Sanders supporters, what are you doing for your plan b?

[TomFoolery]

I've heard something similar from a Sarah Palin supporter back in the 2008 race.  She was big on "reading between the lines" and didn't want to accept that people disliked Palin for their stated reasons for disliking her.  Apparently, she wasn't psychologically comfortable with the answers she got and decided to invent new ones, ones that coincidentally made Palin look good and her detractors look bad.  She was serious about the "Party of Lincoln" and "Party of Jim Crow" stuff, too.  What a headcase.

I believe people don't like Hillary for their stated reasons for not liking her. I just don't know why they don't mind other politicians who also exemplify those same stated reasons. People hate her for what she did as the Secretary of State? I guarantee half of them don't even know what the Secretary of State does or who the current one is. Being married to Bill I think is an interesting argument, because I've heard people rail about things that he did when talking about her, and then go on to say, well, they're the same person. So in that case it's less of a woman thing and simply a consequence of being married to a former president, which just so also happens to make her female.

I think it could also just be that she's the wrong person for this election. People seem very inclined to buck the status quo this go around. Had Barrack not come around in 2008 I think she might have made it. But the fact that people are falling for Trump (and even Sanders I have to admit) shows that people are tired of career politicians, and that's the best phrase I have to describe her.

[PopeyesPappy]

As far as career politicians go Bernie is actually the most experienced politician of the people still in the race for president. He has held an elected government position for more than 34 years. Kasich is close with 26. Hillary has 12 if you count her time as Sec State. Cruz only has about 4 years experience as an elected official and another 5 as the Texas solicitor general. As far as I know Trump has never held a government position.

[SGOS]

I believe people don't like Hillary for their stated reasons for not liking her. I just don't know why they don't mind other politicians who also exemplify those same stated reasons.

This is such a common idiosyncrasy in the behavior of voters that the psychological dynamic should be given a name of it's own.

[Hydra009]

I think it could also just be that she's the wrong person for this election. People seem very inclined to buck the status quo this go around. Had Barrack not come around in 2008 I think she might have made it.

If Obama hadn't run in 2008, she'd have been a shoe-in for sure.

[TomFoolery]

This is such a common idiosyncrasy in the behavior of voters that the psychological dynamic should be given a name of it's own.

I thought I already named it: the Nickelback effect. :)

[gentle_dissident]

I don't care what race or gender the president is. I just want an honest one who works for my far left wing vision. Obama has made some token gestures, but he's also pandered. I admit, I was hoping that someone who ran such a classically performed ancient campaign would be able to take the USA in MY direction by using his manufactured charm. It was a long shot, but the only one I had.

Hillary and Bill have shown me over the years that they're deceitful and counter productive to MY interests

I've always despised politicians. They're playas. Expressing this has caused people to tell me that I should just be glad I'm not in whatever other country. That attitude toward dissident has changed thanks to the internet. We now admit our concerns and dreams to each other. We're discovering that we've been fooled time and time again. We are going to find the faults of all politicians as a think tank, no matter their racial background or gender. People are more vocal about their disgust today because they are educated and liberated, and not the other way around.

Above all, I want a president who will communicate thoroughly in their OWN voice. I want the president to tell the Americans that I disagree with, that their world will change for the better. I want the president to pull out visual aids to explain well thought out plans. If we as a nation have to change course to get the results, I want the president to show us how we will overcome the stumbling block before we execute the changes as a nation. I want a president who lets the public know they're wrong and why, no matter the financial backlash by committee.

[Baruch]

Gentle-dissident ... gotta get a time machine, go back and vote for FDR.  Otherwise you better move to Canada.

[Hydra009]

Above all, I want a president who will communicate thoroughly in their OWN voice.

With that criterion, it's Sanders or Trump.

[gentle_dissident]

you better move to Canada.

My family thinks about this.

[Mike Cl]

Gentle-dissident ... gotta get a time machine, go back and vote for FDR.  Otherwise you better move to Canada.

