Vote Blue, no matter who

[ReptilianPeon]

People be mad because Pete won the Iowa Caucus instead of Bernie.

If you're going to allow such trivialities to divide you, it's just going to be another four years of Trump.

Vote Blue, no matter who.

Senator Sanders got more votes than Mayor Pete in Iowa so that means Sanders won?

Secondly, is a 90%+ white state really representative of the entire country? I'm looking forward to seeing racist Pete trying (and failing) to win over black voters. He fired the first black police chief of South Bend because his racist donors told him to. He could have grown a back-bone, as they say, but he chose to be a douche-bag.

Secret tapes in racially tinged police scandal may revive difficult time for Buttigieg

or how about:

Racism in Buttigieg's South Bend Police Department

Also, 2008, 25% of the Hillarybots voted Republican instead of voting for Barrack Obama. In 2016, 13% of Sanders people voted for somebody other than Hilary.

[Shell B]

I'm not going to vote blue, no matter who. Get Democrats to show up and vote. I'll vote for my cat if I want.

[Athene]

I for one, will NOT be staying home on Election Day. 
To do so, would just be unfathomable.

Now I won't be heading to the polls to cast a vote...that's for damn sure. 

But, I won't be staying home.


Lol

[WinterHold]

No ! Blue is red
Red is blue
Trump is a win
Through and through
Go tell Mitch
And his wife Sue
That red dominates
With Trump too
Blue is red
Red is blue
Trump farted
It smells like...

---

Yes I remember !
Yes it smells
The fart of D
Is nothing but the evolution of American politics
The politics that tries
To convince man with red and blue
Meant to fight on a ring of goo
go elect
go through the mist
the nation's system was rigged
from the start it was shit

---

The American system proved that it's rotten as a camel's anus.
Impeachment my ass.

[ReptilianPeon]

I can see it now: Caroline Goodlett rises from the dead somehow, and manages to become the Democrat nominee for president, with Anna Davenport as her Vice Presidential pick. Well they're woman - and they are Democrats. I guess we have to vote for them. Oh well!

But seriously, imagine if they were on the Republican ticket instead and the Democratic nominee was a man...according to Hillarybot logic we have to vote for the woman every time...because reasons.

[Silver]

Buttigieg takes lead over Sanders in New Hampshire.

[Fake Messiah]

Voting blue is not just giving vote to one person but also supreme judges and similar bodies that president appoints. I mean just take Ruth Bader Ginsburg who will probably not be able to be a judge for 4 more years, and that means more conservative judges who will bring more laws that will make lives more difficult for women, minorities, LGBTQ people, poor people, prisoners, and few more groups.

[Chad32]

Yeah, but we need actual good picks to pick those judges. Not just "republican, or republican lite". We can't force the dems to give us good options, if we keep settling on "I'm not quite as bad as that other guy, though I take money from the same donors as he does".

[Fake Messiah]

Yeah, but we need actual good picks to pick those judges. Not just "republican, or republican lite". We can't force the dems to give us good options, if we keep settling on "I'm not quite as bad as that other guy, though I take money from the same donors as he does".

Maybe then the whole office of the president should be removed because it makes most people angry, plus, without the president, people could perhaps concentrate more on what their senators and congressmen are doing--who are actual lawmakers. I mean in the last two years Democrats in Congress brought laws on health care, voting rights, gun control, education, and so much more. The House passed ALL of them, but are sitting in the Senate because Republican senators don't do anything.

And what is the equivalent of president in the ancient Rome on which US democracy was built? Probably emperor, and Romans also didn't like their emperors very much, nor did they find much use for them. They mostly organized wars and pretended to be gods.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Yeah, but we need actual good picks to pick those judges. Not just "republican, or republican lite". We can't force the dems to give us good options, if we keep settling on "I'm not quite as bad as that other guy, though I take money from the same donors as he does".

Maybe then the whole office of the president should be removed because it makes most people angry, plus, without the president, people could perhaps concentrate more on what their senators and congressmen are doing--who are actual lawmakers. I mean in the last two years Democrats in Congress brought laws on health care, voting rights, gun control, education, and so much more. The House passed ALL of them, but are sitting in the Senate because Republican senators don't do anything.

And what is the equivalent of president in the ancient Rome on which US democracy was built? Probably emperor, and Romans also didn't like their emperors very much, nor did they find much use for them. They mostly organized wars and pretended to be gods.

Actually, the best equivalent would have been consuls under the Republic.  They were elected by the Senate and had pretty extensive legislative and judicial authority.  The best bit is that they served for only one year.  The other best bit is that there were always two consuls at the same time, and they could veto each others' actions.

Boru