Previous posts in this discussion:
PostIs Hillary Clinton "Golden"? (Tor Guimaraes, USA, 04/20/16 7:35 pm)
Massoud Malek (19 April) clearly illustrated why I will never vote for Ms. Clinton:
1. She is beholden to special interests contradictory to the long-term well being of the American people. By her lack of vision, her "play dumb" corruption, and lack of integrity, she has hurt our nation and will continue to do so. Donald Trump may turn out to be worse, but presently he at least offers new hope.
2. She is a master of Democratic Party establishment politics with all its corruption, uninspiring politics based on cheap, superficial populism, whereby only the minorities' establishment leaders have benefited and will continue to do so.
Bernie Sanders has warned us that he alone will not be able to change things for the better, but with direct popular support he can force our corrupt Congress, the entire government, and American society to change for the better. To me it is worth a try; it is my best hope.
Sanders said on Tuesday: "Today in New York state--if you can believe this--about 27 percent of the eligible voters in that state are unable to participate in the Democratic or Republican primaries because they have chosen to list themselves as independents. That's wrong. Almost 3 million people in that state cannot vote today. And that has got to change in future elections."
Contrary to what John Eipper commented, Ms. Clinton is not golden in NY; she is some shade of brown.
JE comments: By "golden" I met victorious in the April 19th primary, nothing more.
I was unaware that New York requires voters to commit to a party prior to the primary date. In Michigan, you simply request the party ballot of your choice when you show up to vote.