likely to vote for Stein voters than the opposite. Given that fact, the only rational choice is to vote for Stein if you want to avoid a Trump presidency.

If Stein is what over 70% of Americans want then why can her party not even get a single person into Congress, even if more progressive areas of the nation?

“Despite your point that I’m some unwavering fanatical ideologue”

Excuse me, but where did I make this point?

@Darth_Algar I was paraphrasing this: “a party that tends to alienate potential allies and supporters who do not unwaveringly, fanatically, absolutely support any and every position on the party platform. You might agree with and support every other position but disagree with, say, the party stance on nuclear energy and you’re a heretic to them.”

The implication is that as a supporter of Stein I am a member of this group.

To you other point, all I can say is that this election year is very different from the past. The people are pissed. I never would have considered voting Green before this DNC shit-show. I’m not “for the green party” so much as for the only candidate who has a shot at defeating Trump (even if it’s a long-shot). If you need further evidence, just look at the fact that Donald Fucking Trump, a failed businessman, reality tv guy, bigot, with the attention span of an ADHD kid that lost his Ritalin, is probably going to be our next president. Because in a reality where that’s possible, so is a relative-nobody, Green party candidate getting elected as the first woman president of the USA, simply because she’s not crazy or hated, people like her ideas, and believe she will honestly fight for getting them done.

No, the implication is that I’m referring to the Green Party and it’s membership in general. There’s no implication that I’m pointing to you specifically, and if you think that then you’re reading way more into that statement than is there.

“To you other point, all I can say is that this election year is very different from the past. The people are pissed.”

Yup, just like the people were pissed in 1992 and Ross Perot rode the wave of pissed off people straight to the White House. Just like the people were pissed in 2000 and Ralph Nader rode the wave of pissed off people to the White House.

@Darth_Algar Fair enough. I thought it applied to me, but I guess I misinterpreted your statement. I do think it’s a lousy argument though. A lot of the people on the left ARE willing to compromise, It’s just that we want to compromise with Republicans, not with each other first. If you want 50% you begin the negotiation asking for 100%, not pre-compromising to 75% and then finally settling for 37.5%. See Obamacare.

I do think people are a lot more pissed in 2016 than they were in 1992 and in 2000. For one, just look at the wealth inequality back then and now. It’s the first time in modern US history that Americans fear their kids being worse off than their parents generation. People are raging against the existing political system.

Yet how many of these pissed off people even pay attention to the down ballot or non-presidental elections? The House and Senate, your state legislature, even you local offices – that’s where change lies. You can’t just wake up every four years, focus on the big race, then go back to being oblivious and expect anything to change. Stable, secure change comes slowly, incrementally, and it’s gotta move from down-to-up, not up-to-down, or it don’t happen.

@Darth_Algar I don’t buy it. There’s a dangerously high chance we’re about to experience some TREMENDOUS changes which WILL COME ALL AT ONCE like a giant sack of hot shit raining down on this country. It will be the DNC’s fault for not doing their fucking jobs. In years past you may have been correct, but like I said, things are different this year and we are in uncharted territory.

@gorillapaws

Is that what you want? Sudden tremendous change always comes violently.

@Darth_Algar That’s just fear mongering. Of course I don’t want a Trump presidency, but I think the fact that it very well could happen refutes your argument that change must come slowly over time from the ground up.

What I want is for people to wake up and realize that Clinton is a dead-end. She drove the final nail into her coffin when she picked a VP that the Rust belt is going to hate. I only see one progressive candidate that has a chance (If slim) to win, and that’s Stein. Backing Stein now, while the general election is still early is the only way I can see progressives winning the White House.

@gorillapaws “I only see one progressive candidate that has a chance (If slim) to win, and that’s Stein.”

You do understand that “polling at 7%” (which is a high estimate, from what I’ve seen) is not the same thing as having a 7% chance of winning the election, right? Jill Stein has ZERO chance of winning this election. I am starting to think you have lost the ability to reason.

