Hillary Clinton Get's it. Will her supporters listen?

I don't think you do understand how the political process works in terms of the party system.

Hillary is not the leader of the Democratic party. She is still in the running to become the standard bearer for the party in the next presidential election. If she accomplishes that, it will still not make her the leader of the Democratic party, she will only be their candidate at the top of the ticket.

The Democratic party is governed by the Democratic National Committee. The party platform is determined by the Democratic National Committee
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee

I don't agree with you that Sanders has garnered, "political leverage that his campaign has earned to push the party platform"--I don't really think he has the leverage you are attributing to him, nor do I think someone who isn't even a registered Democrat, and who has shown little or no inclination to help Democrats get elected to office, should feel any entitlement about trying to influence the party platform. While many voters have supported Sanders, and his message, many others in the Democratic party have rejected it--that's one reason he's not leading in the delegate count. Sanders is far more progressive than the average Democrat--and while his "messages" sound inspiring, the actual implementation of his policies might be in conflict with other goals and aims of the Democratic party, if they could be accomplished at all.

It's up to Sanders supporters, people just like you, to keep his issues alive long beyond this presidential race. These are issues you should keep raising in every election for every office if you really want to see them gain traction. It's not up to Hillary to suddenly pander for votes by sounding like a Sanders clone because her vision, and her policy positions, do differ somewhat from his. And, while I admire many of his views, I think hers are far more likely to come to fruition in the real world. Hillary is of course, reaching out for votes, and if Sanders supporters would rather not vote next November, or would find Trump the better alternative to Hillary, there really isn't much she can do about that. It is up to Sanders to urge his supporters to vote for Hillary if she becomes the Democratic standard bearer--and he's yet to say he'd do that. And, by continuing to attack her qualifications, quite unjustifiably in my view, he provides the Republicans with fodder to use against her--and I heard Trump say as much this morning.

I support Hillary, but I have no desire to attack Sanders or his supporters, I simply think she is the better qualified candidate who will be the more effective President. I'm glad Sanders has been in this race, I'm glad he has raised issues and I agree with many of his views. But he is clearly not going to amass the number of delegates necessary for the nomination, which makes it imperative that he begin shifting his support, or trying to, to Clinton. This isn't about his gaining "leverage" or clout regarding the Democratic platform, the more important issue is making sure the next President is a Democrat, given the alternative from the Republican side.

Clinton is not Trump, Finn

Clinton represents the Democratic party. I would have rather that Bernie won, but she won fair and square. She isn't about blowing up the party, rather she has been the party establishment choice from the beginning. I prefer Clinton very strongly to any of the original slate of Republican candidates.

You are about to have a candidate that really is going to blow up the party. Trump is not only very likely going to lose this election, but he is going to exacerbate the long term demographic disaster that the GOP faces. Clinton will do no such thing.

I am sorry, but I don't feel your pain.

Clinton is worse than Trump

I don't think you understand how the political process works. It is all about leverage and looking for power. And the party nominee might not be the titular leader, but she has all of the power and the responsibility to set the direction of the campaign for herself and for the party in general.

If you want to understand how this will work, just look at 2008. Hillary Clinton not only had quite a bit of leverage after her failed bid, she used it to great advantage.

Good luck making that case in the general election. Trump is toast in any demographic group outside of White men... and the days where White men win elections are long gone.

You are confusing "politics"--which is about leverage and looking for power--with how a major political party is structured and governed.

I repeat--The Democratic party is governed by the Democratic National Committee. The party platform is determined by the Democratic National Committee
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee

The party nominee may direct their own campaign, they do not necessarily set the direction for the party in general, that is done by the National Committees for both the Republican and Democratic parties.

Clinton actively threw her support behind Obama when it was clear he'd be the nominee, and she strongly urged her backers to do the same. Her only "leverage" was the regard her supporters had for her, and her ability to influence them. Where did she demand concessions to the Democratic party platform in exchange for that support? That's what you seem to approve of Sanders doing, and where we disagree.

