You’re right, I extrapolated “despise” unfairly. But it does seem disingenuous to decide, when both camps’ deplorable tactics are essentially the same categorically, that certain manifestations by the candidate’s supporters (accusations of rigging, etc) are acceptable, and certain other practices carried out by the candidate herself (disparaging nonviolent dissidents as treacherous) are just fine by you. How can that be? Are you really sure you’re not justifiably disappointed in Sanders, and just jumping camps, even though Hillary is staggeringly worse on most of the issues that actually matter to you, and not particularly better in terms of tact and approach? Are you really so blind to the issues that you’ll choose a candidate not because of her tact (she’s awful, and I’m pretty sure you know that), but out of revolt for the other candidate and his supporters? I just can’t figure it out. I wouldn’t have bothered responding if I didn’t already know you have good values and great intentions.
There’s also the consideration that Hillary gets tremendous amounts of positive media attention without resorting to more spectacular tactics like Bernie and his supporters do. She’s only marginally well-behaved because she’s the heir apparent. If she were losing, you and I both know she’d be wretched beyond compare in her day-to-day campaigning behavior. That’s who she is as a politician, which is why she’ll make a dreadful president. And she’ll be extremely successful at being terrible, precisely because she’s such a skilled politician and seemingly amoral at best in her actual policy stances (on foreign policy, she is utterly terrible, and will set us back even farther than her several immediate predecessors already have).