HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » WAPO: Bernie Sanders's st...

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:05 AM

WAPO: Bernie Sanders's strange behavior

Perhaps the strangest thing about this is that Sanders isn't vouching for Ossoff's progressivism even as he's doing so for another Democrat of pretty questionable credentials. That would be Omaha mayoral candidate and former state senator Heath Mello, whom Sanders will campaign with Thursday.

As the Wall Street Journal's Reid J. Epstein and Natalie Andrews note, Mello in 2009 sponsored a bill that would require a woman to look at ultrasound images of her fetus before undergoing an abortion (he still opposes abortion rights). Indeed, it's tough to think of something that progressives would hate more.
..................................................


Yet Sanders defends his endorsement of Mello — whom he somewhat curiously refers to as “this fellow" (?) — by noting the terrain on which Democrats are trying to win.

“If this fellow wins in Nebraska, that would be a shot across the board, that in a state like Nebraska a progressive Democrat can win, that will give hope to folks in other conservative states that perhaps they can win as well,” Sanders said.

That entire justification could just as easily be applied to Ossoff, though. He is, after all, running in a district that Republicans have routinely won with more than 60 percent of the vote. Omaha is in Nebraska, yes, but President Obama won its congressional district and an electoral vote there in 2008, and a Mello victory would hardly be the boost that Ossoff's would be.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/20/bernie-sanderss-strange-behavior/?utm_term=.e804922b8cd4

189 replies, 11417 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 189 replies Author Time Post
Reply WAPO: Bernie Sanders's strange behavior (Original post)
ehrnst Thursday OP
Cha Thursday #1
cwydro Thursday #2
Cha Thursday #3
KittyWampus Thursday #6
azureblue Thursday #77
lark Thursday #104
Tarheel_Dem Thursday #130
DownriverDem Thursday #150
sharedvalues Thursday #159
ehrnst Friday #169
DetlefK Thursday #7
tallahasseedem Thursday #75
ehrnst Thursday #12
Cha Thursday #20
KPN Thursday #39
tallahasseedem Thursday #78
KPN Thursday #85
SunSeeker Thursday #92
MontanaMama Friday #176
greatauntoftriplets Thursday #42
Cha Thursday #45
greatauntoftriplets Thursday #50
KPN Thursday #51
druidity33 Thursday #146
lapucelle Thursday #71
Cha Thursday #74
Dammit Jim Thursday #108
sheshe2 Thursday #141
Demsrule86 Thursday #143
KittyWampus Thursday #4
Cha Thursday #9
sammythecat Thursday #106
Cha Thursday #115
sammythecat Thursday #118
Cha Thursday #120
ehrnst Friday #170
R B Garr Thursday #116
sammythecat Thursday #119
R B Garr Thursday #121
sammythecat Thursday #124
R B Garr Thursday #125
MGKrebs Thursday #10
KittyWampus Thursday #13
ehrnst Thursday #18
treestar Thursday #25
stopbush Thursday #103
Cha Thursday #122
onenote Thursday #28
grantcart Thursday #40
onenote Thursday #76
grantcart Thursday #90
onenote Thursday #99
grantcart Thursday #126
onenote Thursday #128
grantcart Thursday #131
MGKrebs Thursday #135
onenote Thursday #140
grantcart Thursday #151
onenote Thursday #155
KittyWampus Thursday #94
MGKrebs Thursday #70
ehrnst Thursday #114
appal_jack Thursday #5
ehrnst Thursday #11
calimary Thursday #59
smirkymonkey Thursday #91
BlueMTexpat Thursday #86
Warpy Thursday #111
treestar Thursday #26
ehrnst Thursday #112
BainsBane Friday #165
appal_jack Friday #185
OilemFirchen Thursday #8
yodermon Thursday #19
treestar Thursday #30
frazzled Thursday #14
ehrnst Thursday #15
frazzled Thursday #17
ehrnst Thursday #21
JTFrog Thursday #22
Cha Thursday #29
MGKrebs Thursday #136
George II Thursday #46
NurseJackie Thursday #52
Post removed Thursday #97
MGKrebs Thursday #137
ehrnst Thursday #23
LisaM Thursday #49
JCanete Thursday #158
BainsBane Friday #164
RedWedge Thursday #16
comradebillyboy Thursday #61
Ligyron Thursday #105
That Guy 888 Thursday #109
BainsBane Friday #166
treestar Thursday #24
MFM008 Thursday #27
Me. Thursday #31
fun n serious Thursday #32
Fresh_Start Thursday #33
nikibatts Thursday #35
KPN Thursday #36
tallahasseedem Thursday #89
KPN Thursday #93
uponit7771 Friday #181
KPN Friday #182
ehrnst Thursday #47
uponit7771 Friday #180
KPN Thursday #34
OilemFirchen Thursday #43
QC Thursday #44
ehrnst Thursday #53
KPN Thursday #62
Ligyron Thursday #107
KPN Thursday #55
OilemFirchen Thursday #68
Historic NY Thursday #81
ehrnst Thursday #48
That Guy 888 Thursday #123
dsc Thursday #127
That Guy 888 Thursday #132
dsc Thursday #139
That Guy 888 Thursday #142
NurseJackie Thursday #56
Amimnoch Thursday #37
KittyWampus Thursday #101
ananda Thursday #38
TNLib Thursday #98
BainsBane Friday #167
dlk Thursday #41
alarimer Thursday #54
pnwmom Thursday #113
pnwmom Thursday #154
KPN Thursday #57
Post removed Thursday #58
Post removed Thursday #73
R B Garr Thursday #117
calimary Thursday #102
cstanleytech Thursday #149
Gothmog Thursday #60
FSogol Thursday #63
SunSeeker Thursday #67
retrowire Thursday #64
SunSeeker Thursday #65
Historic NY Thursday #87
SunSeeker Thursday #88
R B Garr Thursday #138
Mr. Evil Thursday #66
SunSeeker Thursday #69
KittyWampus Thursday #95
Chicago1980 Thursday #72
Brogrizzly Thursday #79
Cryptoad Thursday #80
elias7 Thursday #82
ecstatic Thursday #83
LOL Lib Thursday #84
BainsBane Thursday #96
JCinNYC Thursday #100
Nanjeanne Thursday #110
Demsrule86 Thursday #144
Nanjeanne Thursday #145
Demsrule86 Thursday #147
Nanjeanne Thursday #152
Demsrule86 Friday #175
Nanjeanne Friday #177
Demsrule86 Friday #178
Nanjeanne Friday #179
Demsrule86 Friday #183
Nanjeanne Friday #184
Demsrule86 Saturday #186
Demsrule86 Friday #174
DFW Thursday #148
Demsrule86 Friday #173
QC Thursday #153
Demsrule86 Friday #172
BainsBane Friday #163
Gothmog Thursday #129
R B Garr Thursday #133
Cha Friday #171
VoicesAcrossAmerica Thursday #134
Post removed Thursday #156
Cha Thursday #157
underthematrix Thursday #160
Cha Thursday #162
IronLionZion Thursday #161
zentrum Friday #168
BainsBane Saturday #187
zentrum Saturday #188
BainsBane Saturday #189

Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:13 AM

1. What the hay, BS?!

"As the Wall Street Journal's Reid J. Epstein and Natalie Andrews note, Mello in 2009 sponsored a bill that would require a woman to look at ultrasound images of her fetus before undergoing an abortion (he still opposes abortion rights). Indeed, it's tough to think of something that progressives would hate more."



And, yet..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:14 AM

2. Wow.

Interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:20 AM

3. Weird..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:26 AM

6. Sanders is head of Democratic Party Outreach. He's supposed to be working for the Democratic party.

It's an honor to be given a national platform like that.

He's supposed to be working for building the party... not the other way around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #2)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:20 PM

77. the echo chamber is strong here

anyone who takes the Wapo for fact is a fool. And the number of posters here who believe and support stuff the Wapo says are fools.

So we need to ask ourselves: What exactly is Sanders doing that warrants there specious attacks and the legions of posters who support and echo those attacks? Face facts, if Sanders was just doing his day to day routine, he wouldn't be in the news like this. My guess is he is lining up to be part of the investigate and impeach Trump team, so these attacks are designed to take him out of the game..

Sorry, Wapo and its followers, take your crap elsewhere

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #77)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 01:16 PM

104. What part of the article gets it wrong?

If you are going to attack their credibility, I'd like to know on what basis this is being done? Sanders is the head of Outreach, but doesn't know anything about Ossoff and has no clue that Georgia has been reliably red for many decades? Sanders, who says he's progressive, it supporting an anti-woman candidate who's not at all progressive, then defends this on a progressive vs. MOR basis?

None of this makes sense. I supported Bernie in the primary but was disillusioned with his later actions, like this. Outreach should be 50 states, why would he exclude GA so cavalierly?

Sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #77)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:13 PM

130. There are certainly "fools" here, but it's not the readers of Wapo. And as for "taking your crap....

elsewhere"? Unless you've recently become an Adminstrator of this site, perhaps you want to dial that down a notch? Just sayin'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #77)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:41 PM

150. This isn't Vermont

Bernie needs to figure out what he wants to do. He goes on a Dem Party Unity Tour and attacks the Dem Party. What is that all about? Many of his supporters didn't listen when he told them to vote for Hillary. This isn't Vermont. We have a two party system. By not voting for the Dems, the repubs win. And we all know how that turned out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #77)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 08:41 PM

159. WaPo is best mainstream news source. Bernie haters are wrong though.

Mother Jones, Propublica, Guardian better.

But WaPo is better than the HRC-bashing, Iraq-war flogging​, Trump-electing NYT. (The NYT is still good, still the paper of record, but they have to admit how they got Trump elected.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azureblue (Reply #77)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:48 AM

169. I guess you're with PEEOTUS on the free press being "the fake news"

Good to know.

Curious to know - are you an RT reader?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:28 AM

7. How dare you bash Bernie Sanders!!! With quotes and all!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DetlefK (Reply #7)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:13 PM

75. ROFL!

It drives the Piners crazy!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:42 AM

12. Raising the cost for abortion providers is one way to obstruct low income women from having access

And any non-medically sanctioned obstacle to abortion access is opposed by ACOG.

But from what I am to understand, abortion is merely a "social issue" and not something that Bernie takes into account when endowing the title of "progressive" on a candidate. He has stated that "economic issues" are what determines if a candidate is "progressive or not."

Because childbearing has no impact whatsoever on economics for a woman, I guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #12)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:51 AM

20. . He has stated that "economic issues" are what determines if a candidate is "progressive or not."

Wow.. stranger and stranger..

I guess Jon Ossoff somehow didn't pass the test that Mello did.

"That entire justification could just as easily be applied to Ossoff, though. He is, after all, running in a district that Republicans have routinely won with more than 60 percent of the vote. Omaha is in Nebraska, yes, but President Obama won its congressional district and an electoral vote there in 2008, and a Mello victory would hardly be the boost that Ossoff's would be."