Part of being a member of a political party, and a candidate of that party, is being a team player--but Bernie really doesn't want to play on that team, he doesn't want to support and endorse other Democrats, raise money for the Democratic party, etc.. For many voters, that's part of his appeal--he's not a party mouthpiece. However, that outsider status significantly diminishes his "leverage" and clout within the Democratic party.

If the Democratic party has a head right now, it is Obama, since he is the highest ranking Democratic office holder and the most powerful and influential. But even he cannot write the Democratic party platform--the Democratic National Committee does that and they set the direction for the party in general. Voters who agree with these positions support the party--it's just that simple. The Democrats were in good shape before Bernie Sanders came on the national scene, and they'll still be in good shape after he leaves it. Unlike the Republicans, the Democratic party is not splintered, basic core values are shared and that's what helps the party to unite once primaries are over and candidates are selected.

Hillary has the leverage and power, not Bernie. It's up to him to throw his support to her, unless he wants to derail a Democratic victory by continuing to negatively characterize her from this point on. And, if he does that, he'll be sinking his own positions along with her, so that would seem rather pointless for him to do.

Since we may be presented with that choice, can you explain why? I can see problems with both, but not which is worse.

I'm not a member of the Trump campaign staff. Making "the case" is not my job.

Since when has whether or not a candidate can be elected meant anything about their character?

Notwithstanding your accolades for Sanders, it's clear you hoe the Dem party line.

They are both bad, but one has spent her entire adult life clamoring and scheming for power. Once obtained she spent the rest of her adult life clamoring and scheming for wealth. She is a baldfaced liar, psychotically ambitious, and someone who believes she is above our laws. She will do anything to get what she wants.

He's not that bad.

The Problem you see is that the Bernie people can't accept the fact that Bernie lost. More people voted for Hillary than Bernie but they don't accept that fact. They just wont accept defeat gracefully. Either we accept Bernie and his idea's or they will destroy the democratic party.

I have no problem with that.

I live by the rule "Any Democrat is better than any Republican". I have seen nothing since the administration of Teddy Roosevelt to challenge that basic precept and I teach this rule to my children.

Rabel, Did you consider reading this thread before jumping in with this nonsense?

I am a Bernie supporter who is accepting the fact that Bernie lost. And, I am suggesting that Hillary Clinton will take the steps necessary to unite the party (as Barack Obama did eight years ago).

Come on Rabel. It is over. We have a general election to win and your candidate both represents us and needs us.

Now quit the nastiness and get on board.

I think I'll do what Bob Dole is gonna do: namely, not vote. My poor wife, who once contributed regularly to the Republican Party but stopped years ago, couldn't stand to hear about Trump's most recent primary victories. She said the very thought made her stomach hurt. (She has my sympathy.) She's said that she may actually vote for Clinton (whom she has never liked), which would be the first time she's ever voted for a Democratic presidential candidate. (A few days ago, she said her former party is dying.) Of course, she could change her mind and elect to stay home instead of having me drive her to the polls.

I agree with the Young Turks guy: The presidential election campaign is going to be terrible. Wake me up when it's over. In the meantime, I'll be having nightmares.

good to see you here

I'm at a loss how to respond to such idiotic, tribal nonsense.

This sounds so out of character for you. Of all the kinds of political discussions to be bothered by this one seems rather mild to be telling people to "shut the **** up" about.

Perhaps he is bothered by the concessions being demanded by Bernie and his supporters which feels much more like a threat and a demand to give in to all of Bernie Sanders ideas. If voters had wanted that, they would have voted for it.

I can imagine a lot of reasons to get bothered in this silly season but unlike the resident ideologues he doesn't strike me as someone who bothers easily about such matters.

Perhaps you don't know everything you think you know? Just a thought.

I'm as sure that is the case as I am that it is utterly pointless to my line of inquiry but whatever floats your boat.