@dappled_leaves I think if enough disgruntled Bernie Sanders supporters shift, it will be enough to hit the 15% necessary to qualify for the debates. At that point she would have the ear of the American people. If she pushes a populist message, reminds the people that she’s the only one on stage who doesn’t take money from super pacs, comes through as articulate and presidential, I think she can win people over who don’t like Trump or Clinton. If she’s able to build critical mass in this way, Clinton supporters could be facing the very real possibility that “a vote for Clinton will be a vote for Trump.”

The people who have lost the ability to reason are the ones who think Clinton can win over the Rust Belt. Between the South and the Rust Belt, Trump will win—a mathematical certainty. They blame NAFTA for so many of the good working class, blue collar jobs being outsourced to Mexico. You can sprinkle all of the sugar you want on a shit sandwich, but you’re not going to make it appetizing.

So I acknowledge that a lot of things need to go Stein’s way for her to have a chance, I honestly believe that her chances are better than Hillary’s (nearly zero). But if you want to avoid Donald in the White House the optimal strategy is to fight like hell to get Stein to > 15%. Hillary is unelectable no matter how much sugar the DNC tries to sprinkle on her.

She’ll get the “Anyone but Hillary” segment of the Bernie or Bust crowd, but she won’t get the intellectual contingent. She’s already pissed them off by pandering to the anti-vaccination, anti-GMO crowd.

@gorillapaws The rust belt is looking more blue than red, according to the statistical hotshots at fivethirtyeight. So, I don’t know where you come up with your “mathematical certainty” assertion. In any case, obviously not every person in those states is voting on the availability of blue collar jobs, and not every person who is voting on blue collar jobs in those states believes that Trump can deliver more of them. Don’t forget that his “Make America Great Again” hats are made in China.

And @Seek is right. Stein does not have the support of intellectuals because of her crunchy pro-homeopathy, anti-GMO, anti-vax leanings, even if she is beginning to carefully distance herself from them now.

Anyway, anyone who could be swayed to believe that “A vote for Clinton is a vote for Trump” already believes that “A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump”. What you are saying here makes no sense. It’s magical thinking.

@dappled_leaves If by “statistical hotshots” you’re referring to the team that predicted Clinton would destroy Sanders in Michigan by over 20 points and she ended up loosing to him, then call me unimpressed. Just look at how the Michigan graph has changed. Trump has gained 40 fucking points in just a couple of weeks, and they’re not including Stein in any of the graphs I saw. That site is already predicting a Trump Victory if you were to hold the election today. It’s a “mathematical certainty” that if Trump takes the South and the Rust Belt he has enough delegates to clinch.

Those hats may be made in China, but facts don’t stick to Trump. He’s a master of changing direction and evading responsibility. Scapegoating powerless minorities in other places for your problems has been a very effective tactic (obviously it’s evil as hell) throughout history. Look at Brexit. Combine that with Hillary’s record on outsourcing and her VP pick and she’s toast. Clinton isn’t calling for getting tough on outsourcers, and slapping them with tariffs if they don’t bring the jobs back home. People are going to eat that shit up.

I’m an intellectual, and I support Stein. I disagree with some of the woo-woo crap science she’s been coy about. She’s choosing her words carefully and playing politics, just like the other ones, but I think she’s the only one who has a chance of beating Trump. The magical thinking is that Clinton can somehow turn on the charm and win. Her only shot is to rig the elections (which may actually be a possibility).

The bottom line is that Stein is not going to get ANY juice, because the system is designed to see to it that she DOES NOT. The reality of this can be appreciated in the fact that both Trump and Sanders attached themselves to the only 2 outfits actually allowed to compete for the crown. Both men latched onto the political parties for which they had open contempt because in practical terms, no other avenue is permitted.

@stanleybmanly I think if Stein can get into the debates, she’s got a shot: The vast majority of voters are voting AGANST the other person, and having a doctor/mother/Harvard grad with ideas people agree with could be a game changer. Hillary is toxic and will lose.