Thank you for this article, ehrnst

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #12)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:15 AM

39. Source?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #39)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:20 PM

78. Use the Google machine...

there's a lot out there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #78)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:28 PM

85. I did. Can't find anything that says that (what Cha posted)

specifically. So I have to assume it's an interpretation and/or taken entirely out of context. As far as I can tell, Bernie has always been 100% for social and economic justice for all. There's no reason why a person can't support all of those things. On the other hand, there are people who only support one, or parts of one, or parts of both -- but Bernie does not and has never appeared to be one of those people to me.

So, yeah, I need a clear source before I'll buy this statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #12)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:40 PM

92. Being able to control her own body is the most fundamental economic issue.

It is also the most basic issue of justice and liberty.

It fucking infuriates me that we have "progressives" that don't get that. If you can't control your own body, you have nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #92)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:11 AM

176. Well said.

And truer than true. Anti choice is a deal breaker. When the Dem candidate is anti choice, we have a problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:27 AM

42. Is he Pence in disguise?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to greatauntoftriplets (Reply #42)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:33 AM

45. It's Crazy, greataunt..

Jon Ossoff wouldn't support that and BS doesn't know if he's "progressive".'

Since he's the "chairman of outreach" maybe he should learn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #45)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:41 AM

50. Just nuts.

Strange bedfellows, etc

Having a baby is no social issue, it's clearly economic. Raising a child is expensive, and the burden is especially heavy on single mothers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:41 AM

51. How about you do a little homework before using Mello as a means to attack Bernie.

This article and these tweets assign attributes and attitudes to Bernie without any substantiation whatsoever. It's an attack on Bernie and that's its only purpose. And all you are doing is echoing it.

How about doing a little exploring of the facts. I'll help you out with this, also out today:

"First, from VoteSmart, here is their political summary of Mello regarding abortion. ... he was rated 100% by Planned Parenthood voters of Nebraska and the following 5 lines are records of 5 votes he cast on laws related to abortion.
In 2011 he voted to require a physician to be present during an abortion and against insurance coverage of abortion; in 2010 he voted to prohibit abortions after 20 weeks and he voted for screening requirements to make sure a woman getting an abortion had provided fully informed consent; and in 2009 he voted in yes on the ultrasound law referred to in the diary.
-- snip --
Fulton, who said he opposes abortion, also introduced a less restrictive bill (LB676) in Nebraska. It requires the physician performing the abortion to tell a woman an ultrasound is available, but it doesn’t require the ultrasound to be performed.
Sen. Heath Mello, a Democrat who said he opposes abortion, signed on as a co-sponsor, calling the measure a “positive first step to reducing the number of abortions in Nebraska.”
“It seemed like a good compromise, without bringing in the constitutional issues seen in other states,” he said.
... rather pertinent information to consider when discussing Heath Mello and when discussing whether Heath Mello deserves Democratic Party support in his campaign for mayor.
... at some point people need to decide which is more important: attacking Bernie Sanders or working to elect more Democrats, take back control of the House, Senate, and White House, and getting progressive legislation enacted to make lives better and the world a better place.


]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #51)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:08 PM

146. What, still no response? nt.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:07 PM

71. Plus, BS has endorsed Tom Perriello in the VA

Democratic gubernatorial primary. Perriello has an anti-choice / pro NRA voting record.

It's stunning that he won't endorse a Democrat over a Republican in Georgia.

#BSWTF?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2017/01/06/tom_perriello_has_an_anti_abortion_pro_gun_voting_record_and_wants_to_be.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #71)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:12 PM

74. Good find, lapucelle! Exactly when you put it that

way.. damn!Mahalo~

"It's stunning that he won't endorse a Democrat over a Republican in Georgia."


He could have said something positive.. after all he's touted around here as the "most popular politician in America".



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 01:58 PM

108. I've never read his 1972 'Rape Essay'

 

But now I feel compelled to google it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:33 PM

141. That is not very progressive of Mello. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #141)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:42 PM

143. Daily Kos pulled their endorsement.

I would still vote for the Democrat myself. Tim Ryan became pro-choice after he was elected...I voted for him despite the fact he was pro-life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:23 AM

4. Sanders didn't need to say Osseff was progressive or not. He could just say

"he's a Democrat fighting for the people of his district".

Sanders has been in Congress for decades and as head of Democratic party OUTREACH he should be able to give a positive, yet generic comment about ANY Democrat running.

And I hope he knows who Osseff is because if he doesn't/didn't... there's an issue right there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:32 AM

9. "he's a Democrat fighting for the people of his district".

That would have been great.. and helpful, no doubt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #9)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 01:30 PM

106. how did Hillary support Ossoff

Did she? I don't know.

Maybe she said something, but if not, even though I wanted her to be President, should I now hate her because she didn't take an active part in helping.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sammythecat (Reply #106)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:22 PM

115. This isn't about Hillary.. this is about BS the "Chairman

of Outreach" making a positive statement for a Democrat running against republicans in Georgia.

"The most popular politician in America" according to his fans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #115)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:35 PM

118. Hillary, or any other Democrat for that matter,

says or does nothing helpful for a particular cause and, ... nothing. It's okay. BS does the same and you get upset. Whatever, carry on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sammythecat (Reply #118)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:39 PM

120. BS is a sitting Senator and Chairman of Outreach.. he didn't

fucking Outreach.

I know you'd like to make this about Hillary but it's not working.

That's okay.. Jon Ossoff had plenty of help from Samuel L Jackson who does know who Ossoff is and he said he was helped by many women.. Allysa Milano for one.

We didn't really need the Chairman of Outreach who couldn't be bothered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sammythecat (Reply #118)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:16 AM

170. That's the inverse of the problem

Bernie rails against Dems for not coming out stronger for "true progressive candidates" then disses one in a very important race with a strong progressive record, saying "I don't know if he's progressive or not."