My wife and I did think about that several years ago.  Even made inquiries--but was told we were too old and Canada did not want us.

[gentle_dissident]

My wife and I did think about that several years ago.  Even made inquiries--but was told we were too old and Canada did not want us.

Looks like I'm going to have a make a difference in my own country then.

[Mike Cl]

Looks like I'm going to have a make a difference in my own country then.

Yeah--that's what we said. :)

[SGOS]

My wife and I did think about that several years ago.  Even made inquiries--but was told we were too old and Canada did not want us.

They used to award points for things like wealth, education, and other desirable assets.  Age would be a factor, too.  If you move there after retirement and start using all their services without being able to make some kind of contribution, you are a potential drain. 

I totaled my points up from their list a few years ago, and I was actually short a couple of points, at least the way I figured.  But I got the impression they might weigh in some other intangibles too.  When I was living on my boat, I wintered in Victoria BC one year, and since I was going to be there for more than 6 months, I had to go through a process that was somewhat more intense than a routine check stop at a border crossing.  They didn't talk about their point system, but they spent a couple hours rummaging around on my boat, and interviewing me.  They said if I planned to stay more than a year, they would eventually need to talk to me about applying for citizenship.

That doesn't mean I would be granted citizenship automatically, of course, but I was already retired, so I got the definite impression that age was not a non-starter.  And I always wonder how cut and dried governments are with regulations that on the surface seem very clear.  I would think that being strong in other assets would compensate for something as arbitrary as age.

Canada would be a good place to live, but I'd want to keep my us citizenship, although I can't really give a good reason for holding on to it.  Habit and familiarity, I suppose.

[Baruch]

A few places allow dual citizenship.  Israel for example.  But I differ too much from them to consider it, even if I thought it was safe to live there.  I considered Mexico, until the drug gang crime wave came.

Immigration to NZ and Australia have been popular at times, but I understand they are difficult to transfer to now.  Ireland was also welcoming, particularly for certain professions, but they are under IMF tyranny now.  And GB is under the Tory lash.

There are always places, including Canada, that will take anyone, if you have enough money ;-)  Spend $10 million for a $200,000 house in Vancouver, and they are cool with that.  The new PM might seem very liberal ... but I suspect other things are going on under the carpet.

[SGOS]

A few places allow dual citizenship.  Israel for example.  But I differ too much from them to consider it, even if I thought it was safe to live there.  I considered Mexico, until the drug gang crime wave came.

Immigration to NZ and Australia have been popular at times, but I understand they are difficult to transfer to now.  Ireland was also welcoming, particularly for certain professions, but they are under IMF tyranny now.  And GB is under the Tory lash.

There are always places, including Canada, that will take anyone, if you have enough money ;-)  Spend $10 million for a $200,000 house in Vancouver, and they are cool with that.  The new PM might seem very liberal ... but I suspect other things are going on under the carpet.

You can never control the political situation in any nation where you live.  Although I do like Canada's social politics, it wouldn't be the main reason for leaving the US.  In the US, if politics were my main concern and I couldn't leave the US, I would move to Vermont or Oregon.  But for whatever reason, I always seem to end up in Red Neckville, often smack day in the middle of conservative areas where I'm surrounded by blindly religious neighbors, because I first seek out mountainous rural areas just because of the physical surroundings which are most important in my life.  However, I make an effort to get along with my neighbors, and try to look past their narrow minded reasoning out of necessity.  They usually have redeeming qualities (most of them anyway), and as long as I steer clear of political and religious discussions, we get along.  It does reduce the opportunities to make intensely close friendships, however.

While boating in British Columbia, I've found Canadians unusually welcoming, and have found it easy to establish early friendships.  But I lack the courage (I guess) to pull up stakes and move there, because I'm still leery of first impressions.  They may not be lasting, as I have found with many people I have met in my life.  My closest friends all live 3000 miles away, some going back 45 years.  But I do well being by myself.  But my first consideration is the serenity I get from forests and wild areas with abundant wild life, and there is still that in the United States, but it's getting harder to find.