Connect with us

homepage news

Sanders campaign blasts Human Rights Campaign over Clinton support

Vermont senator says endorsement not ‘based on the facts and the record’

Published

on

Bernie Sanders, gay news, Washington Blade

The campaign for Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) criticized the Human Rights Campaign for endorsing Hillary Clinton. (Image via C-Span)

The presidential campaign for Democratic candidate Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) tore into the Human Rights Campaign on Tuesday for endorsing Hillary Clinton.

After the Human Rights Campaign announced on Tuesday it would back Clinton, the Sanders campaign criticized the nation’s largest LGBT group in response to a Washington Blade inquiry for a reaction.

“It’s understandable and consistent with the establishment organizations voting for the establishment candidate, but it’s an endorsement that cannot possibly be based on the facts and the record,” said Sanders campaign spokesperson Michael Briggs.

Touting Sanders as “somebody who’s been for gay rights long, long ago” since he was mayor of Burlington, Vt., Briggs said Sanders as a U.S. senator voted against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 1993 and he voted against the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. Briggs also cited Sanders’ support in calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn DOMA.

Recalling Sanders’ support for civil unions in Vermont when it became the first state to enact them in 2000, Briggs said Sanders was “a pioneer on this early version of gay marriage, and has by far the most exemplary record on gay rights of any candidate ever in American history.”

Both “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and DOMA became law under former President Bill Clinton.

Hillary Clinton supported DOMA through her 2000 campaign for a U.S. Senate seat in New York and backed only repealing Section 3 of the law during her first presidential campaign. Both Bill and Hillary Clinton now support marriage equality.

“So who knows what prompted the Human Rights Campaign to do what it does — I have trouble myself figuring why they do some of the things they do over the years — but I think the gay men and lesbians all over the country will know who has been their champion for a long, long time and will consider that as they make up their mind on support for his campaign,” Briggs said.

Asked whether he meant to include bisexual and transgender people in his description of gay men and lesbians, Briggs said that was correct and he meant “LGBTQ people all over the country.”

Briggs declined to elaborate on what actions the Human Rights Campaign has taken that he doesn’t understand.

Brandon Lorenz, a spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, in a statement to the Blade responded to the Sanders campaign’s criticisms.

“There are certainly several friends of equality in this race, but the 32 community leaders who comprise HRC’s Board of Directors have unanimously decided that Hillary Clinton is the champion we need to fight for us each day on the campaign trail and every day in the White House,” said Lorenz. “She has a strong record, a strong agenda, and a strong ability to win against any Republican running on an anti-LGBT platform in November and lead from Day One.”

Each of the Democratic presidential candidates submitted responses to questionnaires by the Human Rights Campaign, which the organization made public on the day it announced its endorsement. Both Clinton and Sanders responded in the affirmative to every action HRC sought in its questionnaire.

In May, Sanders, in an interview with the Washington Blade, became the first presidential candidate to support openly trans service in the U.S. military and made a point about including trans people in his campaign and presidency.

Asked what steps can be taken to address the high rate of violence against trans women, particularly trans women of color, Sanders said, “I think we have to, among other things, do a better job in educating our police officers.”

But Sanders hasn’t always been in favor of full marriage equality. In 2006 when asked by the Vermont-based Times Argus newspaper if Vermont should legalize same-sex marriage, Sanders was quoted as saying, “Not right now, not after what we went through,” referring to the conflict in the state over civil unions.

HRC endorsed then-Democratic candidate Barack Obama in June 2008 after he had secured the nomination following a bruising primary battle with Hillary Clinton.

Matt Corridoni, a spokesperson for Martin O’Malley, responded to the Human Rights Campaign’s endorsement of Clinton by emphasizing the former Maryland’s governor record on LGBT rights.

“Gov. O’Malley passed Maryland’s first transgender anti-discrimination bill as mayor of Baltimore, signed marriage equality into law as governor of Maryland and defended it at the ballot box, and his campaign is the only on record saying he would consider and LGBT running mate,” Corridoni said. “His record speaks for itself.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
670 Comments

670 Comments

  1. Taradacktyl

    January 19, 2016 at 12:43 pm

    Sanders is 100% correct. HRC has revealed itself as the kind of organization that turns it back on someone who has been fighting in the trenches for LGBT rights for DECADES – even when it was politically risky. They won’t get a dime from me ever again.

    • leslie365

      January 19, 2016 at 12:45 pm

      Same here

    • William T Carter

      January 19, 2016 at 3:10 pm

      Amen Brother. I did the same. I feel like Chad Griffin slapped me in the face, and I’m not into that sort of thing so I cancelled my partners membership and any future donations.

    • Pierre Pompideaux

      January 19, 2016 at 5:08 pm

      Chad Griffin and his deputies are all just angling for appointments in a would-be Clinton administration. It’s all about their personal ambitions. It’s that simple.

    • Tom

      January 19, 2016 at 9:44 pm

      This isn’t the first time the HRC has betrayed the LGBT civil rights movement, and it won’t be the last.

    • TBR78

      January 20, 2016 at 1:28 am

      Except when he wasn’t fighting for LGBT rights because they were “too divisive” [his words, not mine].

  2. leslie365

    January 19, 2016 at 12:44 pm

    I done with HRC. I agree with Sanders.

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 1:07 pm

      Sanders is an OLD, unelectable socialist. You Bernie bots are disgusting unhinged extremists.

      • Jp310

        January 19, 2016 at 1:11 pm

        Bots?!, you are coppy pasting the same shit all over, lol. How much did they pay you at the Clinton campaign?!

      • caravan70

        January 19, 2016 at 2:02 pm

        He’s a democratic socialist. And that’s a positive label, not a negative one.

        • Marty McFly

          January 19, 2016 at 3:34 pm

          True, but he’s a dreamer and a nut who is just talking out his ass. He cannot make any of these things happen, and he knows it. He’s not Obama, he’s been in the Senate for more than a minute.

          • MainFragger

            January 20, 2016 at 3:29 pm

            I don’t think he thinks he can change America overnight..but he can start the ball rolling. If he is good enough to get re-elected after a first term, he might actually put a dent in some issues. And really, that’s all any President can hope for.. But the dent he makes might make it easier for the next guy to make an even bigger dent if someone from the same party gets elected and continues what he started. I realize its not realistic to expect this.. But if we can get 3 or 4 Democrats serving back to back terms as Pres, you might actually see a nice difference in America.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:05 pm

          He’s an unelectable socialist and he’s FINISHED you wACKO.

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • soxgirl62

            January 19, 2016 at 4:23 pm

            How could he be “unelectable”? He has been elected a hell of a lot more times over a hell of a lot more years than Hell- ery! How do you deem him “unelectable”?

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:23 pm

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I she will change back once elected

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 1:17 am

            Your argument would be a lot more solid if it wasn’t the same exact argument Obama had… until he set the stage for full marriage equality. Not to mention it was also Bernie Sanders’ argument at the same time this video was recorded. People evolve. Both candidates evolved. Both candidates support the LGBT community. I’m not sure why this is so contentious.

          • frank lee

            January 20, 2016 at 9:46 pm

            Could you find the YouTube clip of Sanders arguing the same? Please link.

          • frank lee

            January 20, 2016 at 9:53 pm

            In that clip, he didn’t argue for the sanctity of marriage. He stated he is against Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and voted against DOMA.

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 9:55 pm

            He also said in 2006 that he doesn’t want to pursue gay marriage because it’s “too divisive.” You conveniently glossed over that part.

          • frank lee

            January 20, 2016 at 9:55 pm

            He stated it was a state issue, not that he believed in the sanctity of marriage and not that it was defined as a man and woman. That’s what bothered me about Hillary’s recording. I don’t have a problem with someone arguing a state versus federal issue. I believe states should have more decision power.

          • frank lee

            January 20, 2016 at 9:58 pm

            “Divisive” is not the same as defining marriage specifically as a union between man and woman, which Hillary did. No need for the snarky adverb, I didn’t place much relevance in the “divisive” description. It’s much less of an impact than going into a definition of what marriage is.

          • PlantJoySeeds

            January 21, 2016 at 2:53 am

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:26 am

            They checked a few facts, but they’re also missing a few facts. The fact that their Lexis Nexis search didn’t return a quote from his chief of staff / wife saying he opposed DOMA on states’ rights ground apparently escaped him. They also misssed his quote to the Vermont reporter in 2006 saying he has no interest in pursuing full equal rights as it would be “too divisive.” Everything in this politifact link is in fact correct, but I give it a grade of Incomplete. They missed a few rather important and relevant details.

          • TomLaugh

            January 21, 2016 at 2:16 pm

            TBR78, you also left out the context of the “too divisive” comment, so you are also incomplete.

            Sanders’ comment was in response to the question of pushing for “gay marriage” shortly after the Vermont election affirming “domestic unions”. To me that is a political strategy comment, not a definition or policy statement, which Clinton’s was.

            Clinton, while seemingly evolved from it now, was that marriage was and should be only for “one man & one women” and that LGBT marriages were less than hetero marriages. That is starkly different than Sanders comment and his support of that first in the nation Vermont vote is also in years ahead of Clinton at the time.

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 2:26 pm

            “were less than hetero marriages.” Sensational much? You’re splitting hairs now. Regardless if Sanders statement was a political strategy comment vs a policy statement, he didn’t feel it was a good use of his time to fight for the cause, so your argument isn’t holding a great deal of water here.

          • TomLaugh

            January 21, 2016 at 2:32 pm

            True, not sensation. Maybe the truth hurts, so it is sensation to you. He didn’t feel it was good use of his time at that time – still strategy not policy or definition – again big difference from Clinton.

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 2:55 pm

            Yes, and the truth hurts for you too when the facts are laid out for you that Sanders is hardly the gay rights crusader you have built up in your head has no basis in reality.

          • TomLaugh

            January 21, 2016 at 3:12 pm

            Boy you most be reading the fact check article, that you agreed was correct, except for two additions, very differently than I. Those facts were he was a supporter of LGBT rights long before Clinton considered supporting it and long before most politicians. And is still a stronger supporter. So if you have other evidence please present it.

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:17 pm

            Read this expose from a feminist site. They did a similar analysis for Clinton and were equally meticulous in terms of detail and accountability and assigning culpability. What’s great about this expose is that they conducted primary research speaking to people who actually were LGBT activists in a position to know precisely where the candidates stood at the time.

            http://www.shakesville.com/2015/07/looking-for-bernie-part-4-turning-right.html

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:19 pm

            Oh god. 6 posts? Puh-LEEZ, BernieBot. I can’t believe I was wasting my time here. You people are really bad at pretending to be real people. I was foolish in not checking your profile first.

          • TomLaugh

            January 21, 2016 at 9:45 pm

            No Bot, quite the opposite. I have a life and can’t spend all day replying here. And I needed to take the time to read your information. And no I didn’t & haven’t taken the time to fill out the profile data. So cool your jets.

            OK, Sanders wasn’t an immediate equal marriage supporter. Of course I know many of my LGBT friends & activists were divided on civil unions vs. marriage at the time. In fact here in NM the LGBT community stood up to the LGBT political leaders to say no to a compromise of a non-marriage relationship that had marriage benefits the political leaders wanted to accept. Personally I would have been fine to create a two step process and leave marriage as a religious ritual/certificate and make the requisite civil contract a civil union for all couples. So as with DADT there were pragmatic LGBT & supporters who saw it as an incremental step and supported it, the same was true for folks who supported civil union/domestic partnerships as an incremental step.

            Those marriage light tacts did allow some people to get some benefits sooner, but never eliminated the second class status which was eliminated by marriage equality. So I am not surprised or greatly offended by a not LGBT person not being sure how to proceed at the time.

            And again, Sanders never said proclaimed marriage was only for heterosexual relationships and peddled to those scared of marriage equality that Clinton did. He has a long track record of supporting LGBT rights.

            And as noted in the article you offered, “But Sanders has other, more genuine positives to be talked about in this regard, so anyone who wants to support him has plenty of genuine material.”

            From my point of view support between Sanders vs. Clinton comes down to:
            – do you want radical change & believe it is needed; or
            – do you want incremental change & hope it will slowly change in time.
            Frankly on environmental/climate change and corporate & oligarchic control of our political & economic system I think there needs to be radical change or we will be lost. We do not have the luxury of incremental change. Sanders is for radical change and Clinton is for incremental change as their political history on LGBT rights indicates.

            Obviously you believe in incremental change & I believe in radical change. So I am content to agree to disagree, because our discussion on the details of Sanders’ timing of evolution to supporting marriage equality really has very little to do with the real issues on which we disagree. And this is not the comment forum for that discussion.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 11:50 am

            So what, old news and the largest LGBT organization just endorsed her. Unlike you, they know who will win and beat the Republicans.

          • PhysicistVet

            January 20, 2016 at 12:50 pm

            “the largest LGBT organization just endorsed her.”

            No, 32 well connected, well paid, Hillary Clinton supporters endorsed her, and then they DECIDED for the rest of their “members,” a number which they arrive at by counting up every single donation (of ANY amount, even $1) as well as ANY purchase of ANY item, because if you buy something, then you count as a “member.”

            HRC is a political lobbying firm that takes advantage of a rights movement to raise cash and promote Democratic candidates, and little else. It’s why they often don’t align with the rest of the LGBTQ community, despite being the highest profile group. They are just another PAC hiding their political maneuvering behind one political issue. If you don’t believe me, start taking a look at some of the major corporations that commit some pretty horrible human rights abuses across the globe that get the thumbs up from them.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 1:24 pm

            I don’t think being well connected is a bad thing, in fact it’s good. Hillary will win the general, Bernie will not. It’s simple as that. I’m not a gambling person, I will not bet on Bernie.

          • PhysicistVet

            January 20, 2016 at 2:57 pm

            “Hillary will win the general, Bernie will not.”

            Absolutists tend to spend the majority of their lives upset about one thing or another.

            I’ll say that Clinton has the odds in her favor to win the primary AT THE MOMENT, but that only means that she is the more likely AT THE MOMENT.

            All it takes is a few victories for Sanders to change the entire game. Sanders support only grows with more exposure, as his entire platform has majority support among the majority of the public, if you check public polling across the individual planks within his platform.

            As for the general, Clinton has a favorability to unfavorability rating issue, and no one wins with a net unfavorability rating like hers ever wins the general (although with the current GOP crop, that rule is also up for debate). Do you honestly believe that Clinton has a better shot than Sanders? The ONLY people that Clinton appeals to are Democrats, who only make up 1/3 of the registered voters, so the ONLY way for her to win is for the Democrats to ALSO hope for low voter turn-out, but not too low to ensure a GOP victory, which would also ensure a GOP majority House and make the Senate a toss up. Sanders, on the other hand, appeals to an EXTREMELY broad swath of the voting public, including a TON of former Reaganites, libertarians, anti-establishment GOP voters, moderates and independents of all stripes, liberals, Democrats, and hardcore extreme leftists who are in the burn the corporate sellout DNC to the ground crowd. Stop eating the crap that the Clinton camp is spoon feeding you.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 3:09 pm

            4 paragraphs of absolute drivel! The Bernie bubble will pop after NH. He can have NH :)

          • PhysicistVet

            January 20, 2016 at 3:18 pm

            “4 paragraphs of absolute drivel! The Bernie bubble will pop after NH. He can have NH :)”

            It is possible. But we shall see.

            All Sanders needs to gain more support is exposure.

            Clinton needs to attack and degrade her opponents (which has been counterproductive every time she’s attempted it with Sanders), defend herself from constant 180 “evolutions” on pretty much every political issue, stop losing support from her nonstop transparent pandering, keep the press in line, minimize the public’s exposure to Sanders (increasingly difficult), somehow increase her fundraising, avoid major gaffes, keep her major political campaign cash coordination activities fairly quiet (because its pretty messed up, even beyond the shady stuff Rubio and Cruz have been pulling; check out Sunlight.org’s articles for more details), somehow overcome a large net UNfavorability (which has NEVER been done in political history to win a general election, btw), and somehow manage to keep the internet and social media from steamrolling her if Iowa and NH are both victories and annihilate HER OWN self imposed tale of inevitability and invincibility.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 3:27 pm

            I do want Sanders to gain more exposure. Then he can be vetted the way Clinton has for the last 30 years by the media. Right now, media needs readers. They are propping up Bernie for readers! They need drama. BTW Bernie and Cornel West have been sharp critics of Obama, take that to the minorities.

          • PhysicistVet

            January 20, 2016 at 4:09 pm

            “BTW Bernie and Cornel West have been sharp critics of Obama, take that to the minorities.”

            I am a harsh critic of Obama on plenty of topics. In fact, PLENTY of people are. Blind loyalty only go so far, and only work for a small bloc of party loyalists, who have been growing smaller by the year. You’d think embarrassing Congressional election results from 2010-2014 would have at least giving you a small inkling of that.

            Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but Democrats are only 1/3 of the registered voters, and even then, there are TONS of Democrats who aren’t too thrilled with the steady march toward the center that the Democratic Party has been taking for the past 30 years, a (quite rightly) recognize Clinton as a centrist (at best) on economic issues, barely left of center on social issues, and a blatant neo-con on foreign affairs. She’s more or less a Reagan Republican, but ok with abortion and homosexuals now and somehow good at convincing Democrats that she’s totally on their side.

          • MarleneMoulthrop

            January 20, 2016 at 4:45 pm

            Obama lost congress because the pubs declared from day one that Obama would not make a 2nd term, so if they were fighting his presidency, obviously they were fighting him in congress. You didn’t observe the gridlock in congress that stymied his every move? A lot of it was racial. Imagine losing to a dem and a black one at that.

          • frank lee

            January 20, 2016 at 10:05 pm

            Why do you think it was racially motivated? Could it be that it was largely due to anti-spending measures?

          • PhysicistVet

            January 21, 2016 at 9:07 am

            “Obama lost congress because the pubs declared from day one that Obama would not make a 2nd term”

            Oh really? The voters of this country all decided not to vote for Democrats because Republicans (1/4 of the registered voters in this country) declared from day one that Obama wouldn’t have a second term?

            Yes, Republicans obstructed him, and yes, he got a lot of blame that he didn;t deserve, but trying to pretend like THREE STRAIGHT national elections of Democratic losses are because REPUBLICANS were mean to Obama is only further underscoring my point as to how blind Democrats are to their weaknesses as a party and why they are likely to continue their downward descent in a time when they should be able to easily skyrocket to veto proof majorities in both House and Senate while the Republicans are playing their circular firing squad games.

            Instead of listening to the American people, the Democrats are too busy listening to the Democratic Party, and not even the registered Democratic voters, just the Party officials, who rarely have any connection to average, actual citizens. All the while, any shortcoming cannot be in any way their own fault (not even partly), and by ignoring the possibility of any fault, they ignore any possibility of improvement and progress. That’s why the Democratic Party has been marching to the right since the 90s, and why the US public is now more progressive on average than the “progressive” party; a party that can’t figure out why someone who doesn’t meet ANY of the standard characteristics for a “successful” presidential politician is doing so well simply by supporting things that the MAJORITY of the people support.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 6:25 pm

            This democrat is very happy being in the center! I’ll go to the left here and there, but not Socialist left. AND don’t assume only dems will vote for her, the moderate republicans will too instead of the clowns they have.

          • PhysicistVet

            January 21, 2016 at 8:55 am

            ” the moderate republicans will too instead of the clowns they have.”

            You mean the moderate Republicans who are demanding that we get money out of politics, love the fact that Sanders despises deficit spending (although he makes exceptions for emergency deficit spending), are shouting about how much they despise the political establishment, hate the status quo, are clamoring for a Teddy Roosevelt style trust buster, aren’t fans of Clinton’s firearms stances (especially the extreme left turn), love honesty, aren’t big fans of the ACA, and realize that Rand Paul and Sanders actually share an awful lot more planks in their platform when it comes to personal freedom than Clinton and Sanders do?

            You mean those moderate Republicans? Because that’s pretty much my entire EXTREMELY LARGE family, and they are almost all firmly in the Sanders camp. They may not like his social program stances, and a lot aren’t too keen on abortion, but you better believe almost every one of them will vote AGAINST Clinton in a general election no matter who her opponent is.

          • Needle

            January 21, 2016 at 3:44 pm

            You just described the right wing. I gotta hand it to you, you go to great lengths for someone who is going to lose big.

          • Arlene

            January 20, 2016 at 8:52 pm

            Yes, and truth be told, Hillary had many differences of opinion with Obama during her time as Secretary of State. i.e. she wanted “boots on the ground” in Syria. She correctly questioned Obama’s stone cold withdrawal of communications with the Iraqi Prime Minister, which resulted in the Sunni/Shite onslaught. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is a reliable source on many of these matters. Bill Clinton it has been reported wanted Hillary to challenge Obama again in 2012, referring to Obama as “amateurish” and “incompetent.” Funny how the Clinton Campaign is now sort of trying to take credit for John Kerry’s brilliant negotiating skills with Iran for the release of the journalists. Somehow they have twisted this success into a reflection of all the “haaaarrrrdddd” work Hillary did as SOS. The Iraq War and the Arab Spring have resulted in deepening chaos and death not only across the entire middle east, but throughout every part of the world. Hillary voted for the Iraq War and thought the Arab Spring was wonderful. She was shortsighted.

          • PhysicistVet

            January 21, 2016 at 8:45 am

            To be honest, she never really fully embraced Obama until just now. Even as Sec of State she was somewhat standoffish in a lot of ways and somewhat questioning. I am guessing that it’s insurance for Nevada and South Carolina, and she’s really trying to keep Sanders from gaining any support among the black demographic, where he is weakest. More pandering from the pander-master.

          • Nosebetta

            January 20, 2016 at 10:59 pm

            A curious thing about the Clinton campaign is; That, whenever they attack Bernie Sanders the polls go his way along with the contributions!

          • Nosebetta

            January 20, 2016 at 10:55 pm

            You don’t think Nevada, Georgia, California are going Sanders way?

          • PlantJoySeeds

            January 21, 2016 at 2:48 am

            He is also winning in Iowa now – and surging in Nevada…and SC…just wait and see.

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:27 am

            He’s not winning in Iowa. And he’s not surging in Nevada or SC. Hope is not a strategy.

          • Nosebetta

            January 20, 2016 at 10:53 pm

            There will be hell to pay if the popular candidate does not win! I envision National Guard involvement.

          • frank lee

            January 20, 2016 at 9:41 pm

            Needle, problem is you don’t know everyone who is “well connected” with Hillary. It is a way, way bad thing.

          • Needle

            January 21, 2016 at 8:26 am

            Look at her endorsements, it’s a way good thing. Apparently Bernie who’s been in the senate forever can’t get his colleagues to endorse him. They want to win!

          • J. R. Tomlin

            January 21, 2016 at 2:38 am

            Point to some polling that supports that opinion. Even one poll would do.

          • TomLaugh

            January 21, 2016 at 1:50 pm

            HRC is not that smart and is very establishment oriented, and I take it so are you, Needle, with your risk adverse no gambling stance. (But you are gambling with Clinton, just more comfortable with that.)

            HRC has significant responsibility for losing the Houston referendum vote on Houston’s civil rights bill last year and unleashing a new effective fear campaign against the LGBT community. So HRC isn’t so knowledgeable on electoral politics and plays it very old school – little to no outreach to non-white communities.

            I find HRC very conventional & out of touch with who it purports to represent. It is not at all surprising to find HRC endorsing Clinton – they almost always go with the old comfortable non-boat rocker.

          • TomLaugh

            January 21, 2016 at 2:23 pm

            HRC is not that smart and is very establishment oriented, and I take it so are you, Needle, with your risk adverse no gambling stance.

            HRC has significant responsibility for losing the Houston referendum vote on Houston’s civil rights bill and unleashing a new effective fear campaign against the LGBT community. So it isn’t so knowledgeable on electoral politics and plays it very old school – little to no outreach to non-white communities.

