My personal takeaway from the DNC is that while Sanders may have come as close as he could possibly, without directly saying that he endorses Hillary, many Sanders supporters are not all-in.
What people like myself would like to see is for Hillary to be a woman of her word, and her word to the American people is that she would (a) protect the American worker, and (b) as she's showing in her commercials "Let her do all the worrying......".
This being the case then, Hillary should immediately announce that she will (a) repudiate the TPP, and (b) review existing trade agreements as this is already called for in the trade agreements and they have been an utter failure for the American workers - both lower and middle classes.
Hillary has so far, refused to do this. If she would make this a binding stipulation of her candidacy, then I think she could win over Sanders supports.
But, in looking at Hillary's history - and let's get past the lying and obstruction and just look at her history with supporting international corporations and Wall St's corporate interests - how ANYONE can sincerely believe that she is a friend to American workers is beyond me.
Why Some of Bernie Sanders’s Supporters Are Angry
Closely allied to this suspicion is a feeling that many politicians are in hock to corporations and special-interest groups—the very entities that the D.N.C. spends a lot of time cultivating in its never-ending search for campaign contributions. As well as coördinating Democratic campaigns at the local, state, and national levels, and organizing Presidential debates and Conventions, the committee acts as a drop box for big money. Under current campaign laws, the most that individuals and corporations can give to individual candidates is twenty-seven hundred dollars. But they can give much more to accounts controlled by the D.N.C. So far in the 2016 election cycle, according to OpenSecrets.org, the committee has raised $128,327,060. The top ten contributors include a big hedge fund (Renaissance Technologies), a big Wall Street firm (Blackstone Group), and a big tech company (Microsoft).
As for Kaine, I noted on Saturday some of the reasons he appealed to Clinton: he’s from a swing state; he speaks Spanish; he’s a smart, personable, center-left politician. But if you put yourself in the shoes of a typical Sanders supporter, it is easy to see Kaine as part of the problem rather than as part of the solution. He himself chaired the Democratic National Committee, from 2009 to 2011. He’s pro-free trade (despite a purported flip-flop, over the weekend, on the Trans-Pacific Partnership). As governor of Virginia, he supported the state’s anti-union “right to work” law. And he’s got a history of taking gifts from corporations and wealthy individuals, including flights on private jets and a Caribbean vacation at an exclusive villa that was designed for the late Princess Margaret.
In Virginia and Washington, even among Republicans, Kaine has a reputation as a straight shooter and a “nice guy”—the phrase that Sanders used to describe him on Sunday. He started out as a civil-rights lawyer, after all. It’s a long way, though, from defending inmates on death row to flying on a private aircraft paid for by a big pharmaceuticals company and signing a letter calling on federal regulators to relax restrictions on big regional banks. Is it any wonder that the Sanders demonstrators marching down Broad Street aren’t overly enthusiastic about Kaine’s selection?
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cass ... -are-angry