Bernie's JOB with the Democratic party is outreach. He says we need a 50 state strategy, but seems to want to use the postion to flex his litmus test on if the candidates dissents one inch from his own economic agenda.

Hillary does not have the JOB of outreach. And when she does so much as post a video encouraging women to stay strong, the shrieks go up "NO HILLARY! You don't get to own the resistance!!""

So when Hillary does say something, she's accused of "taking over" but when she isn't in the public eye, the same people say, "Look at Bernie, out there giving speeches, legislating. Hillary's off in the woods somewhere. See, she never was a real leader."

Whatever, carry on.

(not a peep about Obama windsailing - "hey, he looks good! And that $60 million book deal? Well that's not big money, really. Not like he's getting it for giving speeches.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sammythecat (Reply #106)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:26 PM

116. Hillary is not responsible for his lack of awareness

or lack of sense to support Democrats all on his own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R B Garr (Reply #116)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:37 PM

119. Why does she, and other silent Democrats get a pass while BS

gets lambasted?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sammythecat (Reply #119)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:45 PM

121. I think the right to blame Hillary for everything was

forfeited through the last election outcome close to 6 months ago. If Sanders can't work with others to promote Democrats, that's on him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R B Garr (Reply #121)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:09 PM

124. That's why I included "any other Democrat"

You know what? I stay away from these kinds of threads but I didn't this time, much to my regret. You and half a dozen others here, go ahead with your constant complaining of anything Bernie. It's pointless, you're not gonna change a thing, and you will never stop hating Bernie Sanders. Fine. I'm done. Don't give a shit. Going to work, and will go back to staying away from these useless, time wasting shitfests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sammythecat (Reply #124)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:26 PM

125. Taking things out of context will always

cause frustration and confusion. The context is Sanders and his behavior, so dragging Hillary into this is just an excuse. Other Democrats are also not responsible for Bernie's motives and actions. This is a default position for many, though, so you are not alone.

And you are obviously not seeing the context in other areas, as well. Making things personal is a method for alerting, so I can't get into what I noticed here during the month I didn't post or it will be alerted. But a lot of what you're noticing is because of returnees from another website....

Context, my friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:34 AM

10. As far as Ossoff is concerned, I would be too hard on Bernie.

Ossoff may not want positive comments from Bernie (or Warren for that matter) at this point. Nothing wrong with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MGKrebs (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:43 AM

13. What I posted is positive enough without coming across as any kind of endorsement...

the point here is that Sanders is head of Outreach for the Democratic party.

He's not just a Senator who ran in the primary for POTUS.

A simple generic statement is expected of him.

Whether it be more positive or detailed about political positioning would depend on communications he's had with a candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MGKrebs (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:50 AM

18. Warren hasn't stated that she determines who is "progressive" and who is "maybe not."

and isn't telling the party how to run a "50 state strategy," so isn't really going to be expected to actually do the work of stumping for other candidates.

Do you have information that Ossoff requested that Bernie not praise him as a Democrat or question his "progressive" cred?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MGKrebs (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:55 AM

25. good point, GA is so right wing

that association with Bernie might not be good. Nebraska is obviously so right wing that Bernie is probably considered a commie, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #25)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 01:00 PM

103. GA is so right wing that no comment from any D is going to push them

further to the right.

This was an easy call for BS to offer his fervent support and endorsement in GA. He didn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #25)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:52 PM

122. Hi treestar..Samuel L Jackson made a campaign Ad for him..

and Alyssa Milano campaigned and got out the vote for him. California Rep Nancy Pelosi was there for Jon

Ossoff said it was the women who helped him with his "victory".

Alyssa Milano, Christopher Gorham Campaign For Ossoff In 6th District Race

Ossoff, a first-time candidate, has benefitted from big names in the Democratic Party, such as John Lewis and Nancy Pelosi, on the way to a double-digit lead in the polls with about three weeks to go before the election. Now he's pulling out the celebrities.

Actors Alyssa Milano and Christopher Gorham, both in town while filming a new CW show, were seen recently driving voters to the polls. Early voting started Monday in the 6th District, which encompasses parts of Cobb, Fulton and DeKalb counties.

More..
https://patch.com/georgia/eastcobb/alyssa-milano-christopher-gorham-campaign-ossoff-6th-district-race

So I think the "most popular politician in America" could have said a couple of positive words about Democrat Jon Ossoff in Georgia.

The 6th District must have some Dems.. with 48.1% going to Jon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MGKrebs (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:58 AM

28. Why wouldn't Ossoff want positive comments from Bernie?

The three counties that are represented in the Sixth District (in part) produced a total of 87,000 votes for Sanders in the Democratic Presidential Primary. It's highly likely that a number of those voters stayed home on Tuesday, just as its certain that a number of Clinton voters stayed home.

We need every voter who voted for Clinton OR Sanders to be urged to get out and vote in every upcoming election.

Here's some sobering numbers:
Ossoff did better in percentage terms than the Democrat who ran in the 2016 Sixth District race. But in absolute terms, Ossoff got 27,000 fewer votes than the Democrat who ran in 2016. That's a 23 percent drop off from the votes cast for a Democrat running in what was considered a hopeless race in 2016. And even more startling -- Ossoff got 40 percent fewer votes in the District than Clinton did.