I think it’s the rational play to back Stein. I’m just disappointed that people think trying to polish a turd is a better alternative to trying a new approach, simply because it wouldn’t have worked in the past. People are fed up and if presented with a decent alternative, I think they just might take it. If people believed Jill could win I think they would have the courage to back her.

You and I both know that there isn’t a chance in hell that Stein will be included in a debate with the 2 annointed candidates. Not only will the Clinton camp hamstring such an insult, but the half of the GOP actively engaged in the effort to defeat Trump won’t put up with it either.

Even if Stein through some miracle manages to participate in a debate, the event is deliberately scheduled so late in the process that she will be denied the time required to build the necessary momentum.

@gorillapaws You are contradicting yourself. If “facts don’t stick to Trump”, how on Earth do you expect voters to turn from him to Stein? You can’t use the same arguments to simultaneously show that Clinton can’t win and that Stein can. It doesn’t work.

Fivethirtyeight is projecting a Clinton win in November, which happens to be when voting will occur.

And your voice sounds very much like those who said that only Sanders could beat Trump. Except that when it came down to actual voting and not just rallying, Clinton was the winner. That says a lot more to me than “I think X is the only person who has the power to win”. I said that about Sanders, too – until it was shown that he wasn’t. Believe the evidence, not what you want to be true.

@stanleybmanly It is my understanding that if she polls at 15% she’s in the debates. I find this graph very compelling. Look where she was in July of 2012. See how much higher she got by November. Now look where she is in July of 2016. You can’t say for sure that the pattern will repeat itself, but if it even comes close, she’s in for A LOT more exposure this time around.

@dappled_leaves Stein doesn’t need to defeat Trump with facts, all she needs to do to defeat him is provide an alternative plan to help middle class America and not look crazy. Clinton has no plan, it’s simply the status quo + more trade deals that will likely offshore more jobs. People would rather vote for someone they like rather than against someone they hate, and if Jill can put together something that resonates with the people, they would prefer that than to vote for Trump.

I don’t think Sanders was beaten, I think the DNC conspired to defeat him via election fraud. There are too many stories and photos of widespread fraud in CA, the purging of rosters in NY and other places, not to mention collusion with the press, and widespread attempts to suppress the democratic base and discourage independents from participating through closed primaries or intentionally convoluted process for independents (provisional ballots).

If you haven’t seen it, Uncounted is pretty upsetting.

Besides, what’s the alternative? To convince working class people that the archetypal insider politician who has taken tens of millions of dollars from corporate America to do their bidding? Convince them to support a candidate who cheered NAFTA in the 90’s, the TPP, voted for bankruptcy reform to make it harder on working class Americans to get relief from the courts, who helped the offshoring garment industry reduce the hard-won $0.61 per hour minimum wage that Hatian laborers fought for down to just $0.31 per hour, all so Clinton donors could continue to offshore garment production more profitably? To convince them that the status-quo is great, and that 58% of all new wealth in this country going to the top 1% is good for the middle class and healthy for the economy overall? I don’t care how much sugar you sprinkle on that shit sandwich, working class Americans aren’t going to eat it.

As time goes on I fully expect things to get WORSE for Clinton, not better. Bernie was treating Clinton with kid gloves and his message was largely obstructed by the media blackout and the framing of questions, the timing of the debates by the DNC, and he refused to trash her the way Trump will.

This is showing a Trump lead @dappled

http://usuncut.com/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-projection/

@jonsblond that is from last weekend, reflecting the usual post convention pop and before the Democratic convention.

Four days ago. The post is dated July 25. The fact remains that it’s very close. Hillary does not have a commanding lead.

The Democratic post-convention bump has started per the polling sites. Best to avoid the analysis sites and just look at the raw numbers and questions yourself.

@BellaB Exactly. The same-day election forecast which showed Trump would win when @gorillapaws checked it five days ago now says that Clinton would win 85%/15% if the election were held today. Guess what? It’s not going to be 85/15 in November.

It helps to know what the numbers mean when you’re citing them.