I see all these polls with Senator Clinton leading by a wide margin

[burythehatchet]

I dislike her intensely.

But given these poll results it has become abundantly clear that I have no choice but to vote for her.

Resistance is futile.

[againes654]

1. You don't have to vote for her in the primaries

[burythehatchet]

2. I won't be voting for her under any circumstances.

[aquart]

3. Thank you for your concern.

Are you sure you're in the right place?

[ThomCat]

13. Thankfully, the democratic party is far more

than just hillary worshippers. And even if she wins, there will be those of us who don't blindly worship her. We'll still be keeping a close eye on her.

You are free to wear your blinders if you like though.

[burythehatchet]

17. Let me tee one up for you

Where should I go? :shrug:

[againes654]

8. Well I am with you on that

saying that around here will get you shot!!!!:hide:

We have to rally around the #2 candidate to keep HRC from getting the nomination. Then we won't have to hear all the love Hillary threads anymore!:bounce: :applause:

[burythehatchet]

21. If you knew how much the Republicans pay me to post here

you'd understand.

[aquart]

7. In fact, you SHOULDN'T vote for her in the primaries.

If she's not your candidate. The primaries are about YOUR choice. How can we know the majority choice if the majority doesn't vote its choice?

[againes654]

9. The primaries are crap

The majority doesn't choose the candidate. By the time the primaries get to some states, the nominee is all but chosen.

[burythehatchet]

23. Therein lies the issue. Its the primaries and MSNBCNNFOX

have alreayd chosen her for me (or so they believe).

[JuniperLea]

4. Resistance is your right as an American citizen...

And you can vote your conscience in the primary, regardless.

[depakid]

5. That's EXACT what these cheap polls are desgned to do

Influence public pion rather than reflect it.

[gorekerrydreamticket]

27. Bingo! n/m

[Beaverhausen]

6. The polls in states with early primaries are what matter

Nationally, many voters in many states aren't even paying attention.

The polls is the early states like Iowa and New Hampshire are what matter. Voters there are learning a lot more about the candidates and their positions on the issues. In those states the race is much closer.

[durrrty libby]

10. You make that up all by your wittle self? awwww so original

[Bitwit1234]

11. Oh you men and your machoness.

Hate a woman running for president, what will you think of next.

[burythehatchet]

18. Best reply yet

its like you're IN MY HEAD. GET OUT!!!!!!

[smalll]

12. So wrong-headed. I see all these polls and as a Democrat, I rejoice -

Here were were after 2004 facing the most wide-open Presidential election since '52 at least. No President running for re-election, no Vice-President attempting to continue the legacy. The fields on both sides, Repub and Dem, wide open.

Would you want what the Repubs are facing? Total uncertainty in the race, no real front-runner and at least four pretenders to that honor (McCain, Giuliani, Romney, Thompson.) Why the fluidity on their side? Because THEY GOT NOBODY. Every one of their candidates is a flawed candidate, seriously flawed. Grumpy or tired old men. Mormons (the Evangelicals won't vote for them in droves.) Rudith.

But what has happened on OUR side is that one candidate continues steadily to rise in popularity, favorability, esteem, money, endorsements and organization because she has consistently been an expert campaigner, a good strategist, a fine debater, and been able more and more to win people over. The more people get to know her, the more they like her. And all this professionalism as a candidate only helps to strengthen an even more important feeling amongst the voters: she'd make a good President. On our side, we've found our winner. On their side, they're floundering towards defeat. The most wide-open campaign in ages, and suddenly, it's not looking so wide-open any more. The fog of uncertainty has given way, and a near-inevitability has emerged: the Democratic nominee is going to the White House!

And so I am glad. And to all Democrats I say, "Rejoice! She is risen!"

[ThomCat]

14. She's the least of our candidates in so many ways

and yet we should rejoice just to be taking back the office...

That's one of my big problems with so many pro-DLC democrats. All they want is to take back power for the sake of taking power, with no real goals or ideals. Once Hillary gets into office the same people will be making excuses constantly for every pro-corporate, anti-populist, business-as-usual decision she makes.

I'd much rather have a real democrat in office, who will actually have some ideals and stand by them, and do what's right instead of what's profitable.

[burythehatchet]

20. Eggzactly, Thom. The system is so broke.

[burythehatchet]

19. expert campaigner, a good strategist, a fine debater

thank you for making my point. Someday we might actually have a fucking leader.

[Labors of Hercules]

15. Resistance if futi...

GORE. :nuke:

[illinoisprogressive]

16. Over 60% are undecided and alot who have picked are soft support.

Nothing is set until right before voting and you have the choice to make sure she is not 'inevitable'. You do not have to vote for Hillary.

[robcon]

22. Where did you pull that "60% are undecided," iilinoisprogressive?

Out of your hat, or out of your posterior?

The polls show very little undecided in the Democratic Primaries. Less than 15% are 'other and undecided' in every one of the first 5 primaries, and in the national poll as well.

[MissDeeds]

24. Polls are not votes

Be patient. The dye is not yet cast.

[burythehatchet]

25. but, but I saw the polls on DU today with my own eyes.

[robcon]

26. Of course polls are not votes. Things can happen between now and January.

But the list of DUers in denial about the polls is long - trying to find some reason not to believe they're a good representation of the vote as it stands today.

btw, welcome to DU, MissDeeds!