Yes, there's a huge difference between a presidential election year and an off-year special election. But the point is that if Democrats are going to be "energized" by their desire to stymie Trump, they need to get off their butts and vote. And every leading Democrat -- and that includes Bernie even if he won't call himself a Democrat -- needs to be out there pushing voters to vote for the leading Democratic candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #28)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:16 AM

40. because he already has the progressives and wants to get swing voters?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #40)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:15 PM

76. I think that's wishful thinking.

I know a lot of Sanders voters (and during the primaries I was one) who, like Bernie himself, don't identify themselves as Democrats. They were attracted to Bernie because he wasn't part of the Democratic establishment even though he chose to run for the Democratic party nomination rather than mount a 3rd party campaign. Without Bernie's express endorsement, I have no doubt that a sizable number of those voters viewed Ossoff, no matter what his progressive credentials, as part of the establishment and not someone they would fight for. And I'm not in any way excusing Clinton voters who undoubtedly sat out this election in sizable numbers as well.
My point is that we can't afford for anyone to sit on the sidelines and thus those party leaders (and whether he wants the title or not Sanders is a party leader) who have influence over segments of the electorate need to be vocal in pushing the message that all of these upcoming elections are as important as last November's election -- even moreso because of the results of last November's election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #76)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:39 PM

90. No it's strategic thinking.

In Ossoffs district there are three times as many people who will not vote for him because of a Bernie endorsement than those who are sitting waiting for a Bernie endorsement.

Ossoff strategy is clear: vote for a reasonable voice as a referendum on Trump.

The Republican strategy is equally clear: label Ossoff as a creation of the radical left. They have begun today buying millions of dollars of ad buys by PACs with the theme that a bite for Ossoff is a vote for Pelosi.

A Bernie endorsement fits with the Republican strategy and undermines Ossoffs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #90)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:53 PM

99. what is the basis for your numbers?

Three times as many who won't vote for him? Where does that come from? It's not a zero sum game where a Bernie endorsement cancels out a John Lewis endorsement. Those endorsements would be additive.

Put another way -- would you have preferred for Sanders not to have endorsed Clinton?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #99)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:48 PM

126. It's a deep red district that Price won by a landslide

The real issue for Ossoff is to conduct a campaign that does not increase the enthusiasm level of Republicans.

The fact that you ask the question about Sanders endorsing Clinton ckeaishows that you cannot differentiate between a national campaign and a campaign in a suburban Atlanta district.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #126)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:59 PM

128. Its a district in which the incumbent republican won by a landslide

But one in which Clinton came within 5000 votes of Trump (1.5 percent). Notwithstanding Clinton being endorsed by Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #128)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:16 PM

131. lol your continued attempt to mix Presidential strategy with they dynamics of this district is

really quite funny.

You wanted the numbers here are the numbers

Ossoff did very well and got 93,000 votes.

Price consistently got 200,000 votes when he ran except for 2014 where there was a very low turnout in the district but he still got 66%

There are two pools of voters that he can compete for

a) voters on the left side of the spectrum that missed the election
b) former Price voters.

a) is a very small number and with the high enthusiasm numbers already among Democrats the factor that will have the most impact is phone calling, not media, ads or endorsements.

The election is going to depend on what Ossoff can do with b). There are some that can be reached b1 (soccer moms, etc) and others that are unreachable.

The only thing that the Ossoff campaign is thinking about now is how to get b1s to change and not do anything to get b2s enthusiasm up. If he brings in a lot of high profile outsiders it will increase b2 voters enthusiasm. That is why every surrogate, not just Sanders, that they bring in is a risk for Ossoff. Of all of the surrogates that Ossoff would consider bringing in Sanders would be at the bottom of the list.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #131)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:57 PM

135. I just made a joke elsewhere that Karen Handel should

dare Nancy Pelosi to come there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #131)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:18 PM

140. It's both more complicated and simpler than you suggest.

In 2016, Price got 200,000 votes (61.7%) v. his opponent's 125,000 votes (38%). Looks like a clear landslide. And on the numbers it is. But look behind the numbers. Price spent $2 million in 2016. His opponent raised and spent exactly $0. Didn't have a website. No one knew him. No one ever seemed to see him. Yet he garnered nearly 40 percent of the vote.

In 2014, a non-presidential year in which repubs picked up 13 seats nationwide, Price spent $1.7 million. His opponent, spent $14,500. Yet his opponent still managed to get around 34 percent. And in 2012, another big turnout year, despite being outspent by $1.74 million, Price's opponent still got over 35 percent of the vote.

So it appears that one factor that matters a lot is money. Ossoff had it and spent it and it made a big difference. But as seen, even a candidate that spent nothing in 2016 did appreciably better than a candidate that spent something in 2012. And that's because the district is changing.

Ossoff's challenge is turnout. The number of votes cast for the invisible Democrat against Price in the 2014 off-year election was nearly 33,000 more than number cast for Ossoff, despite the millions spent. Yes, it's an off year election, but its a very large pool of voters that need to be convinced that their vote now is as important as the vote they cast six months ago. Moreover, there's an additional pool of voters that supported Sanders in the Democratic primary but stayed home in November. How big is that pool? I have no idea, but in a close race, which likely will be, they could be decisive.

So how do you get the 2016 voters who stayed home last week and the primary voters who stayed home in November to show up?You pull out all the stops. More GOTV for sure. But also, getting those voters interested and excited and a Sanders primary voter who stayed home in November and again last week might actually be persuaded more by hearing Sanders has made this race a priority than he or she will be by someone knocking on their door who can't say to them, Bernie and Hillary agree on this --- we need Ossoff in the House.

So it really is that simple in the end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #140)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:50 PM

151. To say that it's all about turnout and then only speak to Democratic turnout

proves that you do not understand the basic rules of modern campaign management, and pol sci 101.

