Young women, a bloc that has not shown much faith or trust in the Clintons' brand: NPR here, using an AP image.
That is, in fairness, aimed at DWS and not at either of the Clintons. (the "EMAILS" sign being ambiguous)
It is fantasy, but it would be just if DWS sunk so low she'd have to rely on payday lending to get by.
Anyway, as with yesterday's fish, don't keep DWS around too long in the heat.
________________UPDATE______________
Lets talk about something actual and real to mend fences. That entire pack at DNC was biased. It was not a single person doing rogue emailing. It was concerted leadership up and down the ladder, and staff either happy to follow, or following nonetheless.
Get rid of them all, install Tulsi Gebbard as Chair, and then put in new faces around her, leadership and staff.
It is noteworthy that in Minnesota the DFL is careful to adhere to its gender balance rule in almost all party leadership positioning. Nationally, gender balance would at this point be advisable in cleaning house and rebuilding trust as much as may be feasible. But treating progressives as dogs has not been pretty, nor effective, and should immediately cease and be fixed. Progressives can take a hike, especially if there's nothing to stay for. If it means Trump getting the spoils as Obama and his appointees have enjoyed eight years; then so be it and hope a lesson is learned. If it takes that, then it has been handed to progressives that way, like it or love it, YOU DON'T COUNT. ONLY YOUR VOTE DOES.
That's raw, actually.
__________FURTHER UPDATE___________
Actually Tulsi Gabbard would make a better VP choice than Tim Kaine. Put a veteran on the ticket instead of Kaine, and who is better on the issues than Kaine. The Republicans do not have a veteran on either spot on their ticket. Indeed, they've one whose Rush Limbaugh style of passion was aimed to keep those of Gabbard's gender out of equal opportunity duty. From the outside looking in at the military, he did not believe women were up to the task.
Gabbard would be one who would be more presidential than Kaine. More presidential than Clinton too? In my view, yes, not one to behave as if entitled somehow to office, one who would instead show less hubris and better ethics. Who would not give offense. Opinions can vary.
Dump Kaine? Subsitute Gabbard? It will not be, but it's one intriguing hypothetical. Age balance the ticket. Do better than treating the will of people Sanders' effort mobilized as if a peasant rebellion.
_________FURTHER UPDATE____________
Gabbard, two videos, you judge. Here and here.
Three videos, compare and contrast with Gabbard (shorter direct videos); here, here, and here.
All but one of the video segments have been linked to in the past, but putting them in one place, juxtaposed, adds something. It may have been Mark Twain, or Truman, possibly Will Rogers, who first said, "If all you do is tell the truth you do not need to remember what you said." Gabbard, hence, has time for other things than having to remember.
She would make an excellent Secretary of Defense too.
Last, that second Gabbard video makes me think of Mike Pence.
__________FINAL UPDATE___________
What seems to be coming through, and interpreting a mood is admittedly a subjective thing, but the entrenched inner party mood seems to be we got more votes, so we dictate, with the minority inner entrenched bloc then bargaining over a share of the spoils if successful in a "unified" front going into the general election.
These new people many young and more first-timers are not attuned to that. To them, unity has to be earned.
Not by a share of potential spoils being allocated in a closed-door deal, but by real movement toward what people want. Treating that as a peasant rebellion earns scorn, not unity, and the entrenched view cannot understand or even comprehend non-traditional revulsion toward traditional insider spoils-trading as a "unity" motivation. Bernie packed halls repeatedly wherever he went, and that momentum among very decent people decently motivated, is being pissed away by intransigent decision making of the traditional kind - how to move to capture disgruntled Republican/independent fringe folks in the middle; in November; vs how not to lose angered progressives.
The same old, same old will fail. Hillary Clinton is not a charismatic persona, she cannot inspire, she comes across as untrustworthy in poll after poll, and she sees herself differently, apparently, and can lose, even with Trump the opposition. The insiders are pissing away an opportunity and do not seem to care. Okay, DWS goes is a fine step, but only a first and small one. The DWS/Clinton-DNC remainder is not changed one iota, and the Kaine selection is the old way, not anything beyond putting down and then ignoring the peasantry. This time the tealeaves suggest it will fail big time, and the disaffection should focus upon Jill Stein, Green Party, to be effectively counted after November's election. Down ticket Dems are in general the better choice over down ticket Republicans and will remain so with progressives who this time bother to vote, and down ticket losses will not happen beyond the normal gerrymandered districting results.
A massive Green Party - Jill Stein turnout, if happening, will be a message. But one that may anyway go unheeded. The angering message deafness shown so far by the ruling DNC/Clintons/inner party Gestalt, unfortunately, may become more spitefully set instead of less entrenched by a Clinton loss to Trump. The other side, a Clinton win with a high Green Party vote nonetheless, would mean "We were right all along, those vulgar newbies are unnecessary." Either way, the old way, DWS under the bus or not, is what's being fabricated, that is clear. The convention remainder is window dressing to that reality, and we wait and see how November shakes out. And then what happens from there.
Tim Canova trouncing DWS is a necessary but not sufficient outcome needed to perhaps get a message heard, up and down ticket. It may require a seat by seat guerilla takeover of the gerrymandered Dem districts, more Tulsi Gabbards and Tim Canovas, much as the Tea Party is doing in Republican spheres; with the entrenched slow-changing Dems needing an Eric Cantor moment or two to wake up and smell the future. The Dixiecrats were cast off, it happened, but that was a much easier change than a plutocrat cast off, a problem Bill Clinton's presidency cemented via his pivot to the plutocrats.