            I find HRC very conventional & out of touch with who it purports to represent. It is not at all surprising to find HRC endorsing Clinton – they almost always go with the old comfortable non-boat rocker.

          • Nosebetta

            January 20, 2016 at 10:50 pm

            Well said!

          • Arlene

            January 20, 2016 at 12:55 pm

            They smell the money Needle. Bernie Sanders has been an advocate of LGBT Rights way before Clinton and Obama.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 1:22 pm

            I like Bernie, but I don’t want a republican president, you guys are playing with FIRE! Hillary in the general will win, not Bernie.

          • MarleneMoulthrop

            January 20, 2016 at 4:34 pm

            wrong!

          • Nosebetta

            January 20, 2016 at 11:01 pm

            Guess you haven’t been looking at the polls lately. Sanders beats all opponents Democrat and Republican, handily. “Morning Joe”, on MSNBC has a segment on just that this morning!

          • Needle

            January 21, 2016 at 7:41 am

            Cmon Nosebetta, “Morning Joe”? I prefer polls from reputable sources, not a Republican hack like Joe.
            NATESIVER: I don’t think it’s that surprising. First, as we’ve been saying for six months now, the first two states happen to be pretty favorable for Bernie.

            Second, there are a lot of people, including the media and Democratic interest groups, who have a strong incentive for there to be a competitive Democratic race, or at least some semblance of one. To get a little more wonky still, the median voter theorem would imply that two-candidate races should be at least reasonably close.

            Third, history suggests that even “inevitable” candidates, like Bob Dole ’96 and George W. Bush ’00, lose a few states. Al Gore ’00 was the only one to sweep all 50. But he nearly lost New Hampshire to Bill Bradley. And if you’d read the press coverage of that race 16 years ago, you’d see plenty of articles about how Bradley was surging and it was time for Gore to panic.

          • Needle

            January 21, 2016 at 7:43 am

            The problem is Bernie won’t win General election! I’m not betting on him with the supreme court in jeopardy!

          • JON B.

            January 21, 2016 at 9:02 pm

            She’s such a lying, twisted, crass char! To the devil with her!

          • MainFragger

            January 19, 2016 at 4:29 pm

            What Silver is stating is opinion based on data and statistics. And the thing you have to understand about something being 99.99 per cent unlikely..is that it still eventually and occasionally happens.

            No one is a whacko because they disagree with Nate Silver or his statistics. Considering what Republicans have done to this country and what they’d like to continue to do this country…if you support them..you should probably watch what you are doing in the glass house you are throwing the whacko stones in..

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:32 pm

            You keep posting the same garbage you paid troll. Any original thoughts floating around up there?

          • soxgirl62

            January 19, 2016 at 5:13 pm

            Of course not! This idiot doesn’t have any original thoughts, he doesn’t even have a brain, lol!

          • JON B.

            January 21, 2016 at 8:57 pm

            His name is NERO (as in CAESAR!)

            Any questions?

          • craig klucas

            January 19, 2016 at 5:16 pm

            Great! Now I’m writing in Barry Sanders in the general election

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:04 pm

            Barry Sanders? hahahahaha

            Bernie the OLD DINO IS TOAST.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • gunnut

            January 19, 2016 at 5:50 pm

            How does it feel to be the biggest loser on the planet? You have nothing better to do than sit here all day posting maniacal things? I think you need to take your meds. Sending this to the FBI because clearly you have lost your mind and will probably go out and shoot up a shopping mall or movie theatre tonight.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:08 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            you suffer from a mental illness.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 11:52 am

            Because he doesn’t support the old, angry socialist? What the hell is the FBI supposed to do? LMAO!

          • TheDollyLlama

            January 19, 2016 at 6:02 pm

            oh I’m sorry. is Nate Silver the only one voting? see you in Iowa.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:12 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            DINO Bernie is TOAST.

          • Robert Easterling

            January 19, 2016 at 11:04 pm

            Ya HRC completely leveled by Bernie Sanders popularity. She is totally floored by his honesty, integrity and more importantly the following he has amassed as a result of the formerly mentioned FACTS. What do you have dumbass? Nate Silver’s opinion predicated on what? Something other than facts to be sure. Grow a brain idiot or go back to the shallow end of the gene pool where you obviously came from.

          • nero88888

            January 20, 2016 at 9:31 am

            https://twitter.com/tomwatson/status/689630273613500416?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            cry all you want wacko. Bernie the DINO is DONE. HAHAHHAA

          • Nosebetta

            January 20, 2016 at 10:47 pm

          • Brrelli

            January 20, 2016 at 12:39 am

            You refer to everyone as bots when you copy in paste every time—if anyone here is DINO TOAST, it’s you pal.

          • nero88888

            January 20, 2016 at 3:00 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            #feelthebernout

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:29 am

            What Nate Silver said today:

            micah: Real means >25 percent chance [of Sanders winning]/

            natesilver: Sell.

            micah: 20 percent.

            harry: Sell.

            natesilver: Still selling.

          • nero88888

            January 21, 2016 at 9:09 am

          • Diana

            January 20, 2016 at 5:22 am

            …Says the paid off MSM who have been ignoring Bernie as he keeps working and proving them wrong.

          • nero88888

            January 20, 2016 at 3:00 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • MarleneMoulthrop

            January 20, 2016 at 4:33 pm

            Bernie has a better chance than HRC.

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:29 am

            Here’s an even-newer Silver quote:

            micah: Real means >25 percent chance [of Sanders winning].

            natesilver: Sell.

            micah: 20 percent.

            harry: Sell.

            natesilver: Still selling.

          • nero88888

            January 21, 2016 at 9:09 am

          • TomLaugh

            January 21, 2016 at 1:14 pm

            All Nate Silver said in the Daily Kos article is that Sanders is the only candidate with “net-positive favorability rating”. Sorry, as much as I would like the article to have Nate Silver saying, “Clinton is not ‘electable'”, it is the article’s author, Mike Vadon, saying this.

          • PlantJoySeeds

            January 21, 2016 at 2:45 am

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:30 am

            Now it’s you with the outdated information. Hot off the press!

            http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-bernie-sanders-surge-real/

          • nero88888

            January 21, 2016 at 9:09 am

          • Jim

            January 19, 2016 at 6:21 pm

            Shooo little boy! You are a broken record and no one is listening….

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:13 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Bernie the UNELECTABLE DINO is DONE.

          • Nlllllovollllln

            April 16, 2016 at 8:23 am

            You tell ’em, pedophile!

          • Robert Easterling

            January 19, 2016 at 11:01 pm

            He is beating them ALL in the polls dumbass. Nate Silver gets it wrong and you are quite obviously too fucking stupid to formulate your own opinion based on the facts. Go ahead on ya damn dumb sheep!

          • Diana

            January 20, 2016 at 5:21 am

            Keep talking. You do a fine job of showing your ignorance without any help from anybody else.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 11:53 am

            He is funny :)

          • nero88888

            January 20, 2016 at 3:00 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            want a tissue wing nut?

          • J. R. Tomlin

            January 20, 2016 at 11:54 am

            Why should we bother voting. Let’s just let Nate Silver who is president and have done with it. Ummm… No, thanks.

          • MarleneMoulthrop

            January 20, 2016 at 4:25 pm

            Thanks for the info. WACKO

          • Nosebetta

            January 20, 2016 at 10:46 pm

            #Bernieorbust!

          • nero88888

            January 21, 2016 at 9:12 am

          • PlantJoySeeds

            January 21, 2016 at 2:43 am

            Um, you wanna quote Nate Silver? This was an OLD quote by him. Here’s what he’s NOW saying: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/18/1471588/-Nate-Bernie-Sanders-is-the-only-candidate-in-either-party-with-a-net-positive-favorability-rating

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:44 am

            What Nate Silver said today about Bernie’s chances of winning the nomination:

            ‘If I could get him at 20-1 (implying about a 5 percent chance of winning), I’d take it.’

          • nero88888

            January 21, 2016 at 9:10 am

        • Cynthia Joy Finnegan

          January 19, 2016 at 4:07 pm

          Look up the definitions of Democratic and Socialist in the dictionary. You’ll see that “democratic socialist’ in an oxymoron.

          • MainFragger

            January 19, 2016 at 4:24 pm

            Democracy: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/democracy
            Socialism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

            Notice, they actually use the word democratic aspart of the mechanisms of socialism,..

            http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/democratic-socialism

            Not only are Democracy and Socialism NOT oxymorons..they often compliment each other very well.

            Democracy just means everyone has a say in how the government runs. Socialism means that everyone has a say in how businesses allocate their profits among the citizens.

          • Linda Fernandez Brittain

            January 19, 2016 at 7:35 pm

            Hey MainFragger…Don’t look up socialism…Look up Democratic Socialism…They’re two totally different animals…Check out the Scandinavian countries…Sweden…Finland…The Netherlands…Norway…and don’t forget Denmark…called the happiest country on Earth…These countries who practice Democratic Socialism are the ones Bernie Sanders is speaking about…He’s not a Socialist…He is a Democratic Socialist…!! Thank you…

          • MainFragger

            January 20, 2016 at 9:25 am

            The third link is for Democratic Socialism, I just forgot to separately describe it as such..

          • John L. Greene

            January 20, 2016 at 9:29 am

            Then it’s a good thing the U.S. is a Republic and the people have individual rights that are protected from the mob mentality of democracies and selfish socialists who covet other people’s property, labor and profits.

          • MainFragger

            January 20, 2016 at 9:43 am

            Well, true.. But at the same time, A Republic means federal government has more power than the individual. Which most Republicans don’t actually like.. Because, as long as law is practiced state to state, there is always a chance they can get away with not having to deal with laws they see as contrary to their business’s ability to make money by closing shop in one state and running their business out of another. Thats why they rail so much against Big Government. Granted, enforcing all of those rules is expensive, but usually when they say it costs too much, what they really mean is that it costs their businesses too much to follow those rules.. You know, rules that protect things like the environment, worker’s rights and safety, product quality and warrranty standards, product safety standards, advertising practices, monopolies and other things that I am just not thinking of this minute. The moment we have a Republic, what SHOULD happen is that the federal government regulates all of those things and keeps everyone honest. Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is that there are two barriers to that. One being that Big Business lobbies against it, and the other being that it IS actually pretty expensive and time consuming to be able to do that. Some of the government agencies are years behind being able to enforce their rules across the country because they don’t have enough funding and manpower to enforce their laws..

          • John L. Greene

            January 20, 2016 at 1:57 pm

            Did you actually just regurgitate that from one of your liberal professors? Go ahead admit it, by the way, you paid too much for your “education.”

            A republic establishes the rights of the individual and protects the individual’s right to property and production/work.

            a democracy is mob rule and socialism takes all means of production and rights away from the individual and hoards it under gov’t control.

            How well is gov’t control working for Venezuela?

            http://www.theeuropean-magazine.com/andreas-kern–2/9706-the-collapse-of-socialism-in-venezuela

          • MainFragger

            January 20, 2016 at 3:19 pm

            I never went to college for anything that involved a polysci class. And honestly, I ended up going to tech school. I have certifications in computers and networking..nothing political based. I am a gamer, too. And when I game, I admit, I am what they refer to as a “rules lawyer”. In the middle of playing, I have no problem with pulling out the source book of whatever game I am playing and showing the GM the rule to make sure it is followed properly. That is where my comments on Federal government come from. Not from being a Liberal.

            If you actually want to know my political ideals, I’ll put it this way , what you refer to Liberal encompasses a great deal of them. But I do not consider myself a liberal, and I only vote Democrat because I do not like/agree with the Republican or “Conservative” ideals.

            I have said it in other place, the biggest problem with Liberal and Convservative as labels is that I feel they are practiced in reverse. I think squandering the planets resources, crushing people’s souls, and screwing people over is a lot more expensive than funding programs that try to improve the quality of life in America for someone other than the 1%’ers… So I actually see the Democrats as the Conservatives and the Republicans as the Liberals. However, despite my EXTREME dislike of the the Republican’s, and regardless of whether you want to consider then Liberals or Conservatives..I think its only fair to try to see the other guys point of views. So you will never hear me says the words Conservative or Liberal like they are curse words. I wish Republicans would stop using Liberal and Socialist like they were curse words. Because so far, what they consider ideal isn’t really any better for everyone else..

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:32 pm

            For the people, by the people is an “oxymoron”?

          • Robert Easterling

            January 19, 2016 at 11:06 pm

            Don’t confuse yourself being a complete moron with these fine folks who are going to vote for the ONLY honest candidate in the race.

          • nater21

            January 20, 2016 at 3:58 am

            You are talking about Bernie, right?

          • Pierre Pompideaux

            January 19, 2016 at 5:04 pm

            Oh I see. So the vast majority of the nations of Europe that are socialist are not democracies.

          • Vaughan Galustian

            January 19, 2016 at 5:21 pm

            Actually, if any two systems are incompatible it would be Capitalism and Democracy.

        • djmarc

          January 19, 2016 at 8:42 pm

          The people who use the word socialist as a weapon have no idea what it means and have no idea that socialism was a major part of the democratic party for generations… Most of the biggest wins for the democrats by the likes of FDR and LBJ fighting for workers, consumers, kids, retirees, the sick and the hungry came from the socialist AKA progressive wing of the party… Socialism in labor brought us the unions, child labor laws, minimum wage, 40 hour work week with overtime pay… socialists in the party kept a lid on greed and recklessness for generations, when the Clintons ripped the socialist influence away from the party and delivered the party of the people to corporate America, they took away real choice between the parties on economic issues and we all lost the champions for the people.

          • John L. Greene

            January 20, 2016 at 9:19 am

            Unions did not bring 40 hour weeks, overtime, employer sponsored healthcare or anything else. Henry Ford did before unions infested his company.

            You don’t even know what socialism is….

            http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/ford-factory-workers-get-40-hour-week

          • Kurt 20008

            January 20, 2016 at 11:01 am

            Your article only speaks of the 40 hour work week and admits that Ford did it in response to labor agitation. Labor action was the driving force behind all of these standards as well as enforceable non-discrimination protections for LGBT workers.

          • Angry Boss

            January 24, 2016 at 5:44 am

            Um, seriously?? You think that LGBT equality has ANYTHING to do with “Labor action”? Take another look at the map of countries respecting LGBT equality– and take note of the “workers’ paradises” and their abysmal record on LGBT equality! I live in a Right to Work state (i.e., a state where unions have ZERO power) and when my husband and I got married in 2009, every single company we dealt with treated our marriage as normal long before our own state government would do so. Stop with all the “workers unite” nonsense! LGBT equality has been a one-on-one effort to change the minds of the people–and we’re winning. As for LGBT “protections”, its simple: only CAPITALISM provides the motivation for a company to be a “good corporate citizen” because its good for the bottom line. When a company is forced to do something–what do you think happens? Do you really believe that a company’s management just throws their hands in the air and says, “Oh, well, we’ll just have to comply now!”?? ON the other hand, when the general public stops choosing a store or company due to its public views, a company has to go through a process of weighing the pros and cons–and their success or failure will depend on THEIR decisions.

            Personally, I prefer to KNOW who hates me–so I can avoid them and encourage all my friends to do so as well. But, back to unions… I am proud to have never been a member of a union– and “shockingly” I have never been a victim of anti-LGBT treatment by any private employer!

          • Kurt 20008

            January 24, 2016 at 8:30 am

            Gee, of course no one has ever done anything adverse to such a pleasant person like yourself.

          • MarleneMoulthrop

            January 20, 2016 at 4:22 pm

            I didn’t know that corp. were forced to unionize.

          • baruchzed

            January 21, 2016 at 12:20 pm

            Your ignorance can be cured by LEARNING.

          • Angry Boss

            January 24, 2016 at 5:34 am

            I particularly enjoyed the scenes in “Mr. Selfridge” where the union organizer was angry and stormed off when he was told, “Well, we already have all the things you say you can get for us.”

          • Kurt 20008

            January 24, 2016 at 11:59 am

            Glad you enjoy watching public television.

          • Nosebetta

            January 20, 2016 at 10:42 pm

            In short they are ignorant, and require others who are also ignorant for strength.

        • Kit

          January 20, 2016 at 7:35 am

          But down in Australia we prefer to just think of him as one of the last solid good blokes left in your piece of shit Government — If you guys don’t do yourselves the favour of putting Bernie in charge then you’ll have demonstrated that you’re truly lost and theres no helping you – HELP YOURSELVES!

          • frank lee

            January 20, 2016 at 9:37 pm

            We need help?

          • John L. Greene

            January 21, 2016 at 8:43 am

            You’re from Australia?! So why should we care what you think of Bernie Sanders. Didn’t you blokes also like the “great uniter”, Barry Obama, that has worsened race relations in the U.S. putting them at there worst since the early ’80’s?

            So, go ruin your own country….

          • baruchzed

            January 21, 2016 at 12:21 pm

            Newsflash John L. Greene…we are all on ONE PLANET and we effect each other.

          • John L. Greene

            January 21, 2016 at 1:45 pm

            The US isn’t Australia and I don’t have to obey their rules in my country. Luckily, I have the right to not have to listen to them or even you for that matter.

            So, go hold hands and sing kumbaya in your own little circle jerk if you want but leave the rest of us alone

        • John L. Greene

          January 20, 2016 at 1:48 pm

          Socialism is gov’t owning means of production and it has never allowed for private success.

          it’s not working well in Venezuela

          http://www.theeuropean-magazine.com/andreas-kern–2/9706-the-collapse-of-socialism-in-venezuela

          • MainFragger

            January 20, 2016 at 3:24 pm

            In a Democratic Socialist gov’t. there is plenty of room for allowing personal success..and still allowing the rest of the country to benefit from that success as well.

      • LAguy323

        January 19, 2016 at 2:36 pm

        Do you have anything other than pejorative labels?

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:07 pm

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          ….#feelthebernout

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:27 pm

            Nate Silver is talking out his bumhole. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:38 pm

            same quote again… tired troll

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:51 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Reality sucks don’t it?

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:52 pm

            Same tired quote… one person’s opinion is not reality, it is still just his opinion. Look around you.. who has the enthusiasm and momentum? Hillary is done… it will be hard to campaign from prison.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:53 pm

            You don’t know who Nate Silver is? You moron. Bernie is DONE.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:53 pm

            YOU BASEMENT DWELLING LOSER.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:01 pm

            Bernie the UNELECTABLE DINO is DONE you DELUSIONAL MORON. HAHA

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • gunnut

            January 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm

            Post your real info here and we will see how much reality sucks.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:12 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            poor widdle wing nut hates the truth

      • NWNative

        January 19, 2016 at 2:54 pm

        Extremists, LOL. I think the only one here out to lunch is yourself. Every policy position Bernie has is supported by the majority of American’s. Poll after Poll. If anything, Bernie is more mainstream than any candidate currently running for the office.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:03 pm

          Bernie is an old unelectable moron you low info parasite.

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:26 pm

            Fell sorry for people like you. You are angry because you know you are wrong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:37 pm

            Posting some other person’s assumptions again.. no original thoughts of your own? What is wrong with you? Did your mother not hug you enough as a child? You are lucky that intelligent democratic voters are going to save you from your ignorant self.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:51 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Bernie bots=brain dead voters

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:53 pm

            You’re a joke. enough time wasted responding to your drivel… I am sure you will get your campaign check just the same.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:54 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Bernie’s DEMISE is coming you radical unhinged nut job.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:02 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            You are a basement dwelling troll being paid by the Bernie campaign. Bernie the DINO is DONE.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:10 pm

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          Bernie is an UNELECTABLE DINO extremist. He’s DONE you paid Bernie troll.

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:26 pm

            Do you think she cares about LGBTQ rights at all? Now who’s delusional? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

          • Angry Boss

            January 24, 2016 at 5:17 am

            The only thing that Hillary Clinton cares about is power. As a gay man, I am horrified that anyone can think that she is a real ally. She will support the LGBT community so far as is required to further her agenda for power. There is nothing genuine about her.

          • Po eM

            January 19, 2016 at 5:26 pm

            Ugh, you’re everywhere posting the same thing. We don’t care what he has to say because they were saying he was unelectable at 4% in the polls and now that he’s at 43% in NH they still say the same thing. Everyone knows Hillary and she only really gets the sympathy vote. She isn’t going to get any new voters. But Bernie? People will move to him once they hear more about him because it has already been happening. So you can stand by your trolling efforts or whatever you’re doing here but at the end of the day, only one candidate really stands a chance and it’s not Hillary.

          • Vaughan Galustian

            January 19, 2016 at 5:26 pm

            Don’t mind him, he’s a bot.

          • Vaughan Galustian

            January 19, 2016 at 5:26 pm

            Actually, flag all of his comments.

          • Ajit Patel

            January 19, 2016 at 6:55 pm

            Bernie is leading Clinton 66% to 30% in NH and he says it is still “very close”. The guy’s a moron. No worth arguing with.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:05 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Your OLD UNELECTABLE DINO is going to lose badly. hahah

          • Jim

            January 19, 2016 at 6:25 pm

            NOPE child. Nate Silver JUST said BERNIE SANDERS IS THE ONLY ONE TO BEAT TRUMP.

            Voting for HC is an endorsement for a REPUBLICAN.

            http://m.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/18/1471588/-Nate-Bernie-Sanders-is-the-only-candidate-in-either-party-with-a-net-positive-favorability-rating

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:13 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Nope wacko, Nate says that Bernie is TOAST. HAHAHAAHA

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:14 pm

            Voting for Bernie is voting for a right wing gun nut who voted with the NRA in against the Brady bill. Bernie is republican lite aka DINO.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 1:54 am

            You have some reading comprehension issues here. That’s not what that article says at all. Nate Silver never said what you believe he said. The author of the article opined that BASED ON WHAT NATE SILVER SAID, the author believes that Bernie is the best chance to beat Trump.

        • Cynthia Joy Finnegan

          January 19, 2016 at 4:36 pm

          In her eight years in the Senate, Hillary was ranked the ELEVENTH MOST LIBERAL Senator in Congress. Bernie? Even today, he’s ranked as the FORTY-FOURTH most liberal Senator. He’s little better than a Republican.

          Oh, there’s also the little FACT that he’ll let churches who discriminate against the LGBT community KEEP their tax exempt status that should WORRY you.

          • NWNative

            January 21, 2016 at 12:40 am

            Are you serious with that response? A church can discriminate against anyone it wants, at anytime, for any reason. There is no law in the land that could ever change that. It’s called separation of church and state. The federal or state government has no control over that and cannot remove tax exempt status because of it. Back to school for you. Wow, that was just…wow.

            And as you’ll note I made no reference as to who the most liberal candidate was. I just mentioned that people keep calling him extreme and in reality he is mainstream. Meaning supported by the majority of American’s.

      • JimBob

        January 19, 2016 at 3:06 pm

        Is this really the best you can do? Sanders and Hillary aren’t far apart age wise.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:02 pm

          Sanders is almost 80. He should be in a retirement home now.

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:25 pm

            she will turn her back on you as soon as she’s elected. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:35 pm

            Sanders at 74 is almost 80? Hillary at 68 is almost 80 too then…

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:51 pm

            Sanders is an 80 year old dino socialist. H’s an unaccomplished loser.

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:55 pm

            Yeah, H is an unaccomplished loser.. but Bernie is still 74.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:02 pm

            Bernie is an 80 year old socialist. He’s DONE.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • RudyBlue

            January 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm

            Except he’s won way more elections than Pantsuits. He’s been consistent with his political views way, way longer than Pantsuits. He’s not even a millionaire despite his years in Congress, while Pantsuits is a multi-millionaire with much of that money coming from Wall Street. Did you know she’s having a fundraiser a few days before the Iowa caucus on Wall Street. Keep an eye out for how much money gets donated to Bernie’s campaign today after this betrayal by HRC for HRC.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:09 pm

            that’s because DINO SOCIALIST Bernie has been in D.C. for far too long. Hillary is going to knock Bernie’s fake teeth out. Hillary received over 18 million votes in 2008 you delusional ignorant loser. hahaha Bernie the DINO is TOAST. HAHAAH

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:10 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Reality is going to suk for you you mentally deranged Bernie bot. You get paid to post don’t you nut job?