It's not your gross turnout that is significant but the difference between the two.

If you spend $1 million and increase your turnout by 10, 000 but irritate the opposition so that 15,000 more Republicans turn out then you have a negative 5,000.

For that reason when you are running in a district like GA 6 you are as conscious about the blowback of ads and surrogates. The key to GA 6 Is not in getting Democrats to over perform but get Republicans to under perform. This is really basic stuff but true to your name you can't get past your one note and continue to go off point. You get the last response so feel free to miss the point completely one more time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #151)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 07:16 PM

155. Irritate the opposition?

They're pulling out all the stops. Nothing we do will "irritate" them into voting if they weren't already. They've already tried to link Ossoff to Sanders and Pelosi. What is Ossoff supposed to say -- no I don't like Pelosi or Sanders? He handled it well with his remark that he doesn't want to be labeled. That's the right response. But if John Lewis and Bernie Sanders joined to support him, there's a bunch of Democratic voters who have sat on their hands who might be energized to get out.

Take a look at Virginia. While more purple than Georgia, it still has a reputation as a place that can't elect a Democratic candidate who is "too" progressive. But the Sanders endorsed candidate is looking very strong and it his endorsement hasn't prevented the Republicans from tearing themselves apart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grantcart (Reply #40)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:43 PM

94. Sanders didn't need to make a strongly positive comment. He could have made a generic

comment and avoided the word "progressive".

He's a career politician and head of the Democratic party Outreach.

He should be able to muster a generic comment that is mildly positive.

Question: "Is Osseff a Progressive"

Answer: "Osseff is a Democrat fighting for the people of his district".

See how easy that would be? And I'm not a career politician.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #28)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:04 PM

70. All I am saying is that it seems unneccessary to be critical of Bernie over this.

None of us knows if there has been communication or what is even in Bernie's head. The WaPo is reaching to imply that since Bernie is stumping for Mello there is some significance to him not stumping for Ossoff. It's just not a fair conclusion. There are several possible reasons why Bernie hasn't engaged in Ossoff's run.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MGKrebs (Reply #70)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:20 PM

114. Bernie does not give anyone else the benefit of the doubt.

If they didn't vote for an admittedly symbolic amendment that he tacked on - no question - they are not progressive.

There was no "maybe that bill coming up that addresses the issue in far more depth, and my constituency will need some education on the issue, being as that the major employer in my district could be construed as being attacked."

Nope - straight to accusing them of being" in the pocket" of an industry, no matter what fantastic record they had on progressive issues in their career.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:26 AM

5. I will only support pro-choice candidates, and Bernie should do the same.

Last edited Thu Apr 20, 2017, 01:18 PM - Edit history (1)

I guess I was/am what some DU'ers would call a "Sandernista," and sure, I'll wear the mantle on a lot of issues and a lot of the time. But endorsing Mello was a dumb move, Sanders. My stand with Bernie is significantly predicated on him standing for the absolute right for women to make choices about their reproductive and sexual lives without undue government interference.

Fetal ultrasound image bills such as the one Mello sponsored (!) explicitly violate both 1st Amendment (i.e.- no to mandated speech) and 4th Amendment (i.e.- yes to privacy) Constitutional guarantees. I have no use for any politician willing to shred the Constitution in this manner.

-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:35 AM

11. Anyone who dismisses women's reproductive health care and childbearing as a "social issue"

is in direct contradiction with what the medical profession says it is - a public health issue.

That is a huge red flag as far as I'm concerned about a politician's judgement and ability to get data on an issue from experts.

It's also a huge red flag concerning Mello, as well.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:51 AM

59. Yep. I'm SO with you there.

For me, a WOMAN'S RIGHT to have the last word over HER body is non-negotiable. It is an absolute. It's NOT on the table. It's not even in the room where that proverbial table is. Learning more about Mello raises a huge red flag for me, too.

I will NOT be someone else's property. NOT EVER. Nor is ANY woman somebody else's property, where somebody else (usually male) gets to decide what happens to her and what's done to her and what's forced upon her.

NOT EVER.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #59)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:40 PM

91. +1000

This right here!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:29 PM

86. + a million or so! eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:10 PM

111. You can't declare half the human population to be less than human

and claim to be a progressive and that's exactly what antiabortionist politicians are doing.

I will never vote for an antiabortion politician, I don't care how great he is on men's issues. It's a red flag, people, that states he thinks civil rights can be dispensed with at his religious convenience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:57 AM

26. what do they even think the good is?

seeing the ultrasound is going to cause the woman to change her mind? I suppose so.

Like the parental consent laws they propose that assume the parents will forbid the abortion. Heck most of the time if the pregnant woman is a teen the parents will be all for it.

It amazes me how desperate they are on this issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #26)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:17 PM

112. It makes the procedure much, much more expensive. That's the only reason. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to appal_jack (Reply #5)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 12:13 AM

165. Thank you

You have renewed my faith in American politics, if only a tiny bit. It's such a relief to see someone who doesn't ignore the issue or make excuses for Sanders on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #165)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:04 PM

185. Cheers, sister!

We've got to stand up for all of our rights, all of the time, no matter where any particular politician falls.

-app

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:30 AM

8. The first rule of Our Revolution:

After years of being told that the Democratic Party must trend left and run progressives in all fifty states, we now learn that there is a caveat: Don't always advertise that a candidate is progressive, because it might harm him or her in a red area. That's the takeaway from the excuse-making for Sanders' bizarre take on Ossoff - that his pronouncement that Ossoff is progressive would negatively affect Ossoff's electability.

Oy.

