Congrats. This is also gonna be my first election

Sis, if she is running for President, it's going to be something she's going to be have to held accountable for. She has been in politics for a long time and her mistakes are going to define her as much as her stances if she's trying to snatch real estate in the White House.

She is a problematic candidate with not as pristine of a track record, but legit anything is better than Donald Trump at this point. Be cognizant, politicians are not saints.

I'm stumped as to what Clinton could have done about Benghazi? Send more security when the security professionals themselves did not see a need for it? Send more security when State budget has been continuously been cut by the House Republicans, meaning that sending more would reduce security in other embassies where threats are more imminent?

The response was not pristine but it was a climate of misunderstanding, where the entire Intelligence Community had no idea what happened. Obviously she has to take responsibility and she has... why the need to keep pushing it? Its become purely a smear campaign.

You answered your own question, and I don't know why you're confused as this is an election and this is what people do. If you have all of these receipts, she needs to be the one bringing it forward and not you.

Like when she clocked Bernie on the Castro idolization, people said it was a drag and that it was over. When she gets dragged for Benghazi, she's getting 'bullied'. What even?

Well obviously she can't be the one saying it because it would be bad optics and get spun out of control as her being a failed leader and not taking ownership over the people who have died. It is why she relies on surrogates to push this message.

Well that's because, even recently, Bernie was praising Fidel Castro, who has a very ugly, bloody, detrimental effect on Cubans and Cuban Americans (it ended him in Florida. He got destroyed there). He still stands by his words

Benghazi was takes about over and over again for years now and I've also never seen Bernie being grilled, in front of congress, for 11 hours straight over his words to Castro like Clinton was in her role in Benghazi. The main attempt was to find a "gotcha" moment, end her candidacy, and her politics future.

Their situations are nothing alike

They are alike because they've been brought up in the same campaign and are both used in "gotcha" sort of moments. Bernie doesn't get grilled because he's not relevant anymore.

Hillary served in a crucial foreign relations position and it was a faux pas on her part. It has every reason to be brought up, because this is her legit on the job. It hurts the nation's and other countries' perspective of her with things like this and e-mail gate already on her plate before she even gets elected. Everything is fair game in election campaigns and it's why Trump's KKK apathy and penis remarks are going to be continuously referenced, as well.

I agree that there is a lot of added pressure to Clinton because of lengthy her career is and because she is a woman (it's easier to denounce her to some people, which is why people think that Sanders to Trump is a thing that is legit justifiable for anything other than misogyny or being a pressed bitch), but on the opposite side, she is a politician and a person much like everyone else in the race, and needs to be able to reap what she sows.

She's not getting bullied, people are trying to read while she's still winning primaries. People see the forest between the trees, but that doesn't make the trees invisible.

I really don't get why people are still having discussions about the primaries it's pretty obvious who it's going to be. all my attention is on the general election now.

We know it'll be Hillary, but we don't know who it'll be on the republican side. It probably won't be trump, unless he can get the the magic number of delegates.

I want it to be Cruz. Kasich may win in a GE and Trump is too unpredictable.

He magically already has the higher number of delegates

Yeah unless Trump wins before the convention I don't see it for him. The RNC is sketchy af and will try any and everything to stea it from him
Well it's not mathematically impossible for Sanders to win. And for the republicans it's not out of the question a contested convention. While we have strong leanings (at least strong democratically, a slight lean for republicans) of who the nominees will be, in politics anything could happen.
Eh. I still find it strange that the republicans and RNC devoted so much time to attack only one of the five democratic candidates from the beginning. It may not be outright bullying but they definitely have public enemy number one written on her. But you're right it's probably due to her being both a woman and her being a lengthy career politician. There's mixed coverage on her so it's not all bad.

Clinton's biggest deficiency is white men. They voted for her v. Obama, but seem to have deserted her because a) her catering to minorities (though Bernie does so as well) and b) Trump's appeal to white men. Will see whether her Wall Street connections will hurt her with white male blue-collar voters in the GE, although it'll be hard for a big-money Republican to attack her for that.

Even that, I don't think the deficiency is large enough to worry about. She won the white vote in Ohio and in states she lost it in, this past Tuesday, it was by less than 5 percent—to my recollection.

When Bernie drops out/suspends his campaign, he will campaign for her and his supporters (well, the sane ones) will fall in line if they care to keep Trump away from the oval office.

re: the last page, Hillary wasn't even responsible for what happened in Benghazi. Not even a little bit.

How can Trump not be the nominee? Isn't it basically already locked?

No. If he doesn't get the majority by the time of the convention, the RNC may force someone else to be the nominee.

Who would they force? Ted Cruz? I don't think electing a nominee that has never participated in the campaign has ever happened in American history.