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 1:23 am

            Pantsuits? You’re not doing your candidate any favors with your casual misogyny. You’re better than that.

          • Tom

            January 19, 2016 at 9:42 pm

            Only Tea Party extremists see “socialist” as a dirty word.

        • Cynthia Joy Finnegan

          January 19, 2016 at 4:08 pm

          SEVEN YEARS APART, dumb-ass.

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:46 pm

            6. 74-68 = 6 Dumb-ass.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:10 pm

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          #feelthebernout you delusional low info parasite

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:24 pm

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:34 pm

            You really are a piece of shit… running around pasted the same garbage on all the posts and insulting and name calling fellow democrats from the safety of your mom’s basement. Go away.

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:35 pm

            You really are garbage… running around pasting the same garbage on all the posts and insulting and name calling fellow democrats from the safety of your mom’s basement. Go away.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:52 pm

            You Bernie bots are worthless subhuman scum,

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:54 pm

            Idiot.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:02 pm

            Go take your meds you unhinged Bernie bot.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 7:15 pm

            27 point lead in NH, dead heat in Iowa, Nevada is next. Suck it Hillsbian.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:18 pm

            outlier

            Bernie the DINO is DONE.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 7:58 pm

            Don’t get too worked up over Nate Silver’s poll data for Iowa. He has Gravis marketing as part of his dataset, which is +21 Clinton. If you remove the Gravis result, it is a Bernie landslide.
            http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/05/21/the_worst_poll_in_america.html

            You clown, anyone can paste the same comment over and over.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 8:04 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Your fat worthless head WILL explode when you find out that UNELECTABLE DINO Bernie gets his fake teeth knocked out in the primaries. hahaahah

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:19 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Your UNELECTABLE DINO Bernie is gonna get “schlonged” and I will enjoy every minute of it because you Bernie bots heads WILL explode with anger. hahahaah

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 7:59 pm

            Don’t get too worked up over Nate Silver’s poll data for Iowa. He has Gravis marketing as part of his dataset, which is +21 Clinton. If you remove the Gravis result, it is a Bernie landslide.
            http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/05/21/the_worst_poll_in_america.html

            Right?

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 8:03 pm

            DINO Bernie is DONE you delusional POS PARASITE. HAHAAHAH

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 8:06 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            right moron? hahahaha

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:22 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary

            BAD NEWS for your worthless UNELECTABLE DINO SOCIALIST. HAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAAHAHHA

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 7:57 pm

            Don’t get too worked up over Nate Silver’s poll data for Iowa. He has Gravis marketing as part of his dataset, which is +21 Clinton. If you remove the Gravis result, it is a Bernie landslide.
            http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/05/21/the_worst_poll_in_america.html

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 8:06 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Suk it DELUSIONAL POS parasite. Bernie is DONE.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:07 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            jump off a bridge.

          • RudyBlue

            January 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm

            My, my, my, such a potty mouth. Does your mother know you talk like this?

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:10 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Say bye bye to unelectable DINO Bernie you delusional nut job. haahah

          • gunnut

            January 19, 2016 at 6:07 pm

            Reported here, to Disqus and to the FBI. Have a nice day

          • LAguy323

            January 19, 2016 at 7:41 pm

            Flag his comments as spam.

          • Janet Bernick

            January 20, 2016 at 9:40 am

            You seem to be a bit of an idiot…..and that isn’t a good way to try to win anyone over to your side of an argument…..just saying…..frankly, it’s much more likely that a troll calling Bernie supporters “worthless, subhuman scum” is in fact the epitome of BEING worthless, subhuman scum….

          • nero88888

            January 20, 2016 at 2:58 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            You DELUSIONAL parasite. ahahah

          • Vaughan Galustian

            January 19, 2016 at 5:25 pm

            I’ve flagged all of nero’s comments, I’m pretty sure he’s a spam bot.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:05 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Cannot take the truth huh Bernie bot?> tHE dino bernie is toast. cry all you want loser.

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 8:00 pm

            The Dino is smoking the criminal!

            Don’t get too worked up over Nate Silver’s poll data for Iowa. He has Gravis marketing as part of his dataset, which is +21 Clinton. If you remove the Gravis result, it is a Bernie landslide.
            http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/05/21/the_worst_poll_in_america.html

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 8:03 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Bernie the UNELECTABLE DINO is FINISHED you DELUSIONAL radical POS extremist. Want a tissue? hhhaahahah

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 8:05 pm

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Bernie is getting smoked politically, unlike that good dead right wing parasite Andrew Breitbart. hahahaah

          • PhysicistVet

            January 20, 2016 at 1:03 pm

            Gravis has been throwing the polling aggregates way off the charts to one side since day one. They have not been even remotely close to the rest of the polls; always showing Clinton miles ahead of where the rest of the polls show her. Always.

            I’m still confused why people use Gravis, after they’ve been so RIDICULOUSLY off on so many elections for so many years now. Fivethirty eight still gives them a C, mostly because they do get enough right to average out their grade and because they call cell phones in some surveys now, but I’d disqualify them simply based on the fact that they have been off by more than THIRTY POINTS in more than one big election that most other polls got fairly close.

          • aerie_star

            January 19, 2016 at 7:10 pm

            Or a paid troll. Or maybe even a Trump supporter. Bernie does better than Hillary against Trump in national polls. Which is still something.

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 1:19 am

            Right. A Trump supporter. That’s why Karl Rove and other GOP operatives have just spent millions in Iowa attacking Clinton and the GOP was sending tweets during Sundays Dem debate defending Sanders… because they fear Sanders. Right. Keep telling yourself that one.

          • Cynthia Wray

            January 19, 2016 at 7:16 pm

            Is that all you’ve got? The regurgitated words of an establishment toady paid to maintain the status quo???

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:22 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary

            Your DINO is DONE you DELUSIONAL moron. hahaahah

        • Brrelli

          January 20, 2016 at 12:40 am

          And Hillary is actually in much worse health reports seem to indicate…

      • Shawn Osterhus

        January 19, 2016 at 3:12 pm

        You’re the one trolling here. The irony.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:08 pm

          Your OLD DINO Bernie is FINISHED you DELUSIONAL UNHINGED PARASITE.

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:28 pm

            Sad little man you are, nero88888. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

          • Humbug

            January 19, 2016 at 4:28 pm

            You’re doing God’s work. I’m certain your eloquent, rational discourse will change every Bernie supporter’s mind. I know you’ve changed mine.

            Or maybe you’re just ranting to make yourself feel good. In which case, whatever. Do you.

          • gunnut

            January 19, 2016 at 5:59 pm

            One day someone is going to beat the crap out of you and you will go crying to your mommy.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:12 pm

            Go kill yourself you basement dwelling parasite.

      • modern angel 99

        January 19, 2016 at 4:01 pm

        If we get a little testy, it’s because we can’t understand those who would choose to reinstall the very people who helped to dismantle the middle class over these past 40 years.

        • Angry Boss

          January 24, 2016 at 5:20 am

          I’m confused… the number of middle class people has expanded for 40 years. How is that dismantling? The only “poverty” measure which has gotten worse is the utilization of Food Stamps. It’s a travesty that Food Stamps are no longer stigmatized. Food Stamps were supposed to be a last resort, not a way of life.

      • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

        January 19, 2016 at 4:23 pm

      • nater21

        January 19, 2016 at 4:31 pm

        I guess that is why every poll shows him beating Republicans by larger margins than Hillary. Sorry bud, but your Corporate shill is unelectable, and likely a criminal.

        • Mawm

          January 19, 2016 at 4:38 pm

          General election polls this far out are meaningless. The vast majority of people haven’t paid enough attention to know that he intends to raise their taxes. Once he said that he made himself completely unelectable.

          http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-year-out-ignore-general-election-polls/

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:50 pm

            Hillary supporters cannot continue to perpetuate this myth that he is unelectable. He has better opinion poll numbers, even if they are early. His integrity and trust index numbers are through the roof, Hillary’s are on the floor. There is no way that Hillary can beat a republican, especially with this indictment hanging over her head. Bernie is running a respectful campaign and has not gone negative. He easily could, and then would be destroying Hillary. Do you think that the Republicans would treat her and her foundation with kid gloves the way that Bernie has? She will be painted as the treasonous liar that she is.

          • Mawm

            January 19, 2016 at 5:17 pm

            How old are you? Socialism and I’ll raise your taxes means no winning in the general election. Welcome to the USA and no amount of explanation that he is actually a “Democratic Socialist” is going to change that.

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 6:55 pm

            How old are you? Obviously too old to appretiate the honesty and integrity that he brings to the process. You think that a person with a criminal indictment hanging over their head has a better chance to be elected than the most consistent and honest person in politics? Wow.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:20 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            GOP wants to run against your OLD, UNELECTABLE DINO SOCIALIST BECAUSE Bernie would get slaughtered in a general election. You are just a low information parasite who was born brain dead.

      • craig klucas

        January 19, 2016 at 5:15 pm

        Thank you, Hillary

      • donna

        January 19, 2016 at 6:09 pm

        The preferred spelling is Berniebot, just so you know. AND thank you for the compliment. The more I watch people who should know better bend over and kiss Hillary’s arse as payment to play the game, the more I appreciate being associated with people who can actually think.

        Inevitable huh? You are backing a dead horse my friend!

      • Jim

        January 19, 2016 at 6:20 pm

        Oh look it’s the child again….you are just a silly broken record.

        NOTHING TO SEE HERE….MOVE ALONG. CHILDREN AT PLAY.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 7:13 pm

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          Does the truth upset you Bernie bot?

      • Foodahz

        January 19, 2016 at 8:36 pm

        Sanders may be both of those things, but that doesn’t mean someone can’t agree with him or why doing so makes them a “bot.” That’s just lazy on your part.

      • Robert Easterling

        January 19, 2016 at 11:00 pm

        Go fuck yourself dumbass! You have NO clue who or what Sanders is as you have not bothered to actually listen to anything he has had to say. You are an ignorant despot who has no idea who supports your cause and has been supporting your many causes for far longer than HRC has been an actual Democrat. Oh and for the record HRC is only 5 years younger than Sanders and he is still running circles around her. Back to the shallow end of the gene pool fool!

      • pattapuss

        January 20, 2016 at 6:54 am

        hillary clinton is 68, bernie sanders is 74. I wouldn’t expect someone with a comment like yours to be able to understand math but if we’re going to talk about “old” that’s an age difference of 8 years. roughly what a typical candidate ends up being in office for.

        • nero88888

          January 20, 2016 at 2:59 pm

          Bernie is OLD. He’s DONE.

      • Jerry Allen

        January 20, 2016 at 8:56 am

        Who fiddled while Rome burned? Nero. Now whose fiddling while D.C. burns? Nero88888.

      • Draa

        January 20, 2016 at 10:28 am

        And you’re a delusional sycophant for supporting more status quo.

      • J. R. Tomlin

        January 20, 2016 at 11:52 am

        Yes, everyone is supposed to die at 30. What a childish remark.

      • P Kokity

        January 20, 2016 at 3:20 pm

        Yeah, socialism is a un-American as public schools, social security, medicare, highways/public road, public libraries, the police, fire department, postal service, student loans/grants, garbage collection, farm subsidies, museums, public parks, veterans’ healthcare, food stamps, the judicial system, various vaccines that have been given out during epidemics, free lunch programs, disability insurance, unemployment insurance, WIC, welfare, National Public Radio, Peace Corps, and the military. Only extremists would like such things. We should abolish all of it!

      • MarleneMoulthrop

        January 20, 2016 at 4:19 pm

        Don’t criticize his age, not applicable. In fact, don’t throw stones at the people who believe in Bernie.

      • Nosebetta

        January 20, 2016 at 10:39 pm

        Come out, come out where ever you are. Explain what you are to the “unhinged” , “bots” out here.

      • Nathan Schultheiss

        January 20, 2016 at 11:14 pm

        “Old” isn’t a criticism. If measured, age is a number. Bernie is not unelectable – at least according to all the polls, he would be the far-and-away dominant Democratic candidate. Hillary would be expected to have an even fight, at least according to the polls. That too is just math. Bernie’s enthusiastic following is not composed of “bots” – just empassioned, forward-thinking (i.e. progressive) patriots. Passion and patriotism are certainly not “disgusting.” “Unhinged” implies instability, but Bernie’s supporters have proven the most loyal and grounded in their reasons for supporting their candidate. On the other hand Hillary’s supporters are jumping ship – for Bernie’s political revolution – en masse. And “extremists” – well that might be fair in the sense that the people’s campaign is in fact arguing for a fundamental shift in our dysfunctional, inefficient, rigged, and often cruelly unjust political system. And in any case, why such hostility friend? Free debate of ideas is the core of American ideals and the highest among freedoms. Perhaps your interest in politics has more to do with finding a representative that affirms your pre-existing stances? The world is a changin’ friend. Better to contribute to steering it, or at least not be severed from one’s root by the tide, than to remain fixed to the gone world. Lastly, in a world where there is plenty of wealth, food, and joy to go around; why not work for fair distribution of happiness and the resources that make happiness possible. When those goals are pursued by collective decision making – that’s democratic socialism. And democratic socialism is the new American identity. But then, I’m probably just enjoying myself wasting time under the guise of engaging a troll.

      • Junie

        January 21, 2016 at 1:39 am

        What “Socialism” really is? Watch this and educate yourself:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQqRHNR6lOw

      • Junie

        January 21, 2016 at 2:00 am

        RUN by the corrupt ESTABLISHMENT POLITICS indeed!
        http://www.back2stonewall.com/2014/09/hrc-prez-chad-giffins-2013-salary-507000-00-stealing-credit-rewriting-history-pays-well.html

        As a Trans woman, I’m still feeling the Bern! And I am not even American! Bernie is the type of ideal honest and compassionate politician every country deserves and need!!

        Planned parenthood and HRC are indeed part of the establishment, but only **in the sense** that they are tied to establishment politics and they feel obligated to endorse establishment politicians. Hillary and her campaign (including the executives in planned parenthood and HRC) are purposely taking what Bernie said out of context to attack him disingeneously, as they always do.

    • Junie

      January 21, 2016 at 1:35 am

      As a Trans woman, I’m still feeling the Bern! And I am not even American! Bernie is the type of ideal honest and compassionate politician every country deserves and need!!

      Planned parenthood and HRC are indeed part of the establishment, but only **in the sense** that they are tied to establishment politics and they feel obligated to endorse establishment politicians. Hillary and her campaign (including the executives in planned parenthood and HRC) are purposely taking what Bernie said out of context to attack him disingeneously, as they always do.

  3. barb

    January 19, 2016 at 12:45 pm

    Wow Bernie and his team are now trashing the Human rights campaign.. not COOL!!!

    • Nava

      January 19, 2016 at 1:05 pm

      Hillary is the best choice for POTUS!

    • JimBob

      January 19, 2016 at 3:07 pm

      Since when is criticizing “trashing”? Get a grip on yourself!

  4. SophieCT

    January 19, 2016 at 12:46 pm

    Sorry they FEEL that way, but the facts don’t support the claims of the Sanders campaign.

    • Chummy

      January 19, 2016 at 1:29 pm

      So now even the Bernie campaign starts bashing people and organizations who prefer Hillary? If this is their idea of how democracy works I want no part of Bernie Sanders and his agenda.

      • Kathy Hutchinson

        January 19, 2016 at 1:46 pm

        They have been doing that all along, Chummy. Every endorsement Hillary gets, the Bernie Tots flood their social media and whine whine whine. Honestly, Sanders supporters are a primary reason that I cant vote for the man. They are immature angry white children, and I wouldnt want anyone to think that I agree with such nasty people

        • Daniepwils

          January 19, 2016 at 1:59 pm

          LOL, cat meet kettle…

          • Cynthia Joy Finnegan

            January 19, 2016 at 4:10 pm

            POT, meet Kettle, MORON.

          • Daniepwils

            January 20, 2016 at 10:03 am

            Wow, how grown up you are, calling people names. I bet you feel real big right now… You might want to actually know what you are talking about before you try to call people out though.

            Cat, meet kettle is another term used, not as popular as pot, meet kettle, but it still applies none the less.

        • Kurt 20008

          January 19, 2016 at 2:47 pm

          I agree. Sanders is a very decent man. Some of his followers worry me. They are strident, rigid, and unwilling to consider a different viewpoint and even take moralistic stands on questions of strategy.

        • JimBob

          January 19, 2016 at 3:02 pm

          Then I guess you’ll be votoing Republican in November.

        • Jon Revoir

          January 19, 2016 at 3:06 pm

          Are you voting for a candidate or some loud Internet trolls? Your reasoning is equally childish.

        • Shawn Osterhus

          January 19, 2016 at 3:17 pm

          You come across the same way, actually. The irony is huge here.

        • Scott Davenport

          January 19, 2016 at 4:07 pm

          If the primary reason you choose your candidate is the type of supporters, you really have a weak wat of picking who to vote for.

      • Linda Woods Alexander

        January 19, 2016 at 2:53 pm

        Kathy Hutchinson is right. Every single endorser of Hillary has their FB sites swarmed with nasty name-calling and sometimes even threatening comments from hate-filled Sanders fans. It’s totally juvenile and disgusting. If you compare Hillary’s endorser sites to Bernie’s endorser sites, you’ll see the difference in how hate-filled and disgusting Bernie’s supporters are and have been all during this campaign. They want to control EVERYONE…just like Bernie wants everything HIS way or NO WAY. THAT is why I’m voting Hillary Clinton…she at least is willing to admit when she’s wrong, and is willing to negotiate and compromise in order to get things done. Sanders has a history of NOT working with others…that’s why he has no support from his Democratic colleagues in the Senate that have known him for many years.

        • Jon Revoir

          January 19, 2016 at 3:05 pm

          I support Sanders and have found such people in forums of Sanders supporters. They go by the motto: Bernie or Bust. Many of his supporters, myself among them, argue against their pig headedness. Bernie does not advocate this. He chose to run as a Democrat so not to divide the party but these people exist in a cyberspace that has no control over such behavior.

          • Matt

            January 19, 2016 at 3:22 pm

            I agree. Even Bernie supporters dislike nasty Bernie supporters. But you know, I’ve seen the same on Hillary’s side too as well as every candidate in this election. There are nice and respectful people and there are haters.

        • Shawn Osterhus

          January 19, 2016 at 3:20 pm

          Or because Hillary is far more popular and half of them endorsed her before he even announced his run. Hillary supporters act the same way whenever a poll comes out saying Bernie is winning in a state, or when Bernie comes out with a proposal they do not like and call him names. I do not support Bernie trolls, but it’s clear that many of her endorsements come from close connections with the leaders of the cause or campaign. That is just a plain fact.

      • Matt

        January 19, 2016 at 2:56 pm

        We have to acknowledge the fact that there are radical people on all sides of the aisle and for all candidates. None of the candidates act as some of their supporters do.

        Now, I do have some concern regarding this endorsement considering Chad Griffin, the President of the HRC worked in the White House for the Clinton Administration. http://www.hrc.org/chad/

        This fact confirms bias in the voting process.

      • JimBob

        January 19, 2016 at 3:01 pm

        Bashing? Since when is it out of bounds to criticize a decision by any organization?

        • Marty McFly

          January 19, 2016 at 3:28 pm

          It makes him look petty and intimidated.

          He has a reputation for being an impatient, ill-tempered man. This has been noted over the years by numerous co-workers and journalists. Uncle Bernie is a facade. His ideology is very appealing, but there is no wand he can wave to suddenly make these “Revolutionary” changes happen. He’s speaking in platitudes and cannot provide the details on implementation.
          He’s just as much of an empty suit as Trump, and his supporters are equally as obnoxious.

      • keVn

        January 19, 2016 at 3:10 pm

        ‘Bashing’ and ‘Blasting’ are words used by yourself and the paper. They’re not accurate representations of the quotes shown in the article. They’re used to incite bias. You want to dismiss Bernie, and the paper wants to draw eyes to their paper.
        Hillary used some unnecessary and sweeping rhetoric in 2006 which clearly shows her defense of DOMA. No one made her say something so anti equal rights. That was her choice. She’s disingenuous
        See LAGuy323’s quote from Hillary below …

    • Natureslayer

      January 19, 2016 at 1:29 pm

      That sounds more to me that he felt like he lacked the political capital to do so more than the drive or desire.

      • Kathy Hutchinson

        January 19, 2016 at 1:42 pm

        Precisely what the Clintons did. You must be one of those baby Bernie Tots who wasnt of voting age in the 90’s. Dont ask , Dont Tell, was Bill Clintons attempt to help gays in the military, in the face of extreme anti gay sentiment in our culture. The “moral majority” were at full strength in the 90’s. Focus on the Family, Pat RObertson, Tony Perkins, etc, etc, were all urging republicans to introduce a constitutional ammendment to defend hetero marriage. Most average Americans did not agree with same sex marriage in the 90;s although liberals did think civil unions were the way to go. Everyone has evolved on this issue, Sanders included. Sometimes, you cant make what you want to happen come true, because you have to address the concerns of the majority. I think if Sanders were, by some miraculous stroke of fate, every to win the Presidency, we would see the same thing with his “Universal Health care ” thing. He would not be able to pass it because of the extreme fight we have had on Obamacare. That wouldnt make him a flip flopper, any more than it makes Clinton one for not supporting full gay marriage in the 90’s.

      • modern angel 99

        January 19, 2016 at 4:03 pm

        True. This is the United States of Bribery, which is what Bernie intends to end as the sole enforcer of “democracy”.

    • novenator

      January 19, 2016 at 1:42 pm

      You are being deliberately disingenuous, and have been all over the place SophieCT.

      Bernie Sanders answers the gay marraige question in the 2006 Senate debate (not against it)

      http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4548262/sanders-gay-marriage

      • LAguy323

        January 19, 2016 at 2:24 pm

        She’s a desperate Hillsbian

        • billknowsit

          January 19, 2016 at 4:19 pm

          “Hillsbian”… love it and gonna use it

    • LAguy323

      January 19, 2016 at 2:26 pm

      “I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending the Constitution are less committed to the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that it exists between a man and a woman, going back into the midst of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults.”– Hillary Clinton 2004. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

    • LAguy323

      January 19, 2016 at 2:30 pm

      This happened because of the leadership of Bernie Sanders starting in 1983.

      • SophieCT

        January 19, 2016 at 3:07 pm

        Yes, I’m sure the LGBT community had nothing to do with it, no leaders, no brave people willing to come out at a time when it was dangerous, no involvement at all.
        I will never forget where I was and what I was doing the day Bernie freed the Gays.

    • Ann Marshall

      January 19, 2016 at 2:39 pm

      Well, I have just watched again Hillary’s stance on YouTube Gay Marriage in 2004. She clearly stated she was against marriage equality. If you have no idea about Senator Sanders’ positions, you can find extensive information on berniesanders.com. I have been a volunteer all of my life and now volunteer with the Bernie Sanders campaign. Happy to report that I am surrounded by professional, thoughtful, and dedicated volunteers who only think about the future of our country, the need for social change, the hardships folks are in and the solutions we must adopt. You might also want to find out progressive news on freespeechtv.com by watching Thom Hartmann.

      • Marty McFly

        January 19, 2016 at 3:31 pm

        And how many opinions have you revised in the last TWELVE years, Ann? If you claim you’ve made it through more than a decade without looking deep and revisiting old issues and your stance on them as new experiences and information comes your way, you’re a sociopath or a liar.

      • Mawm

        January 19, 2016 at 4:43 pm

        How old were you in 2004? Do you not know that the Democrats got killed that election, because Karl Rove used the boogeyman of gay marriage to drive conservatives to the polls? You want everyone to be a purist no matter how many elections they lose.

