Clinton, simply, has a great deal of blood on her hands. Mainly the blood of poor, brown people. A number of left-leaning voters feel that that’s more important than her second X chromosome.

… not voting would be an act of incomparable treason.

I, for one, would vote yea on a law to make voting mandatory, with financial penalties for failing to do so, and/or financial incentive for “doing one’s civil duty”.

I am/was not saying anything about WHAT they vote on/for. Vote your political beliefs, by all means. But VOTE, dammit, VOTE ! You betray the nation you live in if you don’t. No excuses!

There. Fixed that for ya. :^)

“It sounds partisan to say, but it remains true: The fate of humanity rests to a very large degree on keeping the Republican Party out of power for as long as possible.”
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/03/antarctic-study-gop-would-trigger-catastrophe.html

“When Al Gore ran against George W. Bush in 2000, some claimed that a vote for Gore was almost the same as a vote for Bush and encouraged people to cast protest votes for Ralph Nader. Sarandon supported Nader during that election. Bush became president, and what did we get? Two incredibly young, incredibly conservative justices, John G. Roberts Jr. and Samuel A. Alito Jr., who will be on the court for decades, and two wars — in Afghanistan and Iraq — that, together, lasted over a decade.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/31/opinion/campaign-stops/bernie-or-bust-is-bonkers.html?src=me

You also got 8 years of climate inaction, tax cuts for the rich – including a temporary elimination of the estate tax – and the great recession. The Republican Party today is worse than the Party of 2000. Enabling a Republican victory or refusing to secure as big a Democratic victory as possible by not voting would be an act of incomparable stupidity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/hillary-clintons-support-_b_9579544.html

There is a distinction between jobs supported by government spending of tax dollars, which may fund work done by government employees or (usually to our detriment) by contracted for-profit corporations, and jobs supported by individuals’ economic activity. If a highway is repaired by a government employee or by a private company hired by the government, either way, it’s government spending. If I pay the same private company to pave my driveway, that’s private sector. You didn’t know that???

Though there are scholarly studies on the detrimental effects of NAFTA that Hillary can’t simply wish away, the grain of truth in what you say is that in the past, minorities and women were both discriminated against and underpaid, so wage-class black folks were much worse off than wage-class white folks. Economically, I do not accept that the gap could only have been lessened by reducing the latter to poverty wages as well. Politically, you can hardly expect that a white male who grew up in a stable, secure blue-collar household, who now sees his own family facing lifelong insecurity, will be adequately consoled by: “Your kids’ poverty will be no worse than lots of black Americans have suffered for generations, so suck it up.” It is not racist to wish that you could be sure of having a roof over your head this time next year. If you offer such a man no chance of restoring what he thinks of as a normal life, he will vote for someone who does. You might not like the outcome.

BTW, Scott Adams is wrong about some things, but he’s dead on here:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/141657128476/the-sarcasm-tell-with-an-absurd-absolute

We need people who actually know how things work to make progress on progressive goals. You seem to get your ideas from blogs that are just as inaccurate as those dedicated to denying climate change.

Of course government can create private-sector jobs. Probably half the budget consists of defense spending, and a very big part of that consists of buying stuff from private companies. You didn’t know that?

And it’s true that in the past, a White Male could support a family. But you obviously don’t know history beyond that little factoid. He could do that because women and minorities were excluded from the workforce. It had nothing to do with trade deals; all those guys defected from the Democrats when their unions (or connections) no longer provided them with a privileged position. That decline started long before NAFTA.

In those “glory days”, men worked in unsafe factories that spewed out gross levels of pollution, consumed absurd amounts of energy, and produced really crappy products like autos and appliances that fell apart after a few years.

Personally, I have no desire to return to that Golden Age. We need people in office who can move us forward, and that means wheeling and dealing and compromising, not making grandiose and impractical promises.

Show me the votes.