That is my dillemma. And my hair is already torn out.
Thanks for understanding.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2016 11:36 AM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Sanders endorses Clinton: Laws of political
physics confirmed
Joe,
You live in a swing state. Even Noam Chomsky says that people who live in
swing states need to vote for her. If I were in your situation, I'd be
tearing my hair out in distress, but I don't know that you have a choice.
Trump could win in Michigan.
Miriam
________________________________
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe harcz Comcast
Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2016 11:00 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Sanders endorses Clinton: Laws of political
physics confirmed
While I agree with you and virtually all on Hilliary I am likely going to
vote for her as the lessor of two evils in an evil system.
I wish this would lead to the death nell of the electoral college vote. And
I'm sad to say that Trump is so evil and so dangerous I might have to vote
for Hillary just to tread water in this state which has becom a swing state.
This all freaks me out, even writing these words, and as I write them I wish
to erase them.
----- Original Message -----
From: Alice Dampman Humel <mailto:alicedh@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 8:20 PM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Sanders endorses Clinton: Laws of political
physics confirmed
and, I would add that as terrifying as a Trump presidency is, a Shillary
presidency is equally as terrifying, only in very different ways. And
remember what happened in King’s brilliant 11/22/63...
A Trump defeat doesn’t guarantee beer and skittles for us... On Jul 16,
2016, at 11:54 AM, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charlie,
There are certainly huge numbers of people who are writing articles that
express precisely what you are saying. I suppose that I've just come to the
end of that road that says that I will make any compromise in my vote in
order to prevent the more terrible candidate from winning. First, I really
think that Hillary's politics and her way of functioning in relation to
financial institutions, corporations, and the military, are bad for the
country. I look at her history, and it makes me cringe. Trump is the
Republican candidate because of how the Democratic Party has been pandering
to monied interests for the past 40 years. The Republicans are what they are
because the Democrats sold out working people a long time ago. Obama
attained the Presidency with a mandate from the people to make fundamental
changes that would improve life for everyone. He had the world in his hands.
And he turned out to be a Neo Liberal who squandered his opportunity, sold
out the majority of his countrymen, and betrayed his fellow African
Americans. I know that there are many explanations for this. Nevertheless,
that is what happened. We now have a Democratic party establishment that has
sold out to corporations by continuing to back these terrible trade deals,
that is engaged inpermanent war, and that is actively building and
strengthening a budding police state. That's what the Democratic Party is.
It uses socially progressive language, but it acts with an iron hand. With
all of the talk about how Sanders was able to influence the platform in a
progressive direction, there was clear resistance to substantive change,
even in language which, we all know, is only symbolic. They wouldn't raise
the cap on social security taxes to incomes of $250,000. They wouldn't
forbid fracking. They wouldn't demand that the TPP not be passed in the lame
duck session of congress. They wouldn't condemn Israel's occupation of the
West Bank, even though this is supposed to be US policy. They wouldn't state
that single payer health care is necessary. Aside from policy regarding
Native Americans, they refused to make clear definite statements about
anything. $15 an hour? That's not even enough to live on now, let alone in
five years or whenever it goes into effect. Yes, if Trump wins the
election, it will be a nightmare for everyone. But it won't be because I
refuse to vote for his opponent who is a war monger and beholden to Wall
Street.
Miriam
________________________________
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charles Crawford
Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 10:49 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Sanders endorses Clinton: Laws of political
physics confirmed
Hi Alice, Miriam, Roger, and all,
I listened to the Sanders endorsement of Clinton and while the idealistic
side of me was saying he was selling out, the practical side of me
acknowledged he did a really good endorsement of Hilary and most
importantly, she stands the best chance of defeating Trump. I fully know
that there are those who will say that my political calculus is too cynical
and perhaps it is, but I just cannot stomach the idea of Trump and I think
Sanders has had a positive effect on the Democratic Party.
Short and not so sweet, but that is how I see it.
Charlie Crawford.
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alice Dampman
Humel
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 9:19 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Sanders endorses Clinton: Laws of political
physics confirmed
that’s one thing that never seems to change…all those who have even a
glimmer of hope find themselves bitterly disappointed...
On Jul 13, 2016, at 2:01 PM, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
One of the articles I posted last night said it all. Basically, Sanders did
not follow through on his promise to take the fight to the convention. Had
he not endorsed Clinton, he might have had leverage to get a better deal on
the platform. He might have asked about the uncounted California votes. He
might have made the case to super delegates that he could get more votes
than Clinton in order to keep the Presidency out of Trump's hands. But he
caved to pressure. I know that most probably, had he done that and actually
won the presidency, not much would have changed. But all of those young
people who had faith that they could have an impact, that they can change
the system, would not have been so bitterly disappointed. Only the most
motivated and dedicated will keep fighting for change now.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 12:13 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Sanders endorses Clinton: Laws of political
physics confirmed
https://socialistaction.org/2016/07/12/sanders-endorses-clinton-laws-of-political-physics-confirmed/
Sanders endorses Clinton: Laws of political physics confirmed
/ 13 hours ago
June 2016 Clinton-Bernie
By JEFF MACKLER
— Jeff Mackler is the Socialist Action candidate for U.S. president
$33+ million and one year later, Bernie Sanders’ orchestrated “political
revolution” fell back to earth with a dull but expected and pitiful thump,
as he endorsed Wall Street’s corporate-funded Hillary Clinton with a
resounding “The future will be shaped more on November 8 [Election Day] than
by any event in the world.”