On edit: See post 10.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #8)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:50 AM

19. Disappointing. Wondering if there is some strategy at work.

If Bernie is *not* going "rogue" with this type of rhetoric, then what's at play here?




Is the DNC is trying to just concatenate the alt-left/indy/TYT/NeverHillary crowd back into the fold via Bernie's popularity, and *shrug* to the dogwhistles?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OilemFirchen (Reply #8)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:58 AM

30. There is definite wishful thinking on that

if people would just run as progressive that the voters will see how wonderful that is and vote for them. Election of Donald proves that is not the case. People can't see their own interests, or have weird ideas about what they are. Like an abortion free world would be just wonderful. That's all we need for total happiness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:44 AM

14. There's a pretty simple explanation for the "strange" behavior

Bernie Sanders won the Nebraska caucuses 57.14% to 42.8% (even though Clinton won the non-binding presidential primary 53.08% to 46.92%, with more than twice as many voters participating: but we won't go into the discussion of the limited democratic aspect of the caucus system here). Heath Mello chaired the Omaha caucus where Bernie Sanders beat Hillary Clinton by a very wide margin. Granted, chairing is (supposedly) a neutral position. But still, he was there and announced the winner.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, won the Georgia primary by a tremendously wide margin of 71.3% to 28.2%.

It's rather like Trump: loyalty is everything. Places where you got beaten are to be punished.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #14)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:44 AM

15. Doesn't explain why Bernie stated that "he didn't know if Ossoff was progressive." (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #15)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:47 AM

17. Sure it does.

It's what we call conversational implicature: it's like a teacher saying "Johnny always comes to class on time" as their only comment on a student. It's what you say when you don't want to comment because, well, you don't want to reveal your true motives or feelings. Sanders' feelings were (probably): screw Georgia, they didn't like me at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #17)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:51 AM

21. Makes sense. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #17)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:52 AM

22. More like screw the candidate that didn't support me in the primary or that is backed by John Lewis.



Even if it's saying screw Georgia, he is really only screwing the Democratic Party.

Again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JTFrog (Reply #22)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:58 AM

29. Yeah.. karma's gonna catch up

.. watch out for boomerangs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JTFrog (Reply #22)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:01 PM

136. That is just not necessary.

it's not "screw Georgia". It's more like "I haven't paid attention to that because why should I?" Or maybe Team Ossoff has asked them not to be involved. It would not be surprising.

I get it. You are mad at Bernie for whatever reason. But this is not more ammunition for your animosity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #17)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:35 AM

46. But as a "leader" of the Democratic Party shouldn't he have bothered to find out a little bit...

...about Ossoff?

And you really think your last sentence is what he was thinking? If so, I don't think we need someone like that traveling around the country with our Party Chairman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #46)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:42 AM

52. Even if someone doesn't have the time to do their own homework...

... it would make sense if the job was tasked to a responsible underling who could type up a half-page summary, or reduce it to a half-dozen bullet points. Things like this shouldn't be happening. Things like this shouldn't be acceptable.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #46)


Response to Post removed (Reply #97)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:07 PM

137. Uncalled for.

If Team Ossoff wanted his attention they would have asked for it. Apparently they have not. It's just not a bad reflection on Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #14)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:53 AM

23. The RNCC was already painting Ossoff as being supported by Sanders and Pelosi

The NRCC, the House Republicans’ campaign arm, said Ossoff’s reliance on out-of-state money shows he’s a “far-left Washington insider whose campaign is propped up by Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders and the like.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/04/06/democrat-jon-ossoff-raises-8-million-in-georgia-special-election/100122138/

So it's not like Sanders had anything to lose by even saying - "He'll fight for his district."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #14)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:40 AM

49. I think that played into it.

I was just looking up those numbers myself and I really think that's a factor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #14)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 08:16 PM

158. that is 100 percent speculation of motives without any actual proof, fed only by your own


personal opinion of Sanders in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #14)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 12:11 AM

164. the issue in question is his championing a pro-life candidate

How is it that you few of you give a shit? It's the equal rights of half the population of America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:47 AM

16. And why is he focusing on a mayoral election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RedWedge (Reply #16)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:52 AM

61. Because the anti-choice candidate Mello is obviously

a progressive in Bernie's eyes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to comradebillyboy (Reply #61)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 01:25 PM

105. How much effect could a mayor have on any abortion laws in a state?

None, right?

(Not directed at you the question is rhetorical and I thought this was a good place to drop it).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to comradebillyboy (Reply #61)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:00 PM

109. So always support the Democratic candidate on the ticket...

...unless you can score some points on Senator Sanders who isn't campaigning on the Democratic Party's behalf. I'm sure that the Democratic Party hasn't asked Sanders to stay away from the South which the Inside-the-Beltway crowd views as solidly conservative. The "Beltway" Pols probably didn't think that a anti-abortion Democrat would need liberal support.

Well if you don't like Mello maybe you can start a right-in campaign or work for the GOP candidate - the Mayoral Primaries are over.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RedWedge (Reply #16)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 12:14 AM

166. Did Mello endorse him?

Bernie tends to like people who endorse him, regardless of their political views. Could that be it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:54 AM

24. If you have to do that to get elected in Nebraska

as a Democrat, then Nebraska is ridiculously right wing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:57 AM

27. ???????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:59 AM

31. Strange Is Right

Always has been...time to let go of him but won't happen until we deliver the message to our leaders that he steps all over us and they're letting him.

OT..what is that yellow creature in your post?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:59 AM

32. Women and people of color are our base.

Bernie seems to dismiss us.