    • JimBob

      January 19, 2016 at 3:00 pm

      Your post (source and date, pelase) doesn’t refute the Sanders’ campaign. Adn if you had done your homework you’d know that Hillary also opposed a constitutional amendment regarding gay/lesbian marriage. But her actual opposition to gay/lesbian marriage is longstanding, unlike Sanders, and she only changed this position in 2013c leading up to this campaign. Madam Flip-Flop.

      NYT, December 9, 1999:
      “Mrs. Clinton’s spokesman, Howard Wolfson, said that the first lady, like her husband, supported legislation passed by Congress in 1996 that effectively banned gay marriages.”

      January 2000, news conference, White Plains, NY.
      “Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back
      to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has
      always been, between a man and a woman.”

      July 2004: Speaking on the Senate floor Clinton said she
      believed that marriage was “a sacred bond between a man and a woman.”

      2008: Hillary opposed gay/lesbian marriage throughout the campaign and would only support “civil unions”.
      http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-change-position-same-sex-marriage/

      • SophieCT

        January 19, 2016 at 3:04 pm

        Hillary’s total record far exceeds Bernie’s total record. You don’t have to take my word for it–HRC endorsed Hillary, not him.

        • Matt

          January 19, 2016 at 3:17 pm

          The President of the HRC worked in the White House for the Clinton Administration. There is obvious bias which cannot be ignored here.

          • NWNative

            January 19, 2016 at 3:22 pm

            Yup, it was a board vote. I dare them to take the vote to their membership.

        • JimBob

          January 19, 2016 at 3:25 pm

          I won’t take your word for it because I know better. And we know WHY HRC endorsed her despite her poor record, beause it was an “inside job”.

        • Happily Married

          January 19, 2016 at 4:05 pm

          The HRC also gave Bernie a 100% rating in 2006.

        • billknowsit

          January 19, 2016 at 4:24 pm

          Hillary’s total record is one of fucking up everything she has touched… around the world. She has no record of accomplishment; 1 (1!) shoo-in election… and then did nothing, except vote to invade Iraq and keep the banks afloat.

        • soxgirl62

          January 19, 2016 at 5:22 pm

          What do you mean that “Hillary’s total record far exceeds Bernie’s total record”??? Record on WHAT? Gay rights? Definitely NOT!

    • soxgirl62

      January 19, 2016 at 5:15 pm

      Bullshit!

  5. SophieCT

    January 19, 2016 at 12:48 pm

    Also, Hillary is the only candidate that provided real and tangible benefits to us.

    Sec. Clinton directed the State Department’s equal employment opportunity policy to “explicitly protect against discriminatory treatment of employees and job applicants based on gender identity.”

    Sec. Clinton updated State Department policy to offer equal benefits and protections to same-sex partners of American diplomats.

    • caravan70

      January 19, 2016 at 2:04 pm

      Hillary is a calculating shill. If she stuck her finger out and the winds seemed to say that it were better to stick gays, lesbians, and transgender people in concentration camps, she’d probably sign on. I’ve never seen an ounce of principle in her.

      • SophieCT

        January 19, 2016 at 3:08 pm

        Well, that’s your opinion and you’re entitled. In fact, really entitled.

      • Marty McFly

        January 19, 2016 at 3:37 pm

        Oh, caravan, give the hyperbole a rest, you big drama queen.

    • modern angel 99

      January 19, 2016 at 3:47 pm

      Anyone who supports Hillary must also support:

      the TTP (which she helped draft and sell around the world),

      Common Core (which she kickstarted back in the 80’s),

      fracking (which she sold around the world),

      Monsanto,

      private prisons and mass incarceration (the private sectors idea of “new job growth”),

      neoliberalism, (which believes in the privatization of the public sector)

      installing fascist leaders (Honduras),

      assassinating world leaders (Libya),

      fomenting chaos that gives rise to groups like ISIS,

      perpetual wars (that we never win),

      arming countries on the human rights watch list for human (women and girls) trafficking,

      global corporate governance over democratic nations and the eventual dissolution of the Constitution (which the TPP, TTIP and TISA are designed to do)…

      Sorry, not my idea of what a female president or any president should be.

      Naomi Wolf Says Hillary Clinton Is A Pro Police State War Monger Owned By War Profiteers!

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5tta7YQc6g&feature=youtu.beM

  6. MPetrelis

    January 19, 2016 at 12:53 pm

    What plum appointment in a third Clinton administration does Chad Griffin hope to score, if Hillary is elected to the White House again?

  7. Rteefact

    January 19, 2016 at 12:54 pm

    Don’t you just love Bernards supporters & his staffers ever time an endorsement doesn’t go their way.

  8. MikelAZ

    January 19, 2016 at 12:58 pm

    I am done with Bernie. Before he ran most gays never heard his name. Now you wanna claim just because you have these positions you are better? WTF. I will trust the HRC as they have been instrumental in helping gay rights in society and workplaces. Most companies strive for a perfect rating these days. Bernie and his cult followers need to take a step back. You look childish.

    • novenator

      January 19, 2016 at 1:46 pm

      It’s possible for an organization to do great work and still mess up an endorsement. This could just be a result of insider connections though: “HRC President Chad Griffin got his start in politics volunteering for the Bill Clinton presidential campaign, which led to a position in the White House Press Office at the age of 19. Following his stint in the White House and his graduation from Georgetown University, he led a number of political campaigns advocating for or against various California ballot initiatives, as well as a number of fundraising efforts for political candidates, such as Hillary Clinton” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chad_Griffin

      As for Bernie, his track record IS well known:
      In 1983, as Mayor of Burlington, Vermont, Bernie threw in his full support for a highly controversial gay pride march in the city http://www.queerty.com/32-years-before-marriage-equality-bernie-sanders-fought-for-gay-rights-20150719

      Bernie proclaimed Gay Pride Day in Burlington 2 years later in 1985 http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/03/1398990/-Important-document-from-the-desk-of-Mayor-Bernie-Sanders-1985

      • NWNative

        January 19, 2016 at 3:16 pm

        It was a board vote. The membership didn’t vote. I’m certain the outcome would be different.

    • Daniepwils

      January 19, 2016 at 2:00 pm

      Just keep on living with your head in the sand….

    • LAguy323

      January 19, 2016 at 2:32 pm

      Bernie Sanders has always been a leader for LGBT equality.

    • Shawn Osterhus

      January 19, 2016 at 3:21 pm

      The fact you are insulting Bernie supporters right back makes your case sound weak.

    • Happily Married

      January 19, 2016 at 4:17 pm

      “I will trust the HRC as they have been instrumental in helping gay rights in society and workplaces.” Then you should trust the fact that the HRC have given Bernie a 100% rating on issues regarding LGBT rights. http://www.hrc.org/elected-officials/profile/senate/92#.Vp6nvfkrLmE

  9. barb

    January 19, 2016 at 1:02 pm

    Bernie bashing Human Rights Campaign is dirty vile and mean spirtied

    • Natureslayer

      January 19, 2016 at 1:31 pm

      The HRC dropping support for trans* inclusion in pivotal pieces of legislation is “dirty vile and mean spirtied”.

  10. Nava

    January 19, 2016 at 1:04 pm

    Hillary is the candidate who cares! We NEED her in the White House. I believe that she will win! 2016 and 2020!

    • caravan70

      January 19, 2016 at 2:09 pm

      God, let’s hope not. What a corporate shill.

    • NWNative

      January 19, 2016 at 3:28 pm

      Cares about herself. You are the pawn and pawns are expendable.

      • Marty McFly

        January 19, 2016 at 3:44 pm

        LOL. And the mindless mob that grovels at Sanders’ feet aren’t pawns?

        • NWNative

          January 19, 2016 at 8:06 pm

          Actually, we aren’t the pawns. We won’t get tossed to the side when the Queen gets in trouble. We are the Knights, Rooks and Bishops strategically being placed around the board in support of our King.

          LOL, sorry, I had to go there. I was laughing as I was writing it.

  11. Timothy Bolden

    January 19, 2016 at 1:06 pm

    They endorsed the right candidate who has shown that she is capable of evolving on the issue as did the Party and the POTUS. She has been forthwith describing her evolution on the issue. However, Sanders cloaked and feigned support on the surface. Stripping away the layers revealed that his support was primarily due to supporting the issue as a “states rights issue’ not of one cemented in genuine care, concern or evolution of his attitudes, acceptance, and understanding of those in the LGBTQ community.

  12. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 1:08 pm

    Bernie bots are becoming more and more extreme and unhinged when they don’t get their way. Your UNELECTABLE SOCIALIST is FINISHED.

    • caravan70

      January 19, 2016 at 2:13 pm

      Dream on, nero.

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 4:06 pm

        Bernie the OLD DINO is getting CRUSHED in the primaries. Embrace the suck you DELUSIONAL low info parasite.

        “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
        Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
        chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
        chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 4:21 pm

        You Bernie bots are the ones who need to dream. Your socialist DINO IS FINISHED. HAHA

        “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
        Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
        chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
        chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

    • JimBob

      January 19, 2016 at 3:16 pm

      Nothing new to say, nero? It appears that you are the one unhinged.

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 4:09 pm

        You Bernie bots are unhinged DELUSIONAL EXTREMISTS. Bernie is DONE you low info parasite.

        “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
        Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
        chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
        chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

    • Shawn Osterhus

      January 19, 2016 at 3:26 pm

      You’re the one who has made tons of trolling comments. The evidence is on this entire page. Troll elsewhere, you’re worse than most Republicans on the Fox News fan page.

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 4:11 pm

        “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
        Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
        chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
        chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

        Bernie the UNELECTABLE DINO is DONE. ;)

    • NWNative

      January 19, 2016 at 3:31 pm

      I laugh at you. Hah!

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 4:11 pm

        “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
        Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
        chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
        chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

        I will be laughing when Bernie the UNELECTABLE DINO gets crushed in the primaries. haha

  13. David Speakman

    January 19, 2016 at 1:09 pm

    Sanders’ ignorant claim that civil unions and domestic partnerships are akin to same sex marriage is patently offensive.

    We *do not* forget his record. in 2006, he supported state-based discrimination that was outlawed by the U.S. Supreme Court as unconstitutional.

    The biggest difference between him and Clinton on this matter is Hillary is at least willing to admit when she was wrong. He still tries to defend and deflect his inexcusable record instead admitting he was wrong. Fess up, Bernie.

    http://www.washingtonblade.com/2015/10/27/sanders-defends-2006-opposition-to-same-sex-marriage/

  14. Alex L

    January 19, 2016 at 1:09 pm

    Yeah Hillary really has your back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYjIcrJB_Cc

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 1:10 pm

      Bernie is an OLD, unelectable DINO and his fans are utter delusional morons.

      • Trooper

        January 19, 2016 at 2:03 pm

        How about go fuck yourself, Emperor Nero?

      • caravan70

        January 19, 2016 at 2:03 pm

        He’s five years older than Hillary. I’d say that your political education is woefully inadequate.

        • Needle

          January 19, 2016 at 2:22 pm

          5 years is ALOT when you’re staring at 80 on your next milestone birthday!

          • LAguy323

            January 19, 2016 at 2:34 pm

            said no one about the founding fathers– ever.

          • Jon Revoir

            January 19, 2016 at 2:56 pm

            Such pathetic stereotyping is of no worth. That Sanders taps into the passions of Americans age 45 and younger says it all.

          • alwaysthink

            January 19, 2016 at 3:33 pm

            I completely agree that Sanders has tapped into the “passion” of some voters. He rails against the biggest problems we face as a nation.

            But he doesn’t offer solutions that have a snowballs chance in hell of getting enacted in law. He doesn’t compromise. It is all or nothing for him. He voted against Comprehensive Immigration Reform CIR because it has to many H1b visas! He is willing to throw the baby out with the bath water.

          • Needle

            January 20, 2016 at 11:48 am

            sure sure, I don’t want an old, angry socialist for president. Reagan had dementia in his 2nd term!

          • Jon Revoir

            January 22, 2016 at 4:17 pm

            My mom is 89 and her mind is as sharp as ever. At 87 Vin Scully remains the best sports announcer in the business. One of my best friends died at age 46. There are no guarantees and stereotyping is for weak minds at all ages.

          • Needle

            January 22, 2016 at 5:13 pm

            I’m sorry that Bernie is an angry, old socialist, what do you want from me? your mom, Vin Scully and one of your best friends are not going to be president of these great, United States. Cmon!

          • Jon Revoir

            January 23, 2016 at 5:43 am

            You are clearly incapable of simple logic. Must I spell it out? Just because Bernie Sanders is 74 there is no guarantee or proof that he is likely to have dementia within the next 8 years. There is also no proof or guarantee that Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump or even Marco Rubio will remain healthy over the next 8 years.

            According to US News and World Report, 13.5% of people between 80 and 84 have Dementia. So yes, there is a small possibility but even if Sanders was a one term president, he is far better than anyone else running and far more in touch with the youth than anyone.

          • Needle

            January 23, 2016 at 7:04 am

            You are clearly unhinged if you think Bernie is going to win.

        • Cynthia Joy Finnegan

          January 19, 2016 at 4:02 pm

          You Berniebots and your fuzzy math. Bernie is SEVENTY-FIVE; Hillary is SIXTY-SEVEN. How does that equal “five years”?

          Morons.

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:04 pm

            Moron.
            Bernie Sanders 74
            HIllary Clinton 68

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:20 pm

            Bernie is almost 80 years old. He’s been in D.C. for 30 yeas and has accomplished NOTHING. He’s a loser.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:29 pm

            He isn’t a criminal. How long before the indictment comes down? Even if they don’t indict her, can she be trusted as President? Imagine how much her foundation could earn if she is elected! What a joke.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:34 pm

            Indictment? that’s a right wing talking point. Bernie can go back to writing essays about his rape fantasies after he gets crushed in the primaries.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:34 pm

            He’s a DINO GUN NUT.

          • soxgirl62

            January 19, 2016 at 4:45 pm

            Seventy four is “almost 80”??? WTF is your problem? That must mean Hell ery is “almost 74”!
            What does age have to do with it anyway, it’s health that matters, and Bernie is healthy as a horse! Hillary has brain damage from her concussion a few years ago.

          • bandmanager007

            January 19, 2016 at 9:51 pm

            It’s pretty sad when idiots don’t even google something as simple as their age. Thanks nater21 for setting these boneheads straight. And who cares anyway. Some people have a better quality of life and live longer, healthier and more aware. Its an individual thing. Bernie is damn sharp for his age.

          • Brrelli

            January 20, 2016 at 12:57 am

            On top of that, Hillary suffers from feinting spells and various medical conditions that she won’t admit to. As much as a hate to say it, the “inevitable” candidate for the Democrats is a huge fraud. You can’t even trust her to control wall street with its money lining her pockets…

          • Cynthia Joy Finnegan

            January 20, 2016 at 5:11 am

            Horseshit. If anyone suffers from FAINTING spells, it’s Senator Asshole. He nearly PASSED OUR several times on Sunday night.

            Oh, and here’s something you MIGHT want to consider: Karl Rove is the “creator” of that moronic “Feel the Bern” slogan you bots keep slinging about.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:05 pm

          He’s almost 80 years old you clueless ignorant parasite.

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

      • NWNative

        January 19, 2016 at 2:46 pm

        DINO, that’s rich. Yeah, he’s a DINO because he is an Independent. He is more of a democrat than the majority of party democrats in congress and the White House.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:07 pm

          He’s republican lite AKA a DINO. Why did Bernie the gun nut vote with the NRA against the Brady bill 5 times? Bernie the DINO is FINISHED.

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:32 pm

            If you would just read why he voted against the Brady bill, you’d get it. But I forgot, you can’t read, can you? Sucks for you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:33 pm

            He voted AGAINST the brady bill 5 times because he is a DINO GUN NUT you ignorant low info parasite.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

      • Was catholic once

        January 19, 2016 at 3:14 pm

        How old are you?

      • Alex Gibson

        January 19, 2016 at 3:15 pm

        I will take an older honest canidate, before a liar.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:09 pm

          Bernie is a pathological liar and a gun nut who voted with the NRA in against the Brady bill. Your DINO Bernie is an OLD UNELECTABLE lose with no accomplishments. haha

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:32 pm

            Geez, you are embarrassing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:35 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            thousands of Americans have died because of DINO Bernie voting against the Brady bill you worthless POS.

          • soxgirl62

            January 19, 2016 at 5:07 pm

            BERNIE is a “pathological liar and gun nut”?????

            OMG, You are SO fucking funny!!! You are seriously cracking me up! Bernie is the most HONEST and straightforward candidate, probably EVER!

      • modern angel 99

        January 19, 2016 at 3:58 pm

        Delusional is reinstalling the same people who were part of the dismantling of the middle class over these past 40 years.

      • nater21

        January 19, 2016 at 4:02 pm

        LOL… who couldn’t find their way out of the bathroom??

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:12 pm

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          Bernie the OLD DINO is FINISHED. HAHAHA Embrace the suk you low info parasite.

          • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

            January 19, 2016 at 4:33 pm

            “embrace the suk”? How original. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 4:35 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Embrace the suck Bernie bot.

      • billknowsit

        January 19, 2016 at 4:17 pm

        You already did that one asshole. I see you c/p’d your other response below. No one is listening… go away.

      • Maria Teresa Montenegro Davis

        January 19, 2016 at 4:29 pm

        Go read the facts, man. …you can read, can’t you? Seems like you are just copying and pasting the same thing over and over. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I1-r1YgK9I

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:31 pm

          human rights campaign endorsed Hillary, not Bernie. Go cry some more you pathetic loser.

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:32 pm

          you dumb ignorant low info brain dead Bernie bot. Does the truth upset you?

      • soxgirl62

        January 19, 2016 at 4:39 pm

        How about some FACTS nero88888, as opposed to ignorant name calling???

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:39 pm

          go take your meds paid bernie bot troll.

          • soxgirl62

            January 19, 2016 at 5:00 pm

            You’re funny. You have absolutely NOTHING of substance to say! The only thing you know how to do is IGNORANT name calling! Calling everyone else names is ignorant in itself, but you don’t even have any facts to even *debate* Hillary vs. Bernie! You don’t even have an argument as to why you think Hillary is better (there are no real ones but at least SOME people attempt to provide some sort of REASON why they believe Hillary is better. You’ve got NOTHING. You’re just an idiot and every time you post, you make that more clear to EVERYONE here.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:03 pm

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

            Your head is gonna explode when you find out that your OLD, UNELECTABLE DINO gets crushed in the primaries. You low info paid Bernie bot troll.

          • bandmanager007

            January 19, 2016 at 9:53 pm

            Don’t even bother trying to reason with that person. He’s a troll with no life just trying to get a rise out of people. Quite patethic kind of life.

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:50 pm

          You are a delusional moron. That is a fact.

  15. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 1:09 pm

    ANOTHER great endorsement for Hillary. These Bernie supporters are delusional unhinged extremists.

    • caravan70

      January 19, 2016 at 2:09 pm

      Time for the doctors to roll you in for another shock treatment, nero.

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 4:06 pm

        You are a radical extremist. Your fat head WILL explode when your 80 year old socialist dino goes down hard in the primaries.

        “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
        Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
        chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
        chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

  16. Jp310

    January 19, 2016 at 1:13 pm

    wow, Clinton’s staff is out in full force here. lol

  17. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    The behavior of these Bernie supporters is the main reason why more and more people are getting turned off from unelectable DINO Bernie. Bernie is getting CRUSHED in the primaries.

    • Chummy

      January 19, 2016 at 1:44 pm

      I have noticed. It has changed my mind on Bernie Sanders. These people are just as horrible and disrespectful as Republicans. I guess left wingers don’t believe manners and respect have a place in society.

      • caravan70

        January 19, 2016 at 2:08 pm

        If you’re not a “left-winger,” you’re not a Democrat. It’s moderates who are DINOs.

        • Linda Woods Alexander

          January 19, 2016 at 2:56 pm

          Sanders is collecting the equivalent of the Teaparty…but from the left…pure and simple…radicals and a large number of them are anarchists.

          • Shawn Osterhus

            January 19, 2016 at 3:22 pm

            Can you name some?

          • Mawm

            January 19, 2016 at 4:49 pm

            They are exactly like the Paulites.

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 4:19 pm

        They are paid delusional trolls.

    • NWNative

      January 19, 2016 at 3:20 pm

      You must just be a pleasant person in real life. I don’t think I’ve ever seen you type anything positive or of substance.

  18. Chris Bartos

    January 19, 2016 at 1:17 pm

    I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Hillary Clinton is a flip-flopper to the Nth degree: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-change-position-same-sex-marriage/

    • Chummy

      January 19, 2016 at 1:38 pm

      Actually that is how I see Senator Sanders. I switched to Hillary on the last debate because of his refusal to ever admit he makes mistakes. I checked his record on guns and she was correct, it’s terrible. Very disappointed that he has not recanted those votes. I am also disgusted that he said just last month that there will not be any other proposed increases in middle class taxes other than the 1.61 per week for his family leave plan and then he says oops here is more on my health plan. Where is the next rise coming. He has a lot of big plans to raise the budget by trillions. Just don’t trust the man. I think he is selling us snake oil and making promises he cannot possibly keep and he knows it.

      • Daniepwils

        January 19, 2016 at 2:05 pm

        He didn’t make a mistake on the gun issue. He has never wavered from the reason as to why he voted the way he did. A store who sells a gun to someone (LEGALLY) shouldn’t be held responsible for what someone does with that gun. Should we hold TOYOTA liable for a crash that involved the death of someone by a Camry? NO we shouldn’t. That is why he voted the way he did…

        And if you do your research on the “tax” increase you would see, yes, your taxes MIGHT rise 2% but save you thousands in the long run. You actually will save more in the long run per year by not paying anymore deductibles, premiums, etc.. So in actuality you SAVE MORE MONEY…

        Please research before blindly believing the mud that Hillary is throwing

        • Linda Woods Alexander

          January 19, 2016 at 2:45 pm

          That tax increase he’s proposing is not going to come close to giving people all he’s promising them…are you kidding me?? Full dental, vision and hearing…nursing homes…everything medical that can possibly be needed, plus all medical equipment and supplies, etc etc etc? My dentures alone cost over $20,000…do you think the state budgets are going to be able to take on around 15 % of all those costs when their budgets are strained now?? It’s totally ludicrous…he’s spewing fairy dust and all of you believing it to be possible are as crazy as he is!!

          • Matt

            January 19, 2016 at 3:02 pm

            You’re assuming costs for all of those things would stay the same. Every other country with a single payer heath care system has lowered costs for all medical products and services.

          • TheDollyLlama

            January 19, 2016 at 6:25 pm

            Well I’m glad your degree in economics came in handy. Your rates are based upon your private insurance companies, who do their very best, every single day, to bang you as hard as humanly possible. 7 dollars/month for paid medical leave and a 2.2% tax will actually SAVE you money because you’re no long paying those private premiums. THINK, ffs. 29 million people don’t have health care, get out of your bubble.

          • bandmanager007

            January 19, 2016 at 9:59 pm

            Linda, we used to have that exact kind of health care, about 20-30 years ago. I got a tubal ligation done for free. It’s not until the SCOTUS passed Citizens United and gave corporations all that power, that we have seen such a decline. It’s not fairy dust, it’s real. It’s taking the power back away from the insurance companies who are taking our money and buying bigger mansions, and putting it back into taking care of people. Other countries do it. We are allowing these same corporations to not have to pay their fair share of taxes, while we as the middle class take the hit. So, if you think that readjusting things back to a healthier way for all the citizens involved and out of the hands of corporations is crazy…then fine, I’ll take it. We can also take a lot of the pork we spend on the military budget and put it into healthcare, roads etc. etc. It is possible. Sorry you can’t see it!

          • Linda Woods Alexander

            January 19, 2016 at 10:42 pm

            I hope you don’t get your hopes up. I’ve read at least half a dozen expert analyses that have proven his plan is unsustainable and the costs would be at least double his figures. Doesn’t matter though…it’ll never pass through congress. He’s put a similar plan up 9 different times and he’s gotten zero backers for it.

        • soxgirl62

          January 19, 2016 at 5:25 pm

          Danipwils, you are exactly right!

      • Chris Bartos

        January 19, 2016 at 2:30 pm

        1) It’s weird that you think Bernie Sanders is selling “snake oil”. I’ve known him even before his bid for president. I know for a fact he’s for the American people.

        2) Could you provide me a source where he said he “wouldn’t raise taxes”? He definitely said from the very beginning there would be a slight increase in taxes for the middle class.

        3) Did you ACTUALLY look at his gun record? http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/27110/bernie-sanders/37/guns#.Vp6OtJMrLMU

      • NWNative

        January 19, 2016 at 2:51 pm

        The tax increases and payroll taxes are separate. There will be tax increases on households making 250K+. That income range is not considered middle class.

        Second, there is a 2.2% payroll tax, but that is offset by elimination of your health insurance premiums. Please read his plans more carefully.

        • Marty McFly

          January 19, 2016 at 3:33 pm

          You mean the 12 pages total he’s scribbled down under great pressure to account for his promises?

          • TheDollyLlama

            January 19, 2016 at 6:29 pm

            bias… bias everywhere

          • Marty McFly

            March 13, 2016 at 4:49 pm

            And Sanders fans won’t think…

      • Shawn Osterhus

        January 19, 2016 at 3:15 pm

        So your argument is he flipped on three things so therefore Hillary isn’t a flip-flopper? She’s flipped on far more things than Bernie.

    • LAguy323

      January 19, 2016 at 2:35 pm

      She will say anything when it’s politically expedient to do so.
      https://youtu.be/SXXeEzCdhnE

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 4:18 pm

        Bernie flipped on guns. Bernie is a flip flopping liar.

        • soxgirl62

          January 19, 2016 at 5:35 pm

          Hillary has flip flopped on gay rights, Iraq war, TTP, marijuana legalization, and pretty much EVERYTHING that might not win her the vote at the moment! BERNIE has been incredibly consistent over the four decades he has served the people.

          He is the ONLY honest and genuine candidate on either side. Please show us ANYTHING that Bernie has lied about. Ever.

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 7:06 pm

            Bernie is a flip flopping LIAR.

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

  19. GardenofEden

    January 19, 2016 at 1:22 pm

    The HRC made this decision from the top. They didn’t poll members or go by the candidates record. Chad Griffin is the president of HRC. He got his start at 19, campaigning for Bill Clinton. He then was given a job in the white house. He now is a political fundraiser for Hilary. -Things that make you say “now I get it! “

    • D Hubb

      January 19, 2016 at 1:45 pm

      Totally makes sense now. An inside job -go figure! No members polled. Same as what the LCV did – didn’t poll the members.

      • GardenofEden

        January 19, 2016 at 6:00 pm

        Same as planned parenthood too. All the organizations that poll end up supporting Bernie, all the ones decided by the board support Hilary. It’s sad but it only proves she is bought and paid for.

        • TBR78

          January 20, 2016 at 1:33 am

          Show me where PP polls end up supporting Bernie. I fear you made this “fact” up out of thin air.
          And where was Bernie on the vote to defund Planned Parenthood? Rubio and Paul were there. 99 Senators were there actually. One was missing… Sanders. He thought it was more important to be in Iowa that day. I wonder why PP endorsed Clinton? Hmm… what do you think?

          • GardenofEden

            January 20, 2016 at 4:19 pm

            Reread my comment. I specifically said pp didn’t use a poll. They decided to just have the BOD vote.

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 5:18 pm

            PP isn’t a community the way HRC is. My point was how would you make up a poll for a community that doesn’t exist? Your point never made sense in the first place.

          • GardenofEden

            January 22, 2016 at 10:09 am

            They are a huge national organization. 32 people making that decision is not democracy.

          • TBR78

            January 22, 2016 at 3:46 pm

            Good god. Stop. Vote for Bernie, but this scorched earth approach of attacking everyone and everything that isn’t perfectly aligned with your world view isn’t helping your candidate.

          • GardenofEden

            January 22, 2016 at 10:33 pm

            I’m not attacking at all. I simply pointed out all of the connections between Hilary and the executives of the two large organizations who decided to endorse her. If you don’t want to engage that’s fine, but I will continue to spread the facts, that can be easily researched.

          • TBR78

            January 23, 2016 at 12:50 am

            Shocker. The former FLOTUS, Senator from NY state, and Secretary of State knows a lot of people. That’s not her fault that Bernie hasn’t done the same over his much longer tenure of public service. Blame that on Bernie, not Hillary.

          • GardenofEden

            January 23, 2016 at 9:53 am

            You still don’t get it. The connections plus the fact that a small group made a decision for a national organization. Have a great day.

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 4:18 pm

      KEEP CRYing you nut job. Bernie the DINO is FINISHED. HAHAHA

      “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
      Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
      chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
      chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

      • GardenofEden

        January 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm

        Nice name calling. Silver isn’t a psychic. Also I don’t care about the label of DINO. I only care about records and integrity, two things Sanders is strong on.

  20. Gerry Panzica

    January 19, 2016 at 1:23 pm

    something is definitely wrong with Bernie’s campaign!!!!!
    They do not know anything about civility!!!!
    They are as bad as the TEA PARTY!!!!!

    • novenator

      January 19, 2016 at 1:48 pm

      You mean the same TP that Clinton says she can make deals with since she’s such a pragmatist?

      • SophieCT

        January 19, 2016 at 3:26 pm

        No, the same Tea Party that Bernie wants to get more supporters from!

        • novenator

          January 20, 2016 at 1:06 am

          No, Bernie is tapping into disenfranchised people that are sick of politics as usual (mostly independents). That groups distrusts and dislikes Clinton and will vote for TRUMP before Clinton. You really want that to happen? You want a Trump presidency?

    • NWNative

      January 19, 2016 at 3:27 pm

      Civility. You mean civil is sending out your daughter who has a Masters Degree in public health to lie about your opponents Healthcare Plan. You mean that kind of civility?

    • modern angel 99

      January 19, 2016 at 3:49 pm

      Forty years of globalism and “free trade” policies have now obviously failed. This is the perfect timing for a new direction and someone with a new vision. #berniesanders

      “The sign of a society in trouble is when it has a major crisis and it turns to be saved by the people who caused the crisis.”

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F58AkoeSpn0

  21. Chummy

    January 19, 2016 at 1:34 pm

    So now even the Bernie campaign starts bashing people and organizations who prefer Hillary? I thought it was just his rude and nasty young supporters but now I see who is really calling the shots. If this is their idea of how democracy works I want no part of Bernie Sanders and his agenda. The longer this campaign goes on and I learn what Sanders is all about the less likely I will be to vote for him if he is nominated. Being a moderate and an Independent voter who has for years leaned towards Democrats, I simply cannot find my way to support Sanders as a nominee. I have no idea what the Democrats were thinking when they embraced his candidacy.

    • JimBob

      January 19, 2016 at 3:12 pm

      Criticising primary endorsements is hardly bashing. Get a grip! Sanders by far has a more consistent record supporting LGBT rights than does Hillary. It’s absolutely reasonable to ask why HRC’s primary endorsement whent to her, especially since Madam Flip-Flop only decided to support gay marriage in 2013 for this election.

  22. KeithinBrookline

    January 19, 2016 at 1:36 pm

    Can the reporter clarify a couple of things? Is the quote from the Sanders campaign that Sanders voted against DADT in 1993 in the Senate accurate?
    Because, Sanders wasn’t elected Senator until 2006, and there was no vote on DADT, it was a policy, not a law.
    Is this sloppy reporting, or is the Sanders campaign being dishonest?

    • SophieCT

      January 19, 2016 at 1:39 pm

      Yes.

    • Matt

      January 19, 2016 at 3:11 pm

      Sloppy reporting it seems. Bernie was not in the Senate at the time but he was in the House of Representatives. So he did vote against DADT the author just incorrectly stated which side of congress the vote was made on. Hope this helps!

      https://votesmart.org/bill/votes/15579#.VbfPT0JViko

  23. novenator

    January 19, 2016 at 1:40 pm

    Bernie Sanders has a strong, bold, very extensive track record of supporting gay rights dating back 40 years . In a letter he published in the early 1970’s, when he was a candidate for governor of Vermont from the Liberty Union Party, Sanders invoked freedom to call for the abolition of all laws related to homosexuality http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/bernie-sanders-was-full-gay-equality-40-years-ago

    In 1983, as Mayor of Burlington, Vermont, Bernie threw in his full support for a highly controversial gay pride march in the city http://www.queerty.com/32-years-before-marriage-equality-bernie-sanders-fought-for-gay-rights-20150719

    Bernie proclaimed Gay Pride Day in Burlington 2 years later in 1985 http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/03/1398990/-Important-document-from-the-desk-of-Mayor-Bernie-Sanders-1985

    He fought against the discriminator DOMA (that first lady Hillary Clinton supported) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/why-bernie-sanders-must-t_b_8135236.html Bernie verbally blasted a conservative bigot on the House floor who didn’t want “homos in the military” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP7Oqp5j8fc

    Bernie wanted to add full civil rights in housing, employment and public accommodation for LGBT people to the 1964 Civil Rights Act http://www.washingtonblade.com/2015/05/15/sanders-touts-lgbt-record-in-white-house-bid/

    Bernie didn’t call marriage “a sacred bond between a man and a woman as a bedrock principle” on the Senate floor unlike some, or wait to support Civil Unions until 2010, or hold off on standing strong for LGBT Marriage Equality until 2013. He has always been a consistent champion of LGBT rights. http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-lgbtq-rights/

    Hillary Clinton VS. Bernie Sanders on Gay Rights and LGBT Equality

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBj3tWGQnIc

    Clinton quotes against LGBT marriage:

    “I think marriage is as a marriage has always been, between a man and a woman.”

    “I believe that marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman.”

    “the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that exists between a man and a woman”

    Clinton was against Civil Unions until 2010 and against Marriage Equality until 2013. She called marriage “a sacred bond between a man and a woman as a bedrock principle” on the Senate floor in 2004 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iTrqHvTk_0

    Clinton originally supported Don’t Ask Don’t Tell and has defended her support of DOMA (the Defense Of Marriage Act forbidding LGBT equal marriage rights) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-doma_us_562e7dcae4b0c66bae58eb2e

    Could THIS have anything to do with this endorsement? “HRC President Chad Griffin got his start in politics volunteering for the Bill Clinton presidential campaign, which led to a position in the White House Press Office at the age of 19. Following his stint in the White House and his graduation from Georgetown University, he led a number of political campaigns advocating for or against various California ballot initiatives, as well as a number of fundraising efforts for political candidates, such as Hillary Clinton” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chad_Griffin

    • Cynthia Joy Finnegan

      January 19, 2016 at 4:05 pm

      Learn a little history, Berniebot. Bill ran on a PRO-GAY AGENDA. The ONLY reason DOMA and DADT got signed into law was because Gingrich threatened to shut down the government and cook up something WORSE if they weren’t.

      • UTokyoMeGodzilla

        January 19, 2016 at 4:11 pm

        Cynthia… let’s say Hillary wins – do you think it wise to alienate voters she’ll need in the general?
        Not only that, but check your facts on that claim of hers

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/28/hillary-clintons-claim-that-doma-had-to-be-enacted-to-stop-an-anti-gay-marriage-amendment-to-the-u-s-constitution/

      • billknowsit

        January 19, 2016 at 4:16 pm

        Learn a little history? Seriously? When did Clinton come out in favor of gay marriage? … and you’re calling other people “bots”… I’m gonna call you a name, Asshole.

      • Tom

        January 19, 2016 at 9:44 pm

        Bill Clinton’s policies were consistently homophobic, if you look at substance, not fluff.

      • novenator

        January 20, 2016 at 1:15 am

        How is allowing the military to give LGBT folks dishonorable discharges and supporting the DOMA which specifically forbids gay marriage “pro-gay” again?

        • TBR78

          January 20, 2016 at 1:29 am

          I’m guessing you’re either young or have a selective memory.

        • Cynthia Joy Finnegan

          January 20, 2016 at 5:17 am

          Why don’t you get off your lazy Berniebot ass and look it up yourself? I’m not your encyclopedia.

          • novenator

            January 20, 2016 at 2:36 pm

            Isn’t that cute, more blind insults. Really making Clinton look good there by attacking like a RWNJ.

            My point was that claiming an anti-gay bill is pro-gay is absurd. This isn’t opposites day.

  24. barb

    January 19, 2016 at 2:21 pm

    I think Bernie’s cult is mad ..lol

    • modern angel 99

      January 19, 2016 at 3:45 pm

      “There is a secret to being a supporter of Bernie Sanders. It is something that totally escapes the thinking of most Democrats and Republicans. It is the mental understanding that Sanders is fighting a war that most people are not. It is the war between corporations and the people.

      Unless you are fighting this war as well, you cannot possibly understand how important it is to vote for Bernie over Hillary. This is not about Hillary or Bernie, it is about fighting your real enemies, the multi-national corporations who are trying to control this nation and the world. You ignore this war at your own peril.” – Randolph Greer

      • Mawm

        January 19, 2016 at 4:47 pm

        Creepy

  25. Ltrs

    January 19, 2016 at 2:34 pm

    Ah, no – the Sanders campaign is full of it. The idea that he was some sort of champion for LGBT rights is false. I was there. He did nothing for us when we called on him to help. And HRC knows this.

    Meanwhile, Hillary was raising money for us, getting other senators to vote against the constitutional amendment, and speaking up for LGBT rights internationally as SOS.

    Sanders, meanwhile, was telling us Vermont wasn’t ready for marriage equality because of the state’s rights bullshit.

    • LAguy323

      January 19, 2016 at 2:53 pm

      Sixteen years before “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ended, then-Rep. Bernie Sanders took to the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives to defend the “thousands of men and women who have put their lives on the line” to defend our country.
      https://youtu.be/vofisbFFtpI?t=2m1s

    • Troy Rudd

      January 19, 2016 at 3:00 pm

      Uh………. NO!

      Why would anybody be shocked? The President of this organization, Chad Griffin, has worked for the Clintons all his life. Just more cronyism sprinkled on top of the Clinton cronyism. ‪#‎cronyism‬

      *********** From Wikipedia *************

      Chad Hunter Griffin (born July 16, 1973) is an American political strategist best known for his work advocating for LGBT rights in the United States.

      Griffin got his start in politics volunteering for the Bill Clinton presidential campaign, which led to a position in the White House Press Office at the age of 19. Following his stint in the White House and his graduation from Georgetown University, he led a number of political campaigns advocating for or against various California ballot initiatives, as well as a number of fundraising efforts for political candidates, such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

      ‪#‎HRC‬ ‪#‎LGBT‬ ‪#‎GLBT‬ ‪#‎Hillary‬ ‪#‎Clinton‬
      #BernNotice #Bernie2016 #FeelTheBern

    • Shawn Osterhus

      January 19, 2016 at 3:25 pm

      Yeah, he sure helped the gays in Burlington, VT. Your comment is full of it.

  26. JimBob

    January 19, 2016 at 2:40 pm

    This headline is BS and it appears that the Washington Blade is following the Hillary campaigns’ penchant for bending the truth and playing filthy. The Sanders’ campaign didn’t “blast” or ‘tear into’ HRC’s endorsement of Hillary, it criticize and questioned it.

    While Hillary has always had her finger to the wind to determine what was expedient, Sanders has been a consistent LGBT supporter.

    The primary endorsement says more about the HRC leadership and their slovenly support for another corporate candidate and someone who in 2004 on the Senate floor called marriage a bond between a man and a woman! And still HRC supports her? Shame on the HRC!

    In the future I’ll support progressive LGBT organizations and not those that defer to corporadoes like Goldman Sachs and the Senator for Wall Street.

  27. NWNative

    January 19, 2016 at 2:44 pm

    I am truly truly sad about this. I think the evidence is clear who has given their support to the LGBT community over the years.

  28. Kurt 20008

    January 19, 2016 at 2:53 pm

    Presidential candidates making institutional attacks on progressive organizations because they didn’t get the endorsement. Not good. It would have been more honorable for the Senator to just continue to appeal to the community.
    If the Sanders campaign had this negative view of HRC, why did they seek their endorsement? And if they only developed this negative view after the Clinton endorsement, why are they so unskilled at evaluating organizations? Shouldn’t a U.S. President be skillful at evaluation organizations?

  29. NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    January 19, 2016 at 2:54 pm

    With every endorsement that doesn’t go their way (NARAL, Planned Parenthood, Brady campaign, and now HRC) Sanders campaign get more and more butthurt and upset. Welcome to politics, wear a cup!

    • Troy Rudd

      January 19, 2016 at 2:58 pm

      100% Correct! Because they are most generally fine examples of further crony capitalism that #BernieSanders has fought his entire career as a public servant.

      >
      >
      Why would anybody be shocked? The President of this organization, Chad Griffin, has worked for the Clintons all his life. Just more cronyism sprinkled on top of the Clinton cronyism. ‪#‎cronyism‬

      *********** From Wikipedia *************

      Chad Hunter Griffin (born July 16, 1973) is an American political strategist best known for his work advocating for LGBT rights in the United States.

      Griffin got his start in politics volunteering for the Bill Clinton presidential campaign, which led to a position in the White House Press Office at the age of 19. Following his stint in the White House and his graduation from Georgetown University, he led a number of political campaigns advocating for or against various California ballot initiatives, as well as a number of fundraising efforts for political candidates, such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

      ‪#‎HRC‬ ‪#‎LGBT‬ ‪#‎GLBT‬ ‪#‎Hillary‬ ‪#‎Clinton‬
      #BernNotice #Bernie2016 #FeelTheBern

      • NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

        January 19, 2016 at 3:00 pm

        Sorry. Ranting about “Wall Street” and “millionaires/billionaires” isn’t going to sway an electorate. Sanders had his opportunity to emulate what Sec. Clinton did last summer in doing a listening tour and he instead opted to do the same stump speeches for months and now it’s come back to bite him. Tough s**t!

        • Troy Rudd

          January 19, 2016 at 3:05 pm

          Calling all paid #Hillary Trolls…calling all trolls. Please report back to home base on Hillary’s page for further instruction. smh

        • JimBob

          January 19, 2016 at 3:18 pm

          I guess you haven’t been paying attention to the polls. Sanders has been rising and right now is neck to neck with Hillary in Iowa. And guess what? In 2008 at this time Obama was 20% behind her!

          How do you like to eat your crow?

    • Shawn Osterhus

      January 19, 2016 at 3:27 pm

      Which Bernie followers said anything about the Brady nomination? I’ll wait.

  30. Troy Rudd

    January 19, 2016 at 2:57 pm

    Why would anybody be shocked? The President of this organization, Chad Griffin, has worked for the Clintons all his life. Just more cronyism sprinkled on top of the Clinton cronyism. ‪#‎cronyism‬

    *********** From Wikipedia *************

    Chad Hunter Griffin (born July 16, 1973) is an American political strategist best known for his work advocating for LGBT rights in the United States.

    Griffin got his start in politics volunteering for the Bill Clinton presidential campaign, which led to a position in the White House Press Office at the age of 19. Following his stint in the White House and his graduation from Georgetown University, he led a number of political campaigns advocating for or against various California ballot initiatives, as well as a number of fundraising efforts for political candidates, such as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

    ‪#‎HRC‬ ‪#‎LGBT‬ ‪#‎GLBT‬ ‪#‎Hillary‬ ‪#‎Clinton‬
    #BernNotice #Bernie2016 #FeelTheBern

    • NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

      January 19, 2016 at 2:57 pm

      In short, you’re saying Bernie is entitled to these endorsements, because…?

      • Troy Rudd

        January 19, 2016 at 3:02 pm

        In short, I’m saying they should have either endorsed the candidate that has best represented their organization for over 30 years, or they should have just stayed out of the “endorsement business”. Is that clear enough for you, “patriot”? lol

        • NW10,PATRIOT! ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

          January 19, 2016 at 3:03 pm

          What has Sanders done to earn the endorsement of HRC, other than “being right on gay rights from the get-go”? That is just as weak as saying that Sanders is entitled to the black vote because he marched with MLK Jr.

          • Travis Woods

            January 19, 2016 at 3:44 pm

            You’re kidding, right? The past matters, whether you like it or not. What has he done? Well, advocating for equality for LBGTQ people “from the get-go”, compared to someone who does it when it will win them political points, shows consistency, integrity, and a dedication to doing what is right even when it won’t be popular. That’s the hallmark of a true leader. Marching with MLK Jr. shows he isn’t just going to talk big about helping the disenfranchised and oppressed, he’s going to get out there and DO SOMETHING about it, unlike Herllary who was too busy working for a Republican that wanted to repeal the Civil Rights Act. Pointing out a candidate’s behavior is only weak when their behavior is weak, like every other candidate’s, and like yours in suggesting that #BernieSanders record doesn’t answer your initial question. He has done so much more for every person in this country, including LGBTQ people, and that’s even more apparent when an organization’s leadership endorses Herllary, but their members overwhelmingly support Sanders. Otherwise, why wouldn’t they have polled their membership to decide who to endorse? Oh yah, because #Bernie wins every single member-polled endorsement out there.

          • nater21

            January 19, 2016 at 4:01 pm

            #FeeltheBern Patriot! Perfect response…

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 1:31 am

            Now let’s talk about how he voted against DOMA on states’ right grounds.
            Now let’s talk about how other LGBT activists in his home state of Vermont were consistently frustrated by his silence on equality issues.
            Now let’s talk about how in 2006 when asked by a reporter if he would support full marriage equality in Vermont and he said “no, that’s too divisive.”
            He’s not the messiah for the LGBT community you’re painting him as.

          • Matt

            January 19, 2016 at 4:08 pm

            I would be happy to explain in my view what Bernie has done to earn the endorsement on the HRC.

            In an open letter from the early 1970’s Sanders wrote: “Let us abolish all laws which attempt to impose a particular brand of
            morality or ‘right’ on people. Let’s abolish all laws dealing with
            abortion, drugs, sexual behavior (adultery, homosexuality, etc.).”

            In 1983 Sanders supported Burlington Vermont’s first Gay Pride Parade saying “we must all be committed to the mutual respect of each other’s lifestyle and as mayor he signed a Gay Pride Day proclamation.

            In 1984 Bernie put through an anti-discrimination housing ordinance that protected people based on their sexual orientation.

            In 1993, Bernie voted against Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell which barred LGBT people from serving in the military.

            In 1995 he stood up on the House floor and defended gay people in the military during a discussion on a Clean Water Act bill.

            In 1996 Bernie voted against the Defense of Marriage Act.

            In 2000 Vermont proposed a Civil Union law which Bernie supported even though at the time 62% of people opposed same-sex unions.

            As far as the records indicate, Bernie stood for LGBT’s rights throughout his career and I can’t find an instance where he voted against the LGBT community.

            Hillary in comparison in 2000 said, : “Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back
            to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has
            always been, between a man and a woman. But I also believe that people
            in committed gay marriages, as they believe them to be, should be given
            rights under the law that recognize and respect their relationship.”

            She was in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act even though she was in favor of civil unions.
            and 11 years later in 2007, she changed her opinion on DOMA stating: “I support repealing the provision of DOMA that may prohibit the
            federal government from providing benefits to people in states that
            recognize same-sex marriage.”

            In 2007 debate Hillary was asked “What is at the heart of your opposition to same-sex marriage?” and she responded, “Well, I prefer to think of it as being very positive about civil unions.
            You know, it’s a personal position. How we get to full equality is the
            debate we’re having, and I am absolutely in favor of civil unions with
            full equality of benefits, rights, and privileges.”

            So what does all of this tell me? Both Hillary and Bernie support equal rights for everyone based on sexual orientation which is great! However publicly, Hillary disagreed with same sex marriage. She also supported DOMA for many years which was one of the big repeals the HRC was fighting for. Based on these positions I think Bernie has shown he has been a longer and stronger candidate supporting the same things the HRC has been fighting for and therefore is more deserving of the HRC’s endorsement.

          • soxgirl62

            January 19, 2016 at 4:34 pm

            Bernie Sanders has certainly “earned” the endorsement of any pro-LGBT group!
            You don’t think that “being right on gay rights from the get-go” would earn him the endorsement of any gay rights proponents over Hell ery, who has voted AGAINST gay rights until 2 or 3 years ago once it was politically profitable to do so?
            My god, what the hell has SHE done to earn their endorsement???

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 4:17 pm

          Bernie is an UNELECTABLE DINO gun nut. He’s TOAST.

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

      • Tom

        January 19, 2016 at 9:45 pm

        Fact: Sanders is consistently pro-LGBT.

        Fact: Clinton has been homophobic the overwhelming majority of the time.

        • TBR78

          January 20, 2016 at 1:32 am

          Fact: Sanders is consistently pro-LGBT, except when he’s not

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 4:16 pm

      “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
      Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
      chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
      chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

      #feelthebernout moron

  31. Troy Rudd

    January 19, 2016 at 3:09 pm

    Really??? “Blasts” ?? Upon Inquisition and instigation by this cheap blog, the Sanders campaign gave a very sane, non-threatening and accurate reply.

    LOL Ah…. I get it!! “NW10, PAT_ROT” is really Chris Johnson, the author of this hatchet job!! LOL Now it all makes sense.

  32. William T Carter

    January 19, 2016 at 3:09 pm

    I just cancelled my HRC membership in their Partners program and all future donations. I sent them a pretty strong email as well. https://www.facebook.com/williamtcarter/posts/10208298026586431

    • MiaEli15

      January 19, 2016 at 3:10 pm

      Good, because they don’t need fake progressive support anyway.

      • William T Carter

        January 19, 2016 at 3:13 pm

        Im not a regressive. I’m a liberal. And yes, they clearly don’t need my support, and neither will they get it.

        • MiaEli15

          January 19, 2016 at 3:18 pm

          No you’re not a progressive. Progressives aren’t ignorant. The mere fact that you’re so “outraged” about their endorsement suggests you are either pretending to have supported HRC in the past or, don’t have a thorough grasp of the candidates’ actual voting records.

          • Shawn Osterhus

            January 19, 2016 at 3:28 pm

            He’s not a progressive for not supporting a specific organization? That’s laughable and is just trolling.

          • MiaEli15

            January 19, 2016 at 3:35 pm

            If LGBT issues were truly important to him, then no he wouldn’t withdraw support for them simply because they endorsed one candidate over another. Furthermore, progressives aren’t usually ignorant and William must be ignorant if he actually believes Sanders record on LGBT issues is so much better than Clinton’s.

          • JimBob

            January 19, 2016 at 3:32 pm

            And checking the Disqus record it’s obvious you’re a Hillary troll.

          • MiaEli15

            January 19, 2016 at 3:36 pm

            You’re obviously a Berniebot troll. Hey Berniebot, don’t you have to go support the corporate gun-lobby and make sure victims of gun violence are prohibited from even going to court against the gun lobby?

    • SophieCT

      January 19, 2016 at 3:28 pm

      But do keep pretending that this election is all about the issues!

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 4:14 pm

      wah wah wah you pathetic loser.

  33. MiaEli15

    January 19, 2016 at 3:11 pm

    Once again, the desperate and pathetic Berniebots throw a hissy fit because an organization has the audacity to endorse Clinton over Sanders. By the way Berniebots, you might actually want to review Sanders ENTIRE record before casting stones at Clinton. http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/10/05/bernie_sanders_on_marriage_equality_he_s_no_longtime_champion.html

    • JimBob

      January 19, 2016 at 3:19 pm

      Hissy fit? That sounds a bit a sexist, doesn’t it?

      • MiaEli15

        January 19, 2016 at 3:25 pm

        If the shoe fits….

        • JimBob

          January 19, 2016 at 3:31 pm

          You’re right, Ms Homophobic, if the shoe fits wear it.

          • MiaEli15

            January 19, 2016 at 3:33 pm

            Hissy fit refers to immature people throwing temper tantrums! You must be another ignorant Berniebot.

      • MiaEli15

        January 19, 2016 at 3:26 pm

        By the way, I used hissy fit not to make any sexist accusation, but because the Berniebots are such ignorant crybabies.

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 4:14 pm

      Bernie bots are paid trolls. They are delusional losers.

      “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
      Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
      chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

    • TheDollyLlama

      January 19, 2016 at 6:43 pm

      The sign of a good politician is one who’s vote EVOLVES not CHANGES. His vote has evolved from full support/states decision to full support/fed decision. Clinton’s has changed from no support to full support. Your argument is unfounded. Link clearly shows that Sanders has a superior voting record on this issue. Stop defending criminals, makes ya look bad. http://www.ontheissues.org/Notebook/Note_06n-HRC.htm

  34. MiaEli15

    January 19, 2016 at 3:14 pm

    • Alex Gibson

      January 19, 2016 at 3:15 pm

      I am glad you are proud of supporting a canidate that followed Bush and Cheney to war, voted for the patriot act, made a mess in Libya and Syria, takes millions from foreign governments that abuse women, has a charity that only 10 cents on the dollar helps anyone, and changes positions based on polls. Vote for a leader, senator Bernie Sander. He led on minority rights, gay rights, Iraq war, patriot act, TPP, keystone pipeline, healthcare, income inequality, and WOMENS RIGHTS. HRC is a poll/money follower, not a leader.

      • MiaEli15

        January 19, 2016 at 3:25 pm

        Oh wow, there’s so much bs in that to unpack. Let’s start with your first false attack-the Iraq War. Apparently, you don’t know what Congress authorized. Congress authorized the AUMF, which provided that then President Bush had authority to use military force against Iraq, BUT ONLY AS A LAST RESORT & ONLY IF HUSSEIN DIDN’T COMPLY with the inspections. That’s far different than declaring war.
        Secondly, the Syrian people started the civil war against Assad when Assad brutally massacred thousands of dissidents peacefully opposing his regime. We did not start that. Indeed, the Syrian people requested our help and the UN endorsed action to remove Assad.
        Thirdly, while American culture abhors the Islamic culture that demeans women, that doesn’t make the Islam our enemy. Saudi Arabia has been and continues to be our ally, so I see nothing wrong for them to donate to the Foundation and for the donations to be used for charitable purposes. And before you launch the fake rightwing attack against the Foundation, you should know that Charity Watch, a nonprofit organization that monitors the legitimacy of charities, gives the Clinton Foundation an A rating.

        • Alex Gibson

          January 19, 2016 at 7:50 pm

          LOL, first everyone knew it authorised war, she has already admitted she was wrong, as are you. She has yet to answer for her patriot act vote.
          Second, I did not say she started it, I said she made a mess in Syria and Libya. Libya was her baby. I didn’t hear you mention that in your uneducated rant.
          Thirdly, she has proven she will take money from anyone who will give it. Private prisons, wall street, healthcare companies, big pharmaceutical companies, and woman abusing countries, that she had a conflict of interests, due to arms deals, as SOS, with those same countries. Also her charity spends most of its money on a library in their honor and paying their speaking fees.
          https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-of-Clinton-Foundation-money-goes-to-real-and-actual-charities-that-are-not-controlled-by-the-Clintons
          You are either paid to spread that crap, or are very uninformed.

          • MiaEli15

            January 19, 2016 at 8:24 pm

            Wow, you’re even more ignorant than I thought.

            HRC had to concede the argument about the AUMF because of simple-minded idiots such as yourself. The FACT is that the AUMF authorized force as a LAST RESORT.

            Secondly, as far as Libya is concerned, again Gaddafi was about to launch an imminent massacre of his political dissidents, which he affectionately referred to as “cockroaches.” And once again, the UN and Libyans pleaded for our intervention. You must not be very well informed because this is all public record.

            Third, she has rejected private prison donations and 89% of the donations to their Foundation goes straight to charity projects. http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/

          • MiaEli15

            January 19, 2016 at 8:24 pm

            You want to play again, Berniebot? You pathetic liar!

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 8:38 pm

            Bernie is a right wing gun nut you POS

          • nero88888

            January 19, 2016 at 8:39 pm

            Bernie is republican lite. He’s an OLD, UNELECTABLE DINO who used to write essays about his rape fantasies.

          • Alex Gibson

            January 20, 2016 at 9:09 am

            You are embarrassing yourself. He is a good man and will fight for working Americans. Looks like Hillary will be in court anyway about the new classified emails. Also she is getting whipped in the polls. You seem passionate about democratic values, why not get on board with an honest canidate?

          • nero88888

            January 20, 2016 at 2:58 pm

            Bernie is an UNELECTABLE DINO LOSER. Bernie is getting whipped in the polls and he is FINISHED you low info parasite.

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

            http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

            “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
            Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
            chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
            chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

        • Harry Underwood

          January 20, 2016 at 3:00 pm

          “Saudi Arabia has been and continues to be our ally”

          And that sucks for all the LGBT people in Saudi Arabia who have to flee elsewhere to be themselves.

  35. Vladimir Herrera

    January 19, 2016 at 3:31 pm

    There is more to this story that meets the eye… I think we need a better organization to represent the rights of people HRC’s days are counted.

  36. Pamela Hunter

    January 19, 2016 at 3:34 pm

    Listen Bill Clinton was elected by making promises to the Gay faction to help Gays in the millitary. And then that was the best he could do was ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’… that was from Bill Clinton. And I felt it funny that Bill Clinton got to actually experience the Karma… immediately, he got to find out that don’t ask don’t tell does not work (monica).

    • MiaEli15

      January 19, 2016 at 3:40 pm

      What the ignorant Berniebots don’t understand, and many of them weren’t even born during DADT, was that prior to DADT, it was absolutely prohibited for gays/lesbians to serve in the military and when President Clinton promoted gays/lesbians in the military, the backlash from MOST of America prevented him from going any further than DADT. Politics is about compromise and had President Clinton had pushed any further on gays/lesbians serving in the military, he may have not even been able to get DADT. That’s how angry the majority of Americans were about even permitting gays/lesbians to serve.

      • NWNative

        January 19, 2016 at 8:31 pm

        DADT was just a bad law anyway you look at it. Yes, the political climate would not have allowed it. I agree. But the law basically said, you can be gay and serve but just don’t talk about it. It’s like a non-law.

        • TBR78

          January 20, 2016 at 1:00 am

          It was an ugly half-measure. I grew up in the epicenter of the AIDS crisis as a child of the 70s in San Francisco. Even in SF, gay rights weren’t really a thing yet. People who advocated for civil rights in SF were viewed as fringe nutjobs up until the 90s. I know in retrospect Clinton’s moves looked like weak sauce, but they were pretty revolutionary at the time.

  37. alwaysthink

    January 19, 2016 at 3:37 pm

    HRC is the most effective grassroots organization around. Everyone who wants to see real change should study how they have made incredible progress.

    This is about choosing a candidate who can get stuff done. And that is Hillary, hands down. Bernie rails against the right stuff but he doesn’t understand nor have policy positions that with fix stuff that is wrong.

  38. modern angel 99

    January 19, 2016 at 3:39 pm

    Meanwhile John Podesta is her campaign manager, who owns The Podesta Group, which is among the top paid lobbying firms representing clients in the worst human rights-violating nations. You know a person by the company they keep:

    http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/12/17/18940/top-paid-firms-representing-clients-worst-human-rights-violating-nations-2010?utm_campaign=syndication&utm_source=yahoo-news&utm_media=relation&utm_content=node-freeform

    • MiaEli15

      January 19, 2016 at 3:41 pm

      Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders chief campaign strategist, Jeff Weaver, worked for a firm representing the evil Monsanto!!!!

      • NWNative

        January 19, 2016 at 8:23 pm

        So he worked for a law firm. Got it.

  39. MiaEli15

    January 19, 2016 at 3:45 pm

    If Bernie Sanders was such a stalwart in supporting LGBT issues, then why is he on record saying LGBT issues are “not a major priority to him”? Furthermore, why did Bernie publicly oppose an anti-discrimination ordinance protecting gays/lesbians in the workplace as mayor? Why did Bernie defend his vote against DOMA solely on states’ rights concerns and not for marriage equality? Why did Bernie oppose his home state’s efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in 2006 and why didn’t Bernie come out in full support for marriage equality only as recently as 2009?

  40. Scott Davenport

    January 19, 2016 at 3:46 pm

    Key line, “…strong ability to win against any Republican running…” The leadership is not willing to take a stand with Bernie because they believe that HRC is “inevitable”. Not necessarily the better candidate. It is so sad that a group known for taking coragous stands are too cowardly on this point. Or is it only the leadership that are afraid?

    • MiaEli15

      January 19, 2016 at 3:48 pm

      Or maybe they just know that Clinton will be far more effective in getting things done than Bernie….I mean Bernie’s been in Congress over three decades and has done virtually nothing in that time befitting his pandering for a political revolution.

      • Happily Married

        January 19, 2016 at 3:57 pm

        Or maybe it’s because the President of the HRC is completely biased in this endorsement.

        His wikipedia page states: “Griffin got his start in politics volunteering for the Bill Clinton presidential campaign, which led to a position in the White House Press Office at the age of 19”

      • Scott Davenport

        January 19, 2016 at 11:40 pm

        Yes, the psychic mediums just “know” that HRC would be able to seduce a republican congress to do her bidding. I mean, just because they stone-walled president Obama doesn’t mean they will do the same to HRC.

        Besides, those who claim Bernie has done nothing in congress do not understand how congress works and tend to only look at bills sponsored and not at amendments and being a voice during debates.

        • MiaEli15

          January 20, 2016 at 1:42 am

          Did I say HRC would fare much better??? Furthermore, HRC isn’t promising things she can’t deliver, unlike Sanders. The fucking is lying straight to your face and yet, you eat it up! You Berniebots are so pathetic.

        • MiaEli15

          January 20, 2016 at 1:43 am

          Did I say HRC would fare much better??? Furthermore, HRC isn’t promising things she can’t deliver, unlike Sanders. The guy is lying straight to your face and yet, you eat it up! You Berniebots are so pathetic.

  41. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 4:13 pm

    Bernie bots heads explode every time Hillary gets a big endorsement. hahaha

    “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
    Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
    chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
    chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

  42. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 4:16 pm

    Hey Bernie bots, your DINO is getting crushed in endorsements. Your heads will explode when Warren endorses Hillary.

    “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
    Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
    chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
    chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

  43. Cynthia Joy Finnegan

    January 19, 2016 at 4:19 pm

    Get over it, Berniebots. Human Rights Campaign SUPPORTS HILLARY.

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 4:22 pm

      Yep, brady campaign, planned parenthood, naral, and many others have endorsed Hillary. Just wait until Elizabeth Warren endorses Hillary. The Bernie bot morons will have a heart attack. LOL

      • NWNative

        January 19, 2016 at 8:20 pm

        Ann Richards was a given. I’m not surprised by it at all actually. PP is under attack and they are trying secure allies. I get it. I think most people feel they should have not endorsed at all because they haven’t before or at least held out a little while longer before endorsing.

    • NWNative

      January 19, 2016 at 8:17 pm

      Your board of directors supports Hillary. What do the members say I wonder.

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 8:38 pm

        The members don’t support your OLD UNELECTABLE DINO Bernie moron.

      • TBR78

        January 20, 2016 at 12:52 am

        This member agrees with the HRC board.

  44. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 4:25 pm

    You Bernie bots are some of the most vile and disgusting people I’ve come across on the internet. You’re ALMOST as bad as the racist Trump fans. You throw fits when an endorsement doesn’t go your way and you claim conspiracy every time your DINO is getting killed in a poll and you run to all of the online polls after a debate and vote 100 times each. You are pathetic paid Trolls who are obsessed with an 80 year old DINO socialist who will NEVER become POTUS. ;) MANY people are getting turned off from Bernie because of his disgusting nut job supporters.

    “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
    Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
    chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
    chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

    • gunnut

      January 19, 2016 at 5:40 pm

      You are the only one with vile disgusting posts here, oh and BTW all of your incessant spam and foul language has been flagged and you will; soon be blocked from this sit.

      • nero88888

        January 19, 2016 at 7:07 pm

        “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
        Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
        chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
        chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

        go take your meds you unhinged wacko.

  45. Cynthia Joy Finnegan

    January 19, 2016 at 4:29 pm

    I almost forgot this, which contains part of Hillary’s pro-LGBT speech from NINETEEN NINETY.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LreOHZAJlgA

    • Harry Underwood

      January 20, 2016 at 2:51 pm

      She didn’t make a pro-LGBT speech in 1990.

      In order:
      1) Video from 3/10/13
      2) Speech from October 2015
      3) “We will not back down” speech from 2012 AIDS Conference speech
      4) “Gay rights are human rights” Speech in Geneva 2011
      5) Video of Speech from 10/6/01
      6) More video from HRC Dinner October 2015

      Perhaps her earliest related speech would be the “women’s rights are human rights” from her 1995 speech in Beijing. But no, she didn’t make a pro-LGBT speech in 1990 when she was the First Lady of Arkansas.

  46. Mawm

    January 19, 2016 at 4:35 pm

    I’m so sick of straight people telling gay people what to think. Most of you posting against HRC on this thread aren’t even LGB or T, and those of you who are were probably sucking on your Mothers in 1992. It’s easy for Sanders to act high and mighty when he comes from one of the most liberal states in the nation. For politicians who are active at the national level, supporting LGBT right has been a mine field for two decades. BIll Clinton, however, was the first national politician to even mention us and acknowledge our plight. He campaigned, CAMPAIGNED, on open gay service in the military in 1992, and it was the first thing he tried to do after taking the office. However, the harsh saw of reality and bigotry made him play defense on LGBT issues for the rest of his presidency.
    Obama, who ended up being our greatest advocate, didn’t publicly support gay marriage until 2012. Why? It wasn’t because he really didn’t. He did, but he knew he couldn’t say it in 2008 and get elected President. Same thing for Clinton, neither she nor Obama can publicly come out and say that they always supported us but were playing politics, but that is the truth, and thank God that Obama did hide that. I’m much better off now that he was elected in 2008 than if he had been a purist and lost to McCain. Do any of you remember the blood bath that was the 2004 election when Karl Rove used the boogeyman of gay marriage to sweep the GOP into power in many state governments?
    Politics is hard, because it takes walking a tight rope. Sanders is stupid. He would never be elected, because he can’t keep his mouth shut. He wants to tell everyone that he is a socialist, “Democratic” or not and that he will raise taxes on the middle class. He still won’t acknowledge that this makes hime completely unelectable in the general election. Can you imagine if he had been president in the 90s? Because his purity would not have allowed him to push DOMA, we would have gotten a constitutional amendment banning our marriages. Instead of celebrating Obergefell this year, we would be fighting a much harder battle.

    • soundboyjeff

      January 19, 2016 at 4:42 pm

      so you would agree with the HRC that the entire trans community should just sit down? throwing members of the community under the bus for political expediency kinda compromises the entire POINT of the HRC. you remember back to 2004, and you still defend the actions of the HRC?

      • Mawm

        January 19, 2016 at 4:58 pm

        Yeah, that is a complete mischaracterization of their work. I believe activists need to be activists and continue to speak out. However, political organizations cannot ignore what is possible to achieve and what is not possible at the moment. If we have to wait until everyone accepts every part of LGBT rights, we would never advance, However, to get some progress means that we will probably be able to build upon that. This in many ways defines the different candidacies of Clinton and Sanders. Sanders can never deliver on the promises he makes, single payer, free college, expanded social security. However, that doesn’t mean nothing is possible, but one has to be adept at transaction politics which Sanders has never had the stomach for. It’s why his legislative record for the past 26 years is so thin when compared to that of Clinton’s who was only in the Senate for six years.

  47. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 4:36 pm

    Bernie bots, get over it. Human rights campaign ENDORSED Hillary, not your DINO Bernie. Accept reality loons.

  48. soundboyjeff

    January 19, 2016 at 4:37 pm

    He nailed it, the HRC is an establishment org. I wouldn’t give them a cent, and I certainly wouldn’t want them representing me as a gay man. Who needs them anymore?

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 4:38 pm

      poor widdle baby is angry because hrc didn’t wanna endorse an old unelectable dino like Bernie. haha

      • Stacy Young

        January 19, 2016 at 5:20 pm

        YOU are the one coming across like an immature brat. Just look at your hundreds of idiotic trolling cry baby “comments”. LOL!

        #FeeltheBern

        • nero88888

          January 19, 2016 at 7:04 pm

          “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
          Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
          chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
          chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

          #feelthebernout you low information parasite

  49. Jol Devitro

    January 19, 2016 at 4:48 pm

    HRC has failed the LGBT+ community and betrayed a lifetime friend and fierc advocate. Shame, HRC. Big gay shame on you. HRC = Hillary Rodham Clinton = DEATH

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 4:55 pm

      Bernie the DINO is a failure.

    • TBR78

      January 20, 2016 at 12:50 am

      Says the guy with 5 comments who upvoted his own post. You’re not a BernieBot. Nope, not at all!

  50. Sharon White

    January 19, 2016 at 4:51 pm

    This is political cronyism….Chad Griffin, the prez of HRC had a job in the White House press office after working on Bill Clinton’s campaign. Hardly a democratic move on HRC’s part…why not give us a vote to decide who to endorse?

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 4:54 pm

      cry some more Bernie bot. hahaah

      • gunnut

        January 19, 2016 at 5:38 pm

        I hope you die a slow horrible death.

  51. modern angel 99

    January 19, 2016 at 4:58 pm

    Hillary is one of the main architects of the TPP and sold it around the world:

    Clinton Took “A Leading Part In Drafting The Trans-Pacific Partnership.”

    “She’s pressed the case for U.S. business in Cambodia, Singapore, Vietnam, Indonesia, and other countries in China’s shadow. She’s also taken a leading part in drafting the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a free trade pact that would give U.S. companies a leg up on their Chinese competitors.”

    (Elizabeth Dwoskin and Indira Laksmanan, “How Hillary Clinton Created A U.S. Business-Promotion Machine,” Bloomberg, 1/10/13)

    And why do we now need a leg up on China? Because their (yes “their”, it was a co-presidency) administration continued to send jobs to China during the 90’s, beefing up their economy.

    Because the TPP grants corporations governance over democratic nations, I hope you never want to make your voice heard again because it could land you in a private corporate tribunal, away from US courts. Talk about human rights violations!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5StztvYw5SA

  52. modern angel 99

    January 19, 2016 at 5:17 pm

    “Do we need a Lesbian and Gay Pride Day? When our lives must be a struggle for peace and self respect– yes!” — A Vermonter thanking Bernie for instituting Gay Pride Day back in 1983.

  53. Robert Van Kirk

    January 19, 2016 at 5:18 pm

    The actions of the HRC disgust me, and as a gay man I will NEVER support their corporatist pandering, white bread, shortsighted organization ever again.

  54. Chris Myers

    January 19, 2016 at 5:29 pm

    Haha Clinton strong record duh fuck

  55. Po eM

    January 19, 2016 at 5:34 pm

    The only thing that really matters is this: If Hillary were a person of the people and was really going to heal deep divides, then she would already be doing it. People wouldn’t be championing for her solely because she’s a woman or because they don’t want a republican in office. Whereas people like Bernie because of what he stands for, people want Hillary AND THEN justify it with what she stands for. People actually LIKE Bernie. But back my original point — If she were going to heal these divides, SHE WOULD ALREADY BE DOING IT. I don’t see her ANYWHERE on the ground level of things, getting endorsements from black intellectuals like Cornel West or from black activists like Killer Mike. Or even sitting down and having a level-headed, REAL, non-opportunistic, human to human conversation like Bernie did with Killer Mike. I just don’t see it happening. I don’t see her reaching people’s hearts because I don’t think she comes from the same place internally that Bernie comes from. She may hit the notes intellectually and spew all the buzzwords and speak with the fervor of a politician but at the end of the day, I just don’t believe her because you get of sense of who she is as a human being from how she has and continues to conduct herself and her campaign. Cheap attacks and lies just don’t cut it anymore.

  56. RudyBlue

    January 19, 2016 at 5:52 pm

    Money bomb for Bernie Sanders from all gays, lesbians, bis and transgenders who support Bernie Sanders. And from their supporters. Let’s show HRC and HRC what we think about Pantsuits. She’s certainly not someone we’ll give our money to, much less vote for.

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 7:11 pm

      “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
      Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
      chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
      chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

      Bernie the DINO is a flip flopping pathological liar.

  57. arthursc

    January 19, 2016 at 6:25 pm

    HRC does great work for white middle-class LG Americans. They haven’t much history of rocking the establishment, and until recently have pretty much ignored the BT in LGBT, and people of color, if not been outright hostile to these communities. I’d rather have them fighting for LGBT rights than not, but they too often fight for middlebrow mainstream acceptability. Us B and Ts, us on the left, have argued and fought with them for years over these issues (and to be fair, we have made some progress with them, but not nearly enough). So I too agree 100% with Bernie’s position, for all that and for the reasons others have stated in earlier comments.

    • Matthew Harris

      January 31, 2016 at 5:37 am

      People of color isn’t their concern, any more than the NAACP concerns itself with gay rights. You have to be careful to not support causes that while just are outside the purview of the non profit you are working with.

      You are right, however, HRC does support Gay rights far more than Bi Rights, but that’s partially because supporting bi rights is a more nuanced battle, while fighting for gay rights, and gay marriage specifically, was an easy battle call.

  58. David Ramos

    January 19, 2016 at 7:02 pm

    Bernie Sanders is a true progressive in LGBT rights. Everyone read the letters in the link. They describe the Proclamation making June 25, 1983 Gay Pride Day in Burlington, VT.

    “In our democratic society, it is the responsibility of the government to safeguard civil liberties and civil rights – especially the freedom of speech and expression. In a free society we must all be mutual respect of each others lifestyles.”

    Bernie Sanders
    Mayor of Burlington

    https://www.scribd.com/doc/270078345/Sanders-Pride-March-Correspondence-1983-1986

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 7:16 pm

      Bernie is a DINO.

      “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
      Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
      chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
      chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

  59. I'm Just Sayin'

    January 19, 2016 at 7:11 pm

    “Recalling Sanders support for civil unions in Vermont when it became the first state to enact them in 2000, Briggs said Sanders was “a pioneer on this early version of gay marriage…”

    That may be how they are telling it today, but Sanders actually stood against same sex marriage in Vermont, at the time telling reporters that “he was comfortable with civil unions but not full marriage equality.” Sanders complained that a battle for same-sex marriage would be too “divisive.”

  60. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 7:16 pm

    “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
    Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
    chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
    chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

    The Bernie bots are having an heart attack right now. hahaah

  61. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 7:27 pm

    Bernie is sinking faster than the titanic. haha

    “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
    Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
    chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
    chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

    http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-democratic-primary

  62. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 8:07 pm

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

    http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

    “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
    Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
    chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
    chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

    Bernie the DINO is sinking faster than the titanic. hahaahah

  63. ThisChrisGuy84

    January 19, 2016 at 8:33 pm

    I have no respect anymore for the HRC.
    They have lost any of my support and will NEVER AGAIN get another dime out of me!

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 8:37 pm

      you are a brain dead moron.

  64. djmarc

    January 19, 2016 at 8:36 pm

    When youre a progressive group who fights all the right fights for all the right reasons, why wouldnt you look for a candidate who does the same thing… Hillary has never had any respect for or interest in fighting for the gay community until it became popular to do so… Bernie has been fighting those fights when it wasnt politically wise to do so… He fought for us, not for what he would get out of it… This endorsement is shameful.

    • nero88888

      January 19, 2016 at 8:38 pm

      Bernie is republican lite aka a DINO. He’s DONE.

  65. nero88888

    January 19, 2016 at 8:47 pm

    Bernie bots, you act like a bunch of sore losers. Hillary is getting a ton of endorsements while your OLD, UNELECTABLE DOUCHEBAG Bernie is getting well, far less than Hillary.

    #feelthebernout

  66. Linda

    January 19, 2016 at 8:47 pm

    I dont see where he “blasts” HRC, but I do see a new angle the media is trying to drum up along with the Shilary supporters, of the “blasting” allies etc angle… it is transparent and won;’t work

  67. Yewey

    January 19, 2016 at 9:25 pm

    This has more to do with Goldman-Sachs than anything else. My = stickers are all in the trash and my donations are gone. I always wondered why people bashed the HRC but I never looked into it. Duh.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-beaver/hrc-goldman-sachs_b_1257465.html

  68. Bruce Gruber

    January 19, 2016 at 9:40 pm

    Anybody released what the vote was among the 32 community leaders?

    As with the ‘established’ leaders of several unions that did not solicit members on their views – these “spokesmen’ may well be outvoted by their constitiency. Real people know! Sycophants are EXPECTED to ‘show’.

  69. Tom

    January 19, 2016 at 9:41 pm

    I think it is sad that the deceptively named “Human Rights Campaign” has endorsed a notorious homophobe like Hillary Clinton. It’s yet another betrayal of the LGBT civil rights movement, and it shows that the only thing the HRC cares about is big money donation. No knowledgable LGBT person gives them a dime.

    • TBR78

      January 20, 2016 at 12:47 am

      Hillary Clinton is a notorious homophobe now? You BernieBros need to get a grip.

  70. Zen zen

    January 19, 2016 at 11:08 pm

    How could Hilary Clinton get that endorsement. She helped Bill Clinton destroy those ladys he fondled or had an affair with.

  71. UprightButNotStr8t

    January 19, 2016 at 11:42 pm

    I’m for Bernie. The HRC didn’t ask my opinion.

  72. advocate22

    January 19, 2016 at 11:56 pm

    What THIS is is calling in FAVORS for “support given!’

  73. pat oneil

    January 20, 2016 at 12:06 am

    I will not support the HRC again. Bernie Sanders has stood with LGBT community from day one. Hillary only did when it was politically advantageous for her. Enough is Enough.

    • TBR78

      January 20, 2016 at 12:45 am

      No, Bernie Sanders has not supported the LGBT community since day 1.This is a mythology not based on any facts. Do some research and then get back to me. His history on LGBT equality is a lot murkier than you believe.

      • pat oneil

        January 20, 2016 at 1:00 am

        I suggest you compare his to Hillary’s. He has been a lot more supportive than she has.

        • TBR78

          January 20, 2016 at 1:01 am

          No, sorry but you’re wrong.

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/10/27/bernie-sanders-is-revising-history-too/

          And he gets zero credit for voting against DOMA on the grounds of states’ rights. Give me a break. That doesn’t count!

          • pat oneil

            January 20, 2016 at 1:06 am

            Whose husband put DOMA in effect? You are the one who doesn’t have your facts in order. Continue to support your lying candidate Hillary.

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 1:06 am

            So using your logic we should hold Laura Bush accountable for the Patriot Act? Do you have any awareness as to how stupid your argument is?

          • pat oneil

            January 20, 2016 at 2:35 am

            I don’t know why you need to be so rude when you disagree with someone. Save your comments for someone else.

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 2:42 am

            Because I’m sick and tired of these lies from the BernieBots like yourself (6 posts? Really?) smearing Clinton while putting Sanders on a pedastal he doesn’t deserve. They’re both deserving of the LGBT community’s support, and I’m not going to be silent when I continue to see all these lies about Clinton and her LGBT record, particularly in comparison to Sanders.

          • pat oneil

            January 20, 2016 at 5:40 pm

            I guess you will be sick and tired when Bernie wins.

          • TBR78

            January 20, 2016 at 6:51 pm

            Right. The polls don’t lie. He’s about to get smoked. And badly. Later, BernieBot with 7 posts.

    • nero88888

      January 20, 2016 at 3:02 pm

      Bernie Sanders is a pathological liar.

      • pat oneil

        January 20, 2016 at 5:39 pm

        back up your statement.

  74. Wagnerian_thrice

    January 20, 2016 at 12:24 am

    Human Rights Campaign exists solely to deliver voters to Democrats. They have decades of ignoring and dismissing the needs of working class and poor LGBT folks, and POC. This is merely their latest shitshow. Endlessly fuck them forever!

  75. Arturo Sierra

    January 20, 2016 at 1:33 am

    Good Choice…Thank You!! Wake up Blue America!! bern-OUT is NOT a Democrat and would hurt our party in November and lose the White House! Only a TRUE Democrat for me…Viva Hillary!!! #ImWithHer

    • MichaelW

      January 20, 2016 at 7:42 pm

      Hillary is not a true Democrat, either. She has made a career out of pushing a moderate Republican agenda. I think if you became less concerned with the affiliation stamped on their voter cards and paid more attention to actual issues, you will find that Sanders is definitely a Democrat in the FDR model. Even Rand Paul called out Hillary as a neocon. Her positions are certainly not in line with traditional Democratic party values.

  76. Scott Feinman

    January 20, 2016 at 7:30 am

    Feel The Bern! People want someone honest and trustworthy, Bernie Sanders will be our next President!!

  77. AC

    January 20, 2016 at 10:47 am

    Bernie will never be elected president. Even if he wins the nomination, it will be a Republican victory because conservatives fear socialism.

  78. Carmella Rosenbach

    January 20, 2016 at 11:10 am

    You picked the wrong person. Period. Hillary is almost as old as Sanders, btw. What are you guys THINKING??? Ok, you are losing my affection, fast.

  79. J. R. Tomlin

    January 20, 2016 at 11:52 am

    I have long been a financial backer of the Human Rights Campaign. They just lost my donations and my support.

    • TBR78

      January 20, 2016 at 6:55 pm

      You might want to reconsider that stance. Last night on Maddow’s show he referred to the HRC as the “Human Rights Fund.” For an organization in which he feels entitled to their endorsement, he should probably know the name, no? He also went on the attack against the HRC and Planned Parenthood. He’s coming unhinged.

      • J. R. Tomlin

        January 21, 2016 at 2:30 am

        No, I do not want to reconsider especially since he NEVER said he was ‘entitled’ to their endorsement. If you seriously think that it is more important that he remembers the full name of the HRC than that the HRC gave HIM its highest rating as a legislator–100% on LGBT issues, substantially higher than the rating they gave Clinton, then I suggest that it is YOU who needs to reconsider, but what you need to look at is your priorities.

        Nor did he ‘attack’ the HRC or Planned Parenthood. Like it or not, they are part of the Democratic establishment. That is hardly an ‘attack’.

        He is most definitely not ‘unhinged’ but the panic mode of you Clinton supporters is reaching that stage.

        Edit: I repeat what I told the HRC today after I stopped my regular donation, they will never see another penny from me. I should have done it when they betrayed our trans brothers and sisters over employment protections. But this was the final straw for me.

        • TBR78

          January 21, 2016 at 2:33 am

          You’re comparing apples to oranges. I’ve seen that grade comparison. It compares Clinton’s 2008 grade when she was last a US Senator to Bernie’s 2015 rating. Guess what… Sanders didn’t support full gay civil rights in 2015 either (not until 2009). You’re being intellectually dishonest in an attempt to airbrush history, but it sounds like you’re perfectly comfortable in this alternate reality. Me? Oh, I like real reality, so I’ll just stay put here.

          • J. R. Tomlin

            January 21, 2016 at 12:56 pm

            No, the grades are from the same organization so it is apples to apples. You just don’t much like facts.

            But I am now curious. In your ‘reality’ are you a member of HRC? What other LGBTQ organizations are you a member of? I note you preferred not to address that the HRC did not ask its membership before they gave out OUR supposed endorsement. So you think that is acceptable?

            Or are you any chance just a Clinton mouthpiece with no ties whatsoever to the LGBTQ community?

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 1:51 pm

            You’re using different dates, jerkoff. I see intellectual dishonesty is deeply embedded into your psyche. Go back and use Sanders’ 2008 rating, which is NOT 100%, if you’re going to use HIllary’s 2008 rating.
            Yes, I’m an HRC supporter and donor and regularly volunteer legal services on a pro bono basis for LGBT issues. Most organizations do not poll their members before giving out an endorsement. No one is required to vote the way HRC advises us to. It’s merely a suggestion. You’re free to vote for whomever you want, but lying about the other candidate whom you don’t prefer only serves to make you look petty, small, and petulant, much like Sanders looks like after his attacks on the HRC and Planned Parenthood.

        • TBR78

          January 21, 2016 at 2:51 am

          From Sanders’ spokesman with respect to HRC’s (not HRF) endorsement: ““It’s understandable and consistent with the establishment organizations voting for the establishment candidate,” he jabbed, “but it’s an endorsement that cannot possibly be based on the facts and the record.”
          What was that about entitlement issues, you say?

          • J. R. Tomlin

            January 21, 2016 at 12:12 pm

            That is exactly what I said. Nowhere did his spokesman say he was ‘entitled’ to the endorsement. That is in your imagination and bias, not in the comment. In fact, what most of us say is that there should have been NO endorsement at this point in the campaign. Certainly at the least, they should have consulted the membership.

            You are claiming he’s wrong, so you tell ME how it’s based on ‘the record’ when even the HRC gives Sanders’ record a 100% on LGBT issues and Clinton only a 89%. Whatever the endorsement was based on, it most certainly was NOT based on the record.

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 1:52 pm

            This statement doesn’t reek of entitlement to you? Reading between the lines is apparently not your strong suit. This is entitlement to the nth degree. I’m guessing the critical reading section of standardized tests is not where you score in the 99th percentile.

          • J. R. Tomlin

            January 21, 2016 at 3:46 pm

            The problem is that you are putting your interpretation ‘between the lines’ and not anything that is there. As for your further insults, amazing how quickly Clinton supporters turn to that, instead of the issues.

            Now back to the issue at hand, which LGBTQ organizations are you a member of? And why do you think it is all right for HRC to give members’ endorsement to a candidate without asking us?

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 3:49 pm

            Ok. Not interested. Have a good day.

          • J. R. Tomlin

            January 21, 2016 at 4:15 pm

            Tough questions, eh?

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 5:12 pm

            No, just not interested in speaking with a BernieBro not willing to listen or possibly consider other viewpoints.

          • J. R. Tomlin

            January 21, 2016 at 5:30 pm

            Yet another attempt at insults instead of issues, with a bit of sexism thrown in for good measure. I am definitely not a ‘Bro’ of any sort or stripe. Now why is it acceptable for HRC to issue an endorsement without consulting its membership?

          • TBR78

            January 21, 2016 at 5:32 pm

            ok

  80. Arlene

    January 20, 2016 at 12:54 pm

    This just stinks and I think it all gets down to money, sadly. Both LGBT and HRC do, and will continue to, benefit financially from HRC and her husband’s coffers. It is actually Bernie Sanders who has fought the good fight for LGBT and HRC for just as long or longer than HRC, especially LGBT. Anyone can check his voting record and history on all matters LGBT related.

  81. nero88888

    January 20, 2016 at 3:01 pm

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

    http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

    “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
    Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
    chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
    chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

    Bernie the UNELECTABLE DINO SOCIALIST IS DONE.

  82. nero88888

    January 20, 2016 at 3:02 pm

    Bernie bots, you LOST. HAHAHA Bernie the UNELECTABLE DINO is going down. hahaha

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/20/the-math-is-clear-hillary-clinton-has-better-odds-of-becoming-president-than-anybody-else-by-far/

    http://www.npr.org/2015/11/13/455812702/clinton-has-45-to-1-superdelegate-advantage-over-sanders

    “I could see Bernie Sanders winning a few states,” Silver said of the
    Vermont independent. “New Hampshire is still very close. But [Clinton’s]
    chances have to be in the range of 90 to 95 percent. Trump has more of a
    chance than Bernie.”-Nate Silver

  83. P Kokity

    January 20, 2016 at 3:05 pm

    The paragraph at the end, trying to say that Bernie was not in support of marriage inequality is misleading. “Not right now, not after what we just went through.” doesn’t say anything about what Bernie’s ‘favor’ is. He may have just been referring to a need to regroup and recover from Vermont’s conflict.

  84. Junie

    January 21, 2016 at 1:35 am

    RUN by the corrupt ESTABLISHMENT POLITICS indeed!
    http://www.back2stonewall.com/2014/09/hrc-prez-chad-giffins-2013-salary-507000-00-stealing-credit-rewriting-history-pays-well.html

    As a Trans woman, I’m still feeling the Bern! And I am not even American! Bernie is the type of ideal honest and compassionate politician every country deserves and need!

    Planned parenthood and HRC are indeed part of the establishment, but only **in the sense** that they are tied to establishment politics and they feel obligated to endorse establishment politicians. Hillary and her campaign (including the executives in planned parenthood and HRC) are purposely taking what Bernie said out of context to attack him disingeneously, as they always do.

  85. baruchzed

    January 21, 2016 at 12:19 pm

    No more donations for the HRC.

  86. FlatironMike Weyand

    January 21, 2016 at 1:26 pm

    As it was coined on GayUSA, it’s The Establishment Endorsing the Establishment. Hilliary is frantic to stop Bernie as she’s way afraid of another run into the mud as she had in 2008.

  87. Notgonnatellya seefirstname

    January 21, 2016 at 5:45 pm

  88. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:41 pm

    As a gay man, I believe that much of the gay community is completely out of touch with the Gay community and with their masculinity and with reality anymore. They have always been and always shall be their OWN worst nightmares and enemies! Silly, flippant, farcical, fake, arrogant, weak, and stupid, pantomimic queens like RuPaul, and her ridiculous male-destroying show, all seem to be on a mission to put a c u n t, bra and fresh panties on every man on earth! May God destroy it all!

    Especially gay men anymore; most of whom seem hell bent on giving all of their power away as men to WOE-men, allowing them to tell them what to do, beat on them, manipulate, control, dominate, harass, degrade, kill, and dis-empower them. They dress like woe-men, act like them, behave like them, talk like them, etc. It’s all so goddamned satanic and weird! It’s sucks and it’s insane! Stupid, worthless queens! WAKE UP! Claim your masculinity back before it’s too late. You can be gay and masculine without chopping your dyck off all the damned time! Just because we’re gay doesn’t mean that you always have to act like disgusting cunts, so grow up!

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad bitch who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly queers won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your power.

    You’ll wake up in HELL!!!!!

  89. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:43 pm

    As a gay man, I believe that much of the gay community is completely out of touch with the Gay community and with their masculinity and with reality anymore. They have always been and always shall be their OWN worst nightmares and enemies! Silly, flippant, farcical, fake, arrogant, weak, and stupid, pantomimic queens like RuPaul, and her ridiculous male-destroying show, all seem to be on a mission to put a c u n t, bra and fresh panties on every man on the face of the earth! May God destroy it all!

    Especially gay men anymore; most of whom seem hell bent on giving all of their power away as men to WOE-men, allowing them to tell them what to do, beat on them, manipulate, control, dominate, harass, degrade, kill, and dis-empower them. They dress like woe-men, act like them, behave like them, talk like them, etc. It’s all so goddamned satanic and weird! It’s sucks and it’s insane! Stupid, worthless queens! WAKE UP! Claim your masculinity back before it’s too late. You can be gay and masculine without chopping your d y c k off all the damned time! Just because we’re gay doesn’t mean that you always have to act like disgusting c u n t s, so grow up!

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad b i t ch who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly q u e e rs won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your power.

    You’ll wake up in HELL!!!!!

  90. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:43 pm

    As a gay man, I believe that much of the gay community is completely out of touch with the Gay community and with their masculinity and with reality anymore. They have always been and always shall be their OWN worst nightmares and enemies! Silly, flippant, farcical, fake, arrogant, weak, and stupid, pantomimic queens like RuPaul, and her ridiculous male-destroying show, all seem to be on a mission to put a c u n t, bra and fresh panties on every man on the face of the earth! May God destroy it all!

    Especially gay men anymore; most of whom seem hell bent on giving all of their power away as men to WOE-men, allowing them to tell them what to do, beat on them, manipulate, control, dominate, harass, degrade, kill, and dis-empower them. They dress like woe-men, act like them, behave like them, talk like them, etc. It’s all so goddamned satanic and weird! It’s sucks and it’s insane! Stupid, worthless queens! WAKE UP! Claim your masculinity back before it’s too late. You can be gay and masculine without chopping your d y c k off all the damned time! Just because we’re gay doesn’t mean that you always have to act like disgusting c u n t s, so grow up!

  91. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:45 pm

    As a gay man, I believe that much of the gay community is completely out of touch with the Gay community and with their masculinity and with reality anymore. They have always been and always shall be their OWN worst nightmares and enemies! Silly, flippant, farcical, fake, arrogant, weak, and stupid, pantomimic queens like RuPaul, and her ridiculous male-destroying show, all seem to be on a mission to put a c u n t, bra and fresh panties on every man on the face of the earth! May God destroy it all!

    Especially gay men anymore; most of whom seem h e l l bent on giving all of their power away as men to WOE-men, allowing them to tell them what to do, beat on them, manipulate, control, dominate, harass, degrade, kill, and dis-empower them. They dress like woe-men, act like them, behave like them, talk like them, etc. It’s all so g o d d a m n e d satanic and weird! It’s s u c k s and it’s insane! Stupid, worthless queens! WAKE UP! Claim your masculinity back before it’s too late. You can be gay and masculine without chopping your d y c k off all the damned time! Just because we’re gay doesn’t mean that you always have to act like disgusting c u n t s, so grow up!

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad b i t c h who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us as gay people and gay men right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly q u e e r s are going to far as usually; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, loud, silly, sexual and self-destructive guns blazing! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wash-away freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    You’ll wake up in HELL!!!!!

  92. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:48 pm

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad b i t c h who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly q u e e r s are going to far as usually; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, full guns blazing! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wash-away freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    You’ll wake up in HELL!!!!!

  93. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:50 pm

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad b i t c h who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us as gay people and gay men right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly q u e e r s are going to far as usually; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, loud, silly, sexual and self-destructive guns blazing! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wash-away freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    You’ll wake up in HELL!!!!!

  94. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:51 pm

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad b i t c h who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us as gay people and gay men right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly q u e e r s are going to far as usually; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, loud, silly, s e x u a l and self-destructive guns ablaze and blazing, ready to cut anyone down who doesn’t agree with your insane behaviors and licentious lifestyle! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wash-away freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    You’ll wake up in HELL!!!!!

  95. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:52 pm

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad b y t c h who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us as gay people and gay men right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly q u e e r s are going to far as usually; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, loud, silly, s e x u a l and self-destructive guns ablaze and blazing, ready to cut anyone down who doesn’t agree with your insane behaviors and licentious lifestyle! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wash-away freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    You’ll wake up in HELL!!!!!

  96. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:53 pm

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad b**ch who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us as gay people and gay men right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly queens are going to far as usually; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, loud, silly, s e x u a l and self-destructive guns ablaze and blazing, ready to cut anyone down who doesn’t agree with your insane behaviors and licentious lifestyle! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wash-away freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    Wake the hell up! Before you wake up in HELL!!!!!

  97. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:55 pm

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad b**ch who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us as gay people and gay men right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly queens are going to far as usually; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, loud, silly, s e x u a l and self-destructive guns ablaze and blazing, ready to cut anyone down who doesn’t agree with your insane behaviors and licentious lifestyle! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wash-away freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    Wake the hell up! Before you wake up in H E L L!!!!!

  98. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:56 pm

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad witch who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us as gay people and gay men right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly queens are going to far as usually; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, loud, silly, s e x u a l and self-destructive guns ablaze and blazing, ready to cut anyone down who doesn’t agree with your insane behaviors and licentious lifestyle! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wash-away freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    Wake the hell up! Before you wake up in H E L L!!!!!

  99. JON B.

    January 21, 2016 at 7:56 pm

    As a gay man, I believe that much of the gay community is completely out of touch with the Gay community and with their masculinity and with reality anymore. They have always been and always shall be their OWN worst nightmares and enemies! Silly, flippant, farcical, fake, HATEFUL, nasty, disgusting, arrogant, weak, and stupid, pantomimic queens like RuPaul, and her ridiculous male-destroying show, all seem to be on a mission to put a c u n t, bra and fresh panties on every man on the face of the earth! May God destroy it all!

    Especially gay men anymore; most of whom seem h e l l bent on giving all of their power away as men to WOE-men, allowing them to tell them what to do, beat on them, manipulate, control, dominate, harass, degrade, kill, and dis-empower them. They dress like woe-men, act like them, behave like them, talk like them, etc. It’s all so g o d d a m n e d satanic and weird! It s u c k s and it’s insane! Stupid, worthless queens! WAKE UP! Claim your masculinity back before it’s too late. You can be gay and masculine without chopping your d y c k off all the damned time! Just because we’re gay doesn’t mean that you always have to act like disgusting c u n t s, so grow up!

    Hil-LIAR-y Clinton is a conniving, two-faced, liar; she is completely incapable of running the nation because she has never even been capable of running her own life, her previous professions as both the Secretary of State, as well as a lawyer back in the early to middle 70’s, when she was fired for unethical behavior, much less to her ridiculous, farcical marriage to that womanizer, Bill. She is a malehating, powermad witch who will stop at nothing and step on and over anyone who gets in her way to get what she wants.

    She never even supported us (GLBTQ Community) until just the last couple of years. She will say anything, do anything, and be anything like Janus, the two headed demon that she, as a Freemason, worships in secret, in order to finally achieve and get what she wants. She’s a straight demon; a lying, crass char.

    Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, is all man and has supported us as gay people and gay men right from the very beginning. Again, wake up, fools! You stupid silly queens are going too far as usual; no self-control, no self-restraint, no self-accountability. Always full speed ahead, loud, silly, s e x u a l and self-destructive guns ablaze and blazing, ready to cut anyone down who doesn’t agree with your insane behaviors and licentious lifestyle! You won’t get it until one day soon you wake up and you find yourselves without anymore of your wishy-washy-washed-away silliness, social freedoms and self-emaciated power.

    Wake the h e l l up! Before you wake up in H E L L!!!!!

  100. Angry Boss

    January 24, 2016 at 5:25 am

    Bernie Sanders is an affront to America. With tens of millions dead at the hands of Socialism, how can anyone think that those ideas are good? If you want to be a Democrat (welfare statist), that’s fine–and we can debate every possible issue. But, if you’re a Socialist, kindly move to North Korea where you belong. The LGBT community needs to get its collective head out of the sand: just because a political group is willing to go along with legislation does NOT mean that the political party doing so is “right” to be supported.

  101. Angry Boss

    January 24, 2016 at 5:31 am

    I get a headache every time Bernie Sanders goes on about workers’ rights. There are no “workers’ rights”– there are only individual rights. I, as an individual, have chosen to accept or decline the working wages and conditions offered to me by employers willing to employ me. The supporters of Bernie Sanders (and most Democrats, for that matter) favor mob rule and intimidation over reasoned debate and winning people over voluntarily. The vitriol used by Liberals in this country is embarrassing. But, what’s worse is when they simply “legislate the solution” while believing that will be all they need to do. It’s one thing to pass a law– its something else to convince the people that its a GOOD law.

    Some laws/decisions need to be passed despite public “opposition”– such as same-sex marriage. But, that is on the grounds of Constitutional consistency, i.e., legislation to right the wrong of unequal treatment before the Law. Most of the Liberal legislative agenda is about expropriation from people Liberals don’t like in order to give more to those who will vote for them. Enough already!

  102. Angry Boss

    January 24, 2016 at 5:45 am

    As for the HRC, I can’t support them because they go WAY too far.

  103. pts411

    February 17, 2016 at 9:32 pm

    Although I have been a long time supporter of both Hillary and the Human Rights Campaign, I agree that the endorsement was a mistake (especially when the explanation given was so general and unspecific). As members of the same political party, democrats don’t need to be creating unnecessary divisions between one another when it comes to LGBT equality. While Sanders certainly championed LGBT rights as a senator, the same can also be said about Hillary’s term as Secretary of State. What really matters though is they are both committed to continuing the fight for LGBT equality in the years to come if elected into office. Let’s not forget the real enemy of LGBT equality are the nominees who want to appoint SCOTUS justices which will reverse same-sex marriage and those who will pass every executive order they can to bring the US back to the stone ages of gay rights when homosexuals weren’t allowed to serve openly in the military or adopt children. With the dangerous, homophobic rhetoric the GOP can’t seem to stop spewing out in the media, democrats need to stick together, not fall apart.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

homepage news

Equality Act, contorted as a danger by anti-LGBTQ forces, is all but dead

No political willpower to force vote or reach a compromise

Published

on

Despite having President Biden in the White House and Democratic majorities in both chambers of Congress, efforts to update federal civil rights laws to strengthen the prohibition on discrimination against LGBTQ people by passing the Equality Act are all but dead as opponents of the measure have contorted it beyond recognition.

Political willpower is lacking to find a compromise that would be acceptable to enough Republican senators to end a filibuster on the bill — a tall order in any event — nor is there the willpower to force a vote on the Equality Act as opponents stoke fears about transgender kids in sports and not even unanimity in the Democratic caucus in favor of the bill is present, stakeholders who spoke to the Blade on condition of anonymity said.

In fact, there are no imminent plans to hold a vote on the legislation even though Pride month is days away, which would be an opportune time for Congress to demonstrate solidarity with the LGBTQ community by holding a vote on the legislation.

If the Equality Act were to come up for a Senate vote in the next month, it would not have the support to pass. Continued assurances that bipartisan talks are continuing on the legislation have yielded no evidence of additional support, let alone the 10 Republicans needed to end a filibuster.

“I haven’t really heard an update either way, which is usually not good,” one Democratic insider said. “My understanding is that our side was entrenched in a no-compromise mindset and with [Sen. Joe] Manchin saying he didn’t like the bill, it doomed it this Congress. And the bullying of hundreds of trans athletes derailed our message and our arguments of why it was broadly needed.”

The only thing keeping the final nail from being hammered into the Equality Act’s coffin is the unwillingness of its supporters to admit defeat. Other stakeholders who spoke to the Blade continued to assert bipartisan talks are ongoing, strongly pushing back on any conclusion the legislation is dead.

Alphonso David, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said the Equality Act is “alive and well,” citing widespread public support he said includes “the majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents and a growing number of communities across the country engaging and mobilizing every day in support of the legislation.”

“They understand the urgent need to pass this bill and stand up for LGBTQ people across our country,” David added. “As we engage with elected officials, we have confidence that Congress will listen to the voices of their constituents and continue fighting for the Equality Act through the lengthy legislative process.  We will also continue our unprecedented campaign to grow the already-high public support for a popular bill that will save lives and make our country fairer and more equal for all. We will not stop until the Equality Act is passed.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), chief sponsor of the Equality Act in the Senate, also signaled through a spokesperson work continues on the legislation, refusing to give up on expectations the legislation would soon become law.

“Sen. Merkley and his staff are in active discussions with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to try to get this done,” McLennan said. “We definitely see it as a key priority that we expect to become law.”

A spokesperson Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who had promised to force a vote on the Equality Act in the Senate on the day the U.S. House approved it earlier this year, pointed to a March 25 “Dear Colleague” letter in which he identified the Equality Act as one of several bills he’d bring up for a vote.

Despite any assurances, the hold up on the bill is apparent. Although the U.S. House approved the legislation earlier this year, the Senate Judiciary Committee hasn’t even reported out the bill yet to the floor in the aftermath of the first-ever Senate hearing on the bill in March. A Senate Judiciary Committee Democratic aide, however, disputed that inaction as evidence the Equality Act is dead in its tracks: “Bipartisan efforts on a path forward are ongoing.”

Democrats are quick to blame Republicans for inaction on the Equality Act, but with Manchin withholding his support for the legislation they can’t even count on the entirety of their caucus to vote “yes” if it came to the floor. Progressives continue to advocate an end to the filibuster to advance legislation Biden has promised as part of his agenda, but even if they were to overcome headwinds and dismantle the institution needing 60 votes to advance legislation, the Equality Act would likely not have majority support to win approval in the Senate with a 50-50 party split.

The office of Manchin, who has previously said he couldn’t support the Equality Act over concerns about public schools having to implement the transgender protections applying to sports and bathrooms, hasn’t responded to multiple requests this year from the Blade on the legislation and didn’t respond to a request to comment for this article.

Meanwhile, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who declined to co-sponsor the Equality Act this year after having signed onto the legislation in the previous Congress, insisted through a spokesperson talks are still happening across the aisle despite the appearances the legislation is dead.

“There continues to be bipartisan support for passing a law that protects the civil rights of Americans, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity,” said Annie Clark, a Collins spokesperson. “The Equality Act was a starting point for negotiations, and in its current form, it cannot pass. That’s why there are ongoing discussions among senators and stakeholders about a path forward.”

Let’s face it: Anti-LGBTQ forces have railroaded the debate by making the Equality Act about an end to women’s sports by allowing transgender athletes and danger to women in sex-segregated places like bathrooms and prisons. That doesn’t even get into resolving the issue on drawing the line between civil rights for LGBTQ people and religious freedom, which continues to be litigated in the courts as the U.S. Supreme Court is expected any day now to issue a ruling in Fulton v. City of Philadelphia to determine if foster care agencies can reject same-sex couples over religious objections.

For transgender Americans, who continue to report discrimination and violence at high rates, the absence of the Equality Act may be most keenly felt.

Mara Keisling, outgoing executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, disputed any notion the Equality Act is dead and insisted the legislation is “very much alive.”

“We remain optimistic despite misinformation from the opposition,” Keisling said. “NCTE and our movement partners are still working fruitfully on the Equality Act with senators. In fact, we are gaining momentum with all the field organizing we’re doing, like phone banking constituents to call their senators. Legislating takes time. Nothing ever gets through Congress quickly. We expect to see a vote during this Congress, and we are hopeful we can win.”

But one Democratic source said calls to members of Congress against the Equality Act, apparently coordinated by groups like the Heritage Foundation, have has outnumbered calls in favor of it by a substantial margin, with a particular emphasis on Manchin.

No stories are present in the media about same-sex couples being kicked out of a restaurant for holding hands or transgender people for using the restroom consistent with their gender identity, which would be perfectly legal in 25 states thanks to the patchwork of civil rights laws throughout the United States and inadequate protections under federal law.

Tyler Deaton, senior adviser for the American Unity Fund, which has bolstered the Republican-led Fairness for All Act as an alternative to the Equality Act, said he continues to believe the votes are present for a compromise form of the bill.

“I know for a fact there is a supermajority level of support in the Senate for a version of the Equality Act that is fully protective of both LGBTQ civil rights and religious freedom,” Deaton said. “There is interest on both sides of the aisle in getting something done this Congress.”

Deaton, however, didn’t respond to a follow-up inquiry on what evidence exists of agreeing on this compromise.

Biden has already missed the goal he campaigned on in the 2020 election to sign the Equality Act into law within his first 100 days in office. Although Biden renewed his call to pass the legislation in his speech to Congress last month, as things stand now that appears to be a goal he won’t realize for the remainder of this Congress.

Nor has the Biden administration made the Equality Act an issue for top officials within the administration as it pushes for an infrastructure package as a top priority. One Democratic insider said Louisa Terrell, legislative affairs director for the White House, delegated work on the Equality Act to a deputy as opposed to handling it herself.

To be sure, Biden has demonstrated support for the LGBTQ community through executive action at an unprecedented rate, signing an executive order on day one ordering federal agencies to implement the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year in Bostock v. Clayton County to the fullest extent possible and dismantling former President Trump’s transgender military ban. Biden also made historic LGBTQ appointments with the confirmation of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Rachel Levine as assistant secretary of health.

A White House spokesperson insisted Biden’s team across the board remains committed to the Equality Act, pointing to his remarks to Congress.

“President Biden has urged Congress to get the Equality Act to his desk so he can sign it into law and provide long overdue civil rights protections to LGBTQ+ Americans, and he remains committed to seeing this legislation passed as quickly as possible,” the spokesperson said. “The White House and its entire legislative team remains in ongoing and close coordination with organizations, leaders, members of Congress, including the Equality Caucus, and staff to ensure we are working across the aisle to push the Equality Act forward.”

But at least in the near-term, that progress will fall short of fulfilling the promise of updating federal civil rights law with the Equality Act, which will mean LGBTQ people won’t be able to rely on those protections when faced with discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity.

Continue Reading

homepage news

D.C. bill to ban LGBTQ panic defense delayed by Capitol security

Delivery of bill to Congress was held up due to protocols related to Jan. 6 riots

Published

on

New fencing around the Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection prevented some D.C. bills from being delivered to the Hill for a required congressional review. (Blade file photo by Michael K. Lavers)

A bill approved unanimously last December by the D.C. Council to ban the so-called LGBTQ panic defense has been delayed from taking effect as a city law because the fence installed around the U.S. Capitol following the Jan. 6 insurrection prevented the law from being delivered to Congress.

According to Eric Salmi, communications director for D.C. Council member Charles Allen (D-Ward 6), who guided the bill through the Council’s legislative process, all bills approved by the Council and signed by the D.C. mayor must be hand-delivered to Congress for a required congressional review.

“What happened was when the Capitol fence went up after the January insurrection, it created an issue where we physically could not deliver laws to Congress per the congressional review period,” Salmi told the Washington Blade.

Among the bills that could not immediately be delivered to Congress was the Bella Evangelista and Tony Hunter Panic Defense Prohibition and Hate Crimes Response Amendment Act of 2020, which was approved by the Council on a second and final vote on Dec. 15.

Between the time the bill was signed by Mayor Muriel Bowser and published in the D.C. Register under procedural requirements for all bills, it was not ready to be transmitted to Congress until Feb. 16, the Council’s legislative record for the bill shows.

Salmi said the impasse in delivering the bill to Congress due to the security fence prevented the bill from reaching Congress on that date and prevented the mandatory 60-day congressional review period for this bill from beginning at that time. He noted that most bills require a 30 legislative day review by Congress.

But the Evangelista-Hunter bill, named after a transgender woman and a gay man who died in violent attacks by perpetrators who attempted to use the trans and gay panic defense, includes a law enforcement related provision that under the city’s Home Rule Charter passed by Congress in the early 1970s requires a 60-day congressional review.

“There is a chance it goes into effect any day now, just given the timeline is close to being up,” Salmi said on Tuesday. “I don’t know the exact date it was delivered, but I do know the countdown is on,” said Salmi, who added, “I would expect any day now it should go into effect and there’s nothing stopping it other than an insurrection in January.”

If the delivery to Congress had not been delayed, the D.C. Council’s legislative office estimated the congressional review would have been completed by May 12.

A congressional source who spoke on condition of being identified only as a senior Democratic aide, said the holdup of D.C. bills because of the Capitol fence has been corrected.

“The House found an immediate workaround, when this issue first arose after the Jan. 6 insurrection,” the aide said.

“This is yet another reason why D.C. Council bills should not be subject to a congressional review period and why we need to grant D.C. statehood,” the aide said.

The aide added that while no disapproval resolution had been introduced in Congress to overturn the D.C. Evangelista-Hunter bill, House Democrats would have defeated such a resolution.

“House Democrats support D.C. home rule, statehood, and LGBTQ rights,” said the aide.

LGBTQ rights advocates have argued that a ban on using a gay or transgender panic defense in criminal trials is needed to prevent defense attorneys from inappropriately asking juries to find that a victim’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression is to blame for a defendant’s criminal act, including murder.

Some attorneys have argued that their clients “panicked” after discovering the person against whom they committed a violent crime was gay or transgender, prompting them to act in a way they believed to be a form of self-defense.

In addition to its provision banning the LGBTQ panic defense, the Evangelista-Hunter bill includes a separate provision that strengthens the city’s existing hate crimes law by clarifying that hatred need not be the sole motivating factor for an underlying crime such as assault, murder, or threats to be prosecuted as a hate crime.

LGBTQ supportive prosecutors have said the clarification was needed because it is often difficult to prove to a jury that hatred is the only motive behind a violent crime. The prosecutors noted that juries have found defendants not guilty of committing a hate crime on grounds that they believed other motives were involved in a particular crime after defense lawyers argued that the law required “hate” to be the only motive in order to find someone guilty of a hate crime.

Salmi noted that while the hate crime clarification and panic defense prohibition provisions of the Evangelista-Hunter bill will become law as soon as the congressional review is completed, yet another provision in the bill will not become law after the congressional review because there are insufficient funds in the D.C. budget to cover the costs of implementing the provision.

The provision gives the D.C. Office of Human Rights and the Office of the D.C. Attorney General authority to investigate hate related discrimination at places of public accommodation. Salmi said the provision expands protections against discrimination to include web-based retailers or online delivery services that are not physically located in D.C.

“That is subject to appropriations,” Salmi said. “And until it is funded in the upcoming budget it cannot be legally enforced.”

He said that at Council member Allen’s request, the Council added language to the bill that ensures that all other provisions of the legislation that do not require additional funding – including the ban on use of the LGBTQ panic defense and the provision clarifying that hatred doesn’t have to be the sole motive for a hate crime – will take effect as soon as the congressional approval process is completed.

Continue Reading

homepage news

D.C. man charged with 2020 anti-gay death threat rearrested

Defendant implicated in three anti-LGBTQ incidents since 2011

Published

on

shooting, DC Eagle, assault, hate crime, anti-gay attack, police discrimination, sex police, Sisson, gay news, Washington Blade

A D.C. man arrested in August 2020 for allegedly threatening to kill a gay man outside the victim’s apartment in the city’s Adams Morgan neighborhood and who was released while awaiting trial was arrested again two weeks ago for allegedly threatening to kill another man in an unrelated incident.

D.C. Superior Court records show that Jalal Malki, who was 37 at the time of his 2020 arrest on a charge of bias-related attempts to do bodily harm against the gay man, was charged on May 4, 2021 with unlawful entry, simple assault, threats to kidnap and injure a person, and attempted possession of a prohibited weapon against the owner of a vacant house at 4412 Georgia Ave., N.W.

Court charging documents state that Malki was allegedly staying at the house without permission as a squatter. An arrest affidavit filed in court by D.C. police says Malki allegedly threatened to kill the man who owns the house shortly after the man arrived at the house while Malki was inside.

According to the affidavit, Malki walked up to the owner of the house while the owner was sitting in his car after having called police and told him, “If you come back here, I’m going to kill you.” While making that threat Malki displayed what appeared to be a gun in his waistband, but which was later found to be a toy gun, the affidavit says.

Malki then walked back inside the house minutes before police arrived and arrested him. Court records show that similar to the court proceedings following his 2020 arrest for threatening the gay man, a judge in the latest case ordered Malki released while awaiting trial. In both cases, the judge ordered him to stay away from the two men he allegedly threatened to kill.

An arrest affidavit filed by D.C. police in the 2020 case states that Malki allegedly made the threats inside an apartment building where the victim lived on the 2300 block of Champlain Street, N.W. It says Malki was living in a nearby building but often visited the building where the victim lived.

“Victim 1 continued to state during an interview that it was not the first time that Defendant 1 had made threats to him, but this time Defendant 1 stated that if he caught him outside, he would ‘fucking kill him.’” the affidavit says. It quotes the victim as saying during this time Malki repeatedly called the victim a “fucking faggot.”

The affidavit, prepared by the arresting officers, says that after the officers arrested Malki and were leading him to a police transport vehicle to be booked for the arrest, he expressed an “excited utterance” that he was “in disbelief that officers sided with the ‘fucking faggot.’”

Court records show that Malki is scheduled to appear in court on June 4 for a status hearing for both the 2020 arrest and the arrest two weeks ago for allegedly threatening to kill the owner of the house in which police say he was illegally squatting.

Superior Court records show that Malki had been arrested three times between 2011 and 2015 in cases unrelated to the 2021 and 2020 cases for allegedly also making threats of violence against people. Two of the cases appear to be LGBTQ related, but prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office did not list the cases as hate crimes.

In the first of the three cases, filed in July 2011, Malki allegedly shoved a man inside Dupont Circle and threatened to kill him after asking the man why he was wearing a purple shirt.

“Victim 1 believes the assault occurred because Suspect 1 believes Victim 1 is a homosexual,” the police arrest affidavit says.

Court records show prosecutors charged Malki with simple assault and threats to do bodily harm in the case. But the court records show that on Sept. 13, 2011, D.C. Superior Court Judge Stephen F. Eilperin found Malki not guilty on both charges following a non-jury trial.

The online court records do not state why the judge rendered a not guilty verdict. With the courthouse currently closed to the public and the press due to COVID-related restrictions, the Washington Blade couldn’t immediately obtain the records to determine the judge’s reason for the verdict.

In the second case, court records show Malki was arrested by D.C. police outside the Townhouse Tavern bar and restaurant at 1637 R St., N.W. on Nov. 7, 2012 for allegedly threatening one or more people with a knife after employees ordered Malki to leave the establishment for “disorderly behavior.”

At the time, the Townhouse Tavern was located next door to the gay nightclub Cobalt, which before going out of business two years ago, was located at the corner of 17th and R Streets, N.W.

The police arrest affidavit in the case says Malki allegedly pointed a knife in a threatening way at two of the tavern’s employees who blocked his path when he attempted to re-enter the tavern. The affidavit says he was initially charged by D.C. police with assault with a dangerous weapon – knife. Court records, however, show that prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office lowered the charges to two counts of simple assault. The records show that on Jan. 15, 2013, Malki pleaded guilty to the two charges as part of a plea bargain arrangement.

The records show that Judge Marissa Demeo on that same day issued a sentence of 30 days for each of the two charges but suspended all 30 days for both counts. She then sentenced Malki to one year of supervised probation for both charges and ordered that he undergo alcohol and drug testing and undergo treatment if appropriate.

In the third case prior to the 2020 and 2021 cases, court records show Malki was arrested outside the Cobalt gay nightclub on March 14, 2015 on multiple counts of simple assault, attempted assault with a dangerous weapon – knife, possession of a prohibited weapon – knife, and unlawful entry.

The arrest affidavit says an altercation started on the sidewalk outside the bar when for unknown reasons, Malki grabbed a female customer who was outside smoking and attempted to pull her toward him. When her female friend came to her aid, Malki allegedly got “aggressive” by threatening the woman and “removed what appeared to be a knife from an unknown location” and pointed it at the woman’s friend in a threatening way, the affidavit says.

It says a Cobalt employee minutes later ordered Malki to leave the area and he appeared to do so. But others noticed that he walked toward another entrance door to Cobalt and attempted to enter the establishment knowing he had been ordered not to return because of previous problems with his behavior, the affidavit says. When he attempted to push away another employee to force his way into Cobalt, Malki fell to the ground during a scuffle and other employees held him on the ground while someone else called D.C. police.

Court records show that similar to all of Malki’s arrests, a judge released him while awaiting trial and ordered him to stay away from Cobalt and all of those he was charged with threatening and assaulting.

The records show that on Sept. 18, 2015, Malki agreed to a plea bargain offer by prosecutors in which all except two of the charges – attempted possession of a prohibited weapon and simple assault – were dropped. Judge Alfred S. Irving Jr. on Oct. 2, 2015 sentenced Malki to 60 days of incarnation for each of the two charges but suspended all but five days, which he allowed Malki to serve on weekends, the court records show.

The judge ordered that the two five-day jail terms could be served concurrently, meaning just five days total would be served, according to court records. The records also show that Judge Irving sentenced Malki to one year of supervised probation for each of the two counts and ordered that he enter an alcohol treatment program and stay away from Cobalt.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts

Popular