The far left, and I doubt there really is one in the US, wouldn't vote Democrat anyway. The Democrats are centre-right with a social liberal stance, like a great many regular Americans are. Long standing Democrats most likely will vote for Clinton, while the 'Bernouts', who are all independents by another name, will either not vote, vote for Jill Stein or throw away their vote by writing Sanders in.

As a Democrat-leaning centrist who happens to also have wanted Bernie to run as a Dem this year anyway, I will most likely vote for Clinton as it will come down to her vs Trump. If the GOP were to put up a moderate centrist who had sensible ideas on social issues, I could just as easily be swayed to vote for them as well.

The thing is what you describe as far left is actually anything left of centre, it's just that the Overton window has been shifted so far to the right in the US (and the UK now with New Labour) that anything approaching the middle is seen as radical. Look at how Corbyn who is essentially an old school socialist is seen as crazy.

Anyway, the flaw with Gorgeous George and Sarandon's thinking is the idea that Trump would never get anything implemented. I don't think that's a risk that you could ever take. That plus the idea that if we went to the crazy right with Trump, then there would be a push to the left to counter. I don't buy that either, it didn't happen with Reagan, it just created a new normal.

Personally, I have trouble supporting Clinton and probably wouldn't vote for her if I could, but I live in a red state anyway, so it doesn't matter what I think.

I agree that Sanders' support is generally not far left, or even that left of centre anyway. Certainly Sanders, for all his talk about 'democratic socialism' isn't that left of centre in broad terms, just as you say, in comparison to what is now considered to be the centre.

Quite a bit of his support does come from independents who really only registered Democrat because their state required them to (though mine, and others didn't). These aren't people who are going to get behind another candidate just because they are the Democratic nomination.

Trump almost certainly will find common ground with a Republican congress - repealing the ACA and 'The Wall' being two such items, not to mention he will be able to nominate conservative Supreme Court Judges.

It does matter for me, because I live in a blue state. Or at least it was blue in the last two elections, though we do have a Republican governor.

I'm not going to be fantastically enthusiastic about it, but I will vote for her if it comes to it. I wasn't particularly enthused to vote for Obama either, being honest, but he was better than Romney.

There seems to be a lot of discussion that supposedly Red states may be in play this year just because of Trump (and maybe to a lesser extent Blue states due to Hillary). Arizona is being held up as one example. McCain has a strong primary challenger and the Democrats have a strong Senate candidate too. Anecdotally I am seeing far more Hillary bumper stickers than Trump ones locally.

I wouldn't dismiss the value of your vote so easily.

You're overrating many people's thought process, it's a 2 party system so for most it's either the GOP or Dems. My point is, quite a number of people would've gone ahead and done as you say you're going to do - voted for Clinton because she's the closest candidate to their ideals. The emergence of Sanders, however, has robbed her of these people and any chance they might still have voted Dem has been destroyed by the Dem establishment and this shady supper delegate system that makes an absolute mockery of a party that calls itself democratic

I mean, it's anecdotal, but I have read a lot of accounts on various places online where there are a number of Sanders supporters who are flat out refusing to vote for Hillary. Some say they will vote for Trump, and a few are claiming they will write Sanders in.

Clinton is being vilified right now, and while she isn't perfect, I don't think she's really as bad as she's being made out to be (for the record, while I find him objectionable, I also don't think Trump is really as bad as he is being made out to be either). There are a lot of Republicans who think she should be tried as a war criminal, yet seem perfectly happy with Bush and Cheney. Right or wrong, you can't have it both ways.

I'll (mostly grudgingly) vote for Clinton because, as stated, she's closest to my ideals and hyperbole aside, Trump is the kind of unknown quantity that I'm not prepared to trust with running the country.

It's not new. Clinton had her PUMAs in 2008. Honestly I still don't understand all the fuss about Sanders supporters not automatically falling in line.

On the Republican side everyone is concerned that no-one is calling out Trump for his statements.

Is there not an element of cognitive dissonance about this?

For me, it's more a question of are they more willing to see 4-8 years of Trump as Presdent, rather than someone who will at least work to preserve what Obama was able to accomplish, just to prove a point?

It's not so much about falling in line for me, because I don't have a party affiliation, though I do feel Clinton's a better fit, in broad terms. In reality, I'd prefer to be able to vote for Sanders, but realistically, that won't be happening.

I don't disagree, but you can't blame voters for not wanting to vote for a candidate. The onus is on the candidate to make the voters want to vote for them. Until that happens Clinton isn't going to get a subset of Sanders supporters.

"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos ..."

Anyway, no I don't blame them, they can vote for whoever they want obviously. I am just surprised that someone who supports Sanders is willing to take a chance that the election could be won by the man who is the absolute antithesis of everything Sanders stands for.

I still think Clinton will win, but it won't be by much, that's for sure.

Sadly this is the age where people work out who to vote for by taking a quiz on Facebook or Buzzfeed.

Don't remind me ...

She is way ahead in the popular vote, so I really don't see how you can label the super delegate system - obnoxious though it is - as the cause of her getting the nomination.

Edit: here's the popular vote totals (not including today's primaries, of course):

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...ote_count.html

Cthulhu 2016!

I don't agree with the reasoning that Trump would be a better option than Clinton, but if you hate establishment politics and that's why you support Sanders, then I can see why you would be drawn to Trump.

I really don't know how this election is going to go, it's been so unpredictable so far, I don't see that changing now.

First Lindsey Graham, now Mark Kirk. Who's next to back way slowly making no sudden moves?

Sen. Mark Kirk withdraws support for Trump | Chicago Sun-Times