The Democratic primary isn't anywhere as bitter as it looks online

Preserving democracy. That's the larger, big picture goal that will be achieved - and if it means 4 or 8 years of climate-change denying, NRA pandering, Putin loving, xenophobic misogyny, well - small price to pay, I guess?

Putin is handling ISIS, Obama should have handled a national registry to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill people and those with criminal records... Obama and Hillary are raping the environment with fracking and the Keystone pipeline, and Obama has done more drone killing and robbing average people of their personal rights than Bush, so.... what are you worried about?

You could put that to music. Call it
"Whistling past the graveyard where I last felt the bern"

That's a great idea, but I'm gonna go with "What a Crashing Disappointment Obama has Been." More accurate.

The lyrics:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/03/obama-doctrine-goldberg-disappointment/473172/

What is xenophobic misogyny? Plain xenophobia might be based on the realization that a percentage of immigrants do a wonderful charade of adopting the American culture; however, there is emotional baggage from the old country that is just so outrageously unAmerican, it is almost laughable. Perhaps, down South this is not so apparent, but in the teeming diversity in the Northeast it takes possibly three generations here before someone thinks that they are truly as American as mom's apple turnover.

The point isn't really whether she'll be convincing people or not -- but that she herself was recently a strong Bernie supporter, and that's what's she's saying now. To be clear, since "unite" doesn't necessarily contain this info, she was a Bernie supporter but is now supporting Hillary. To quote her a bit more for better context:

You go girl!

I understood the context.

Your friend is speaking as a Democrat. "Unite the party." Independents are 43% of the voting public, and they do not heel to the word unite. They are from a different party... They have different priorities.

Also as I said previously, actual liberal Democrats aren't cobbling back into the fold as automatically as your friend - again citing Democrat PDiddie.

My concern is that Trump will do better than I and everyone else expected in the general election, where it is easier to vote than in the primaries and has the potential to draw in new voters. I think that the one constant in this election so far is everyone underestimating the discontent with the existing parties and Trump will be better positioned to capitalize on it than Hillary.

It's not the conservative Democrats that I'm concerned about, but the apolitical people who think that Trump is upending the system and who are inspired by his campaign.

Among the youth online I see (which is not necessarily representative, I know) there only seems to be excitement for Sanders and Trump and widespread distrust of Hillary merely for being part of the "establishment". They may or may not show up in the polls I usually would predict that they wouldn't, but have been surprised at the strength of the discontent a few times this year and am not starting to sandbag my predictions for a better Trump showing than I have expected, as he has outperformed most of my expectations so far.

The supreme court situation is also getting a fair bit of play with young conservatives - they are seeing an opportunity to create a 7-2 conservative supreme court if Mr. Trump is elected. There's a lot about him they don't like but their eye is on that supreme court prize (which has potential to be a 30+ year prize, not just 4 or 8 years)

That's another factor, but one I think may cut both ways (progressives will fall in line to prevent it too).

It absolutely could (and should). My post was a report of the FB feed view from my account. There's a group of super-religious belly dancers (turns out that's a thing) in the Carolinas and Kentucky who skew that view.

this is showing up a lot in my feed (West Virginia has been a big source in the past week)

a bunch of bald faced lying

Though this thread makes the same point I have in the past on a2k, I do want to add some things that make me question that. In the last election it wasn't the inspiring new candidate that lost and I am still unsure how that dynamic will play out, especially if Bernie goes rouge (which I still do not expect him to do). Here is an article from Nate Silver on independents that have been a key to Bernie's campaign so far:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-hidden-importance-of-the-bernie-sanders-voter/

I am worried more that Sanders' supporters will just stay home in November than that they will vote Trump. The Democrats need to take control of the Senate more than anything else, so that means they need a good turnout. That is not just for the Supremes, either, as important as those nominations are. The White House nominates the entire Federal bench, and of course, all of the executive branch offices, including offices people don't usually think of such as the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

The 2008 situation was more like 1980. In 1980, Reagan was the outsider, the dark horse, and George Bush was the establishment candidate. In both 2008 and 1980, that outsider won the nomination. This situation is not the same. I'm not really worried about Sanders supporters voting for Trump so much as i am that they just won't vote at all.

This is what one must hope for. Sanders as a sore loser would be a real burden for the Democrats. A lot of his supporters are young, and it's hard to get them to the polls.

Anyone who claims Putin dealt with ISIS is living in La-la Land.

For all the people who haven't been paying attention, the Russians just bombed Assad's Syrian enemies. The western coalition has been bombing ISIS, and the real war is being fought by the Iraqis.

WSJ article on the bgattle for Fallujah

The real backbone of ground fighting against ISIS has come from Iran. Iranian officers train the Shi'ite militias and often lead them into battle. Revolutionary Guard teams provide special forces services for the Iraqis, because they're sure not going to get any help on the ground, from Russia or the West.

You may now resume your regular programming.

http://www.newsweek.com/putin-isis-assad-syria-palmyra-russia-war-islamic-state-441497
You're wrong. US propaganda. The Democrat administration would rather lose than let people know that Russia is more effective against ISIS.

After all, the long drawn out 'war' against ISIS feeds our military industrial complex.