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2F10028953182

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fun n serious (Reply #32)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:10 AM

33. +1 nt

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fun n serious (Reply #32)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:12 AM

35. AND WE VOTE!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fun n serious (Reply #32)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:13 AM

36. I disagree and would say that

women and people of color seem to wrongly feel that way. Bernie supports social and economic justice for all. And those who support him STAND WITH our brothers and sisters of color and all women!

Why is that insufficient?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #36)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:38 PM

89. ROFL!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tallahasseedem (Reply #89)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:42 PM

93. Really? You find that funny?

Why is that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #36)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:22 PM

181. Have you read some of Sanders statements he said in the past in regards to race?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #181)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:25 PM

182. Yes.

That's why I said what I said. I'm a fan of Bernie's for a couple decades now.

Maybe you've seen/read/heard something I haven't?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fun n serious (Reply #32)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:37 AM

47. Not according to the manifesto

It's all about economics, and all else is optional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fun n serious (Reply #32)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:19 PM

180. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:11 AM

34. Let me guess ... authored by Chris Cillizza or Aaron Blake?

I'm not even going to take the time to read this bullshit. The WAPO has done a good job attacking Trump and the GOP, but they've also done nearly as good a job attacking economic progressives within the Democratic Party and especially Bernie Sanders over the past two years -- not to mention prior.

Great paper, but a clear centrist bias.

Me? I'm proud of Bernie. He's taking on the Washington establishment/holding the Party accountable and probably has more power doing so as an independent than he would were he a registered D. There's hardly a member of Congress who adheres to traditional, FDR Democrat standards and principles than Bernie Sanders.

Get over it everyone -- the DLC driven drift to the economic right has been a failure and is costing us the loss of a strong, vibrant middle and working class.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #34)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:28 AM

43. The Washington Post attacked Sanders?

That's ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to QC (Reply #44)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:43 AM

53. Well, I guess we can join the WH in dismissing less than complimentary press

about someone as "fake news."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #53)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:53 AM

62. How about we all look into the facts a bit before we go

on the offensive because it fits our narrative. Heath Mello has a 100% rating from Nebraska's Planned Parenthood for example. Why is that?

This is all about attacking Bernie because ... because ... well, just because -- some poeole don't like him, some people hold a grudge because he had the nerve to run against Hillary, some people don't like him because they need someone to blame and so he's why we lost the WH on Nov 8.

How about we stop looking for things to bash Bernie over and start uniting to achieve social AND economic justice for all (rather than the Party's primary focus on social justice and "globalization" the past 25 years?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #62)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 01:53 PM

107. Couldn't agree more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to QC (Reply #44)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:43 AM

55. Yup. And we've got DUers

warning using us repeatedly about falling prey to rightwing talking points/faux news.

Too much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to QC (Reply #44)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:02 PM

68. Meh.

a) "Negative stories" is not attacking.
b) Alternet? Fuck Alternet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to QC (Reply #44)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:23 PM

81. Durng the election over a year ago.....old old news.....

the election is over. How many did they run against his opponent ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #34)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:39 AM

48. Democrats "get over" civil rights and public health issues being relegated to the back of the bus?

Don't think that's going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Reply #48)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:59 PM

123. So you favor the the GOP candidate? There are only 2 candidates for that election.

"civil rights and public health issues being relegated to the back of the bus"


Did the National Democratic Party legalized Gay Marriage? I'm pretty sure that was a Supreme Court decision that exceeded the cautious DC Democrats who gave tepid support to "civil unions" - maybe - at some point in the distant future but certainly not now.

Did the Democratic Representatives in DC passed legislation to protect abortion rights nationwide? They had a brief window to pass legislation that would have protected women's health rights when President Obama was first elected. They couldn't do that but some of them can support protecting the usury rights of pay-day lenders.

President Obama removed the gag rule on abortion - what did the Democratic legislature in DC do to make it a law so a scumbag like Trump couldn't reverse it. Hmm... as far as I know none.

The Democratic Senate refused to hear any testimony from House Democratic Representatives concerning the election fraud in the 2000 Florida election. What Democratic Senator in DC stood up for the voting rights of "caged" and suppressed Black voters...?

The Democratic Party is the best party in this country, but that doesn't mean that it can't be critiqued or that it should get credit for half-assed or non-existent effort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to That Guy 888 (Reply #123)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 03:51 PM

127. 4 of the five justices were Democratic appointees and the 5th only happened because Democrats

blocked Bork.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #127)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:33 PM

132. Bork was unqualified, but when was that?

The post-90's Democratic power-players have been mostly go-along-get-along politicians worried about appearing "balanced" in the age of both-sides-do-it hack political journalism. The GOP Supreme Court appointees have been considered qualified on their merits as "stealth" conservatives. Not great legal minds of their generation, but Ayn Randian, Gawd Squad corporatists who have managed to keep enough of their nuttiest opinions out of the spotlight to get rubber-stamped by Democrats - in the mindbogglingly stupid belief that the Republicans would reciprocate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to That Guy 888 (Reply #132)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:14 PM

139. we actually had a better batting average with our nominees than they did with theirs

Only four Democrats have been named in my lifetime (I will be 50 this December) and all four were solid liberals (Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor) while the GOP has had the very liberal Blackman, the fairly liberal Stevens and Souter, the moderate Oconner, the less moderate Kennedy, and the conservatives Scalia, Rehnquist, Berger, Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Gorsech. The quantity of our nominees has been the problem not the quality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #139)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:36 PM

142. Were Souter, O'Conner, Kennedy and Stevens post-1990's appointees?

That is when the Democratic Party dropped the ball IMO. Why not talk about the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if you want to go back to when Dems weren't afraid of being Dems.

The quantity of our nominees has been the problem not the quality.


Despite