Those who believed that Sanders was never a conscious sheepherder for the
ever-discredited Democrats will now march with him to the beat of the
“lesser evil” Clinton drum, even as she pledges to find common ground with
her Republican colleagues.
Those who are awakening to the inherent horrors of capitalism’s racist,
sexist, warmongering twin corporate duopoly will not be surprised. For them,
the future will be shaped not by those who profit from climate catastrophe
and endless wars against poor and working people abroad and at home, but by
the millions who take their lives into their own hands and struggle on every
front for humanity’s cause and for the socialist future.
Join the vote for Socialist Action in the 2016 campaign!
Share this:
Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window) 27Share on Facebook (Opens
in new window)27 Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)
July 12, 2016 in Elections, Vote Socialist Action. Tags: Clinton, Sanders
Related posts
Socialist Action sponsors election debates
Jeff at mike
Interview with Socialist Action’s presidential candidate, Jeff Mackler
June 2016 Grumpy Bernie
Bernie Sanders’ demise: What are the lessons?
Post navigation
← Socialist Action Campaign Platform 2016
Vote Socialist Action!
Jeff Mackler for President and Karen Schraufnagel for Vice President
More information:
Newspaper Archives
Newspaper Archives Select Month July 2016 (7) June 2016 (14) May 2016
(9) April 2016 (12) March 2016 (14) February 2016 (8) January 2016
(11) December 2015 (11) November 2015 (9) October 2015 (8) September
2015 (10) August 2015 (7) July 2015 (13) June 2015 (9) May 2015
(10) April 2015 (12) March 2015 (9) February 2015 (11) January 2015
(10) December 2014 (12) November 2014 (11) October 2014 (9) September
2014 (6) August 2014 (10) July 2014 (11) June 2014 (10) May 2014
(11) April 2014 (10) March 2014 (9) February 2014 (11) January 2014
(11) December 2013 (10) November 2013 (11) October 2013 (17) September
2013 (13) August 2013 (10) July 2013 (11) June 2013 (15) May 2013 (14)
April 2013 (14) March 2013 (12) February 2013 (10) January 2013 (17)
December 2012 (7) November 2012 (8) October 2012
(19) September 2012 (2) August 2012 (27) July 2012 (18) June 2012
(3) May 2012 (19) April 2012 (14) March 2012 (17) February 2012 (19)
January 2012 (17) December 2011 (3) November 2011 (33) October 2011
(14) September 2011 (13) August 2011 (34) July 2011 (24) June 2011
(19) May 2011 (19) April 2011 (15) March 2011 (15) February 2011
(16) January 2011 (15) December 2010 (17) November 2010 (1) October 2010
(6) September 2010 (3) August 2010 (8) July 2010 (7) June 2010
(2) May 2010 (9) April 2010 (3) March 2010 (8) February 2010 (3) January
2010 (9) December 2009 (6) November 2009 (5) October 2009
(16) September 2009 (3) August 2009 (2) July 2009 (5) June 2009 (2) May
2009 (7) April 2009 (6) March 2009 (16) February 2009 (9) January 2009
(10) December 2008 (11) November 2008 (8) October 2008
(16) September 2008 (14) August 2008 (18) July 2008 (12) June 2008
(3) May 2008 (2) April 2008 (3) March 2008 (14) February 2008 (11)
January 2008 (11) December 2007 (8) November 2007 (1) July 2007 (1) June
2007 (1) April 2007 (1) March 2007 (1) February 2007 (3) December 2006
(11) November 2006 (11) October 2006 (13) September
2006 (15) August 2006 (11) July 2006 (18) June 2006 (7) May 2006
(14) April 2006 (6) March 2006 (14) February 2006 (5) January 2006
(2) December 2005 (9) November 2005 (8) October 2005 (13) September
2005 (12) August 2005 (9) July 2005 (16) June 2005 (16) May 2005
(16) April 2005 (12) March 2005 (14) February 2005 (19) January 2005
(15) December 2004 (14) November 2002 (17) October 2002 (19) September
2002 (22) August 2002 (21) July 2002 (15) May 2002 (21) April 2002 (21)
February 2002 (15) January 2002 (15) December 2001
(17) October 2001 (24) September 2001 (18) July 2001 (19) June 2001
(18) October 2000 (17) September 2000 (21) August 2000 (19) July 2000
(16) June 2000 (26) May 2000 (21) April 2000 (22) March 2000 (28)
February 2000 (18) January 2000 (20) December 1999 (20) November
1999 (26) October 1999 (25) September 1999 (18) August 1999 (40) July
1999 (38) June 1999 (24) May 1999 (27) April 1999 (25) March 1999
(26) February 1999 (29) January 1999 (24) July 1998 (12)
Search
Get Involved
Donate to help support our work
Get email updates
Join Socialist Action
View socialistactionusa’s profile on Facebook View SocialistActUS’s
profile on Twitter View SocialistActionCT’s profile on YouTube
Subscribe to Our Newspaper
Blog at WordPress.com. The Expound Theme.
