When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

I don't play word games-that's your thing. Because, God knows, you sure don't have any ability to seek out FACTS from anywhere but partisan websites, where the author prescreens them to support his/her theme. You have never looked up a fact on its own in the time I've known you.

Lash wrote:

Sigh. You're a huge waste of time. This is the last time I'll respond to you. You have no idea what you're talking about. You are the one who vomits up the same stupid bile about Clinton being a hero because he orchestrated the incarceration and ruin of a race of people. I don't know how the coldest-hearted rigid conservative could say that with a straight face.

Martin Luther King was not talking about incrementalism, as you constantly say,

Lash wrote:

The whole letter was about the deceptive politics of incrementalism. Try reading for the central idea. Why did the clergy write the letter? What did they want him to do? Why wouldn't he agree? As I tell my students, you have to think... Boil the letter down to one sentence. I'm sure you can if you free your mind of pre-conceived notions.

Mainstream American political strategy proceeds from an ever present with few, if any, links to a deeply burdened past. One of the few transformative leaders in modern history, Dr. Martin Luther King, presciently wrote in ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ that if political change is left to those urging caution and patience it will never arrive. In this regard the Democrat Party is a branch of the status quo— it exists to preclude, prevent and otherwise impede threats to the existing order. Cooperative strategies depend on a will to cooperate whereas American political economy exists to create and perpetuate concentrated power. ‘Inequality,’ the case where a few people have grotesquely outsized claims on social resources, is self-perpetuating by design.
_______________________________________________

For reasons outlined below the current election cycle is either a referendum on the continued viability of the existing political system or it is nothing. Bernie Sanders’ program will die a quick, ignominious death within the Democrat Party or it will substantially end the hold that the dominant Parties have on the realm of political possibility— there is no ‘third way.’ The wealthy few whose interests the Democrat Party represents— Wall Street, multi-national corporations, corporate executives and the inheritance babies who represent a rapidly growing proportion of the ‘Forbes 500,’ like the current arrangement of circumstance just fine. ‘Compromise’ in the face of uncompromising power is capitulation.
________________________________________________

To understand the current dismal state of the Democrat Party requires some history. In the mid-1970s a bi-partisan counter-revolution was launched against FDR’s New Deal reforms. Democrat President Jimmy Carter, the ‘liberal’ response to the decay of official power from the Vietnam War and the oppressive residual of America’s racial history, was the Barack Obama of his time— poorly regarded by the thinking left as the more politically palatable face of radical capitalist resurgence. By the time that Mr. Carter ran against Ronald Reagan in 1980 few on the left saw reason to support him. After his electoral loss to Mr. Reagan establishment Democrats put forward the revisionist apologia that it was Mr. Carter’s ‘liberal agenda’ that lost the election.

The relevance to current circumstance lies in the misleading explanations of ‘how change happens’ that Democrat apparatchiks are offering in their attempt to control the official Democrat Party narrative. In this view no good deed goes unpunished— well-meaning and guileless Democrats push the people’s interests forward against evil Republicans who will, if given the opportunity, try to privatize Social Security (like Bill Clinton), hand civil governance over to plutocrats and multi-national corporations (like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama); institutionalize extra-judicial killing, intrusive domestic spying and corporate control over the public sphere (like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama) and treat the public interest as a public relations problem to be ‘handled’ with misleading propaganda.
_______________________________________________
Feel like excerpting the whole article, but I'll stop here. It's not like you'll actually read or think. You'll just copy and paste columns of how many people didn't die in three or four years and say we have Clinton's massive incarceration of blacks to thank for it.



http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/29/pragmatism-incrementalism-and-the-transformative-moment/

The time is now - not when it's convenient for the establishment.
https://youtu.be/JACq7Tg-J3M

Then, last September, came the opportunity to talk with leaders of Birmingham's economic community. In the course of the negotiations, certain promises were made by the merchants--for example, to remove the stores' humiliating racial signs. On the basis of these promises, the Reverend Fred Shuttlesworth and the leaders of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights agreed to a moratorium on all demonstrations. As the weeks and months went by, we realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. A few signs, briefly removed, returned; the others remained. As in so many past experiences, our hopes had been blasted, and the shadow of deep disappointment settled upon us. We had no alternative except to prepare for direct action, whereby we would present our very bodies as a means of laying our case before the conscience of the local and the national community.

One of the few transformative leaders in modern history, Dr. Martin Luther King, presciently wrote in ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’ that if political change is left to those urging caution and patience it will never arrive.

Hillary Clinton is totally beatable in a general election. Just not by Donald Trump or Ted Cruz.

By Chris Cillizza April 18 at 11:47 AM - The Fix - Washington Post

Take two minutes to flip through the new NBC-Wall Street Journal poll and you are left with two very clear takeaways:

1. Hillary Clinton is deeply vulnerable in a general election.

2. Donald Trump and, to a lesser extent, Ted Cruz, are the exact wrong candidates to take advantage of Clinton's weaknesses.

That is the reality that faces Republicans as they look down the road at the general election. A totally winnable race after eight years out of the White House that may be unwinnable -- or close to it -- because of a primary process that has put forward two of their least appealing general election candidates.[...]

If Clinton and Trump are the two presidential nominees, which still seems the most likely outcome today, you can expect a race-to-the-bottom the likes of which have been rarely seen even in presidential politics. Given where each of the candidate's numbers stand, the only way to win will be to make it a choice between bad and worse.

So did the organist.