All I claimed was that others normally accepted by the Left also voted for a wall/barrier on our southern border, which makes the screaming protests against Trump a bunch of hypocrisy. The whole lying lot of you on this thread refuse to answer what is actually said. Whatever protests there may have been against Hillary or any of the others didn't even make a ripple in the media, but those against Trump are accepted as gospel truth on the subject.
ANY SUPPORT FOR A BARRIER OF ANY SORT WHATEVER ADVOCATED BY HILLARY OUGHT TO SHOW THAT THE IDEA OF A WALL IS NOT THE STRANGE AND EVIL THING TRUMP'S DETRACTORS KEEP PRETENDING IT IS.
Spending 40 billion dollars on a wall that will do next to nothing to stop illegal immigration is what we are complaining about. It is a 40 billion dollar wall to nowhere whose entire purpose is to placate the racist leanings of some conservatives.
All I claimed was that others normally accepted by the Left also voted for a wall/barrier on our southern border, which makes the screaming protests against Trump a bunch of hypocrisy.
Clinton is hardly accepted by left - she is a right wing politicians after all. Preferred to Trump, maybe. But the left did not particularly like her. Democrats are centrist to fairly right wing and Hilary is on the right end of that spectrum.
The Democratic Party is by all measures centrist. In most of the world they would be center right.The Democratic Party is by all measures centrist. In most of the world they would be center right.
And Hillary is right-center-right, compares herself to Eisenhower (while Nixon would be closer), a DINO (as are most of the DNC). She supported and advocated for massive incarceration of "super-predator" blacks that started the whole trend to the massive incarceration we now have, and has not apologized for it. Biased to black and Latino inmates, this has created the new slave labor market. There is NO WAY this is a leftist\progressive policy.
Electing Hillary would not have solved the problems of the people that supported Trump, she would have made them worse. The neo-lib cocktail party Clintonism would try to preserve the status quo and maintain the power structure, and that would only have put off the time till the next demagogue republican ran. And the republican congress would have held here tethered, hogtied, and helpless even more than they did Obama, with every single action subject to investigation.
We have to survive at least two years before we can start taking America back. Two years for the supporters to learn they have been played for gullible fools by the GOP in general and TrumpleThinSkin in particular.
Bernie was left-center-right, like FDR, and at least his policies attacked the problems facing working families, not the symptoms. The progressives are looking for a new party, one that represents people instead of corporations. Perhaps the Democratic Socialists of America and Working Families Party and the Green Party can meld together, either as a "democrat tea party" to change the democrat party from the inside, or as a unified stand-alone party to take on the democrats.
We can hope, because a social democrat movement, one that serves the working people, is the only path to saving America and taking it back from the oligarchs that I can see. Not surprisingly a lot of progressives have been radicalized in the last year, and have become active at the local level to take on democrats in the primaries.
It may be a Chinese curse, but we live in interesting times.
To bring this back to the topic, there needs to be a full investigation of voter AND election fraud, including through the primaries, and look at the exclusion of voters as much as the possibility of multiple voting and machine manipulation of votes. There is logically just as much fraud going on in the primaries as there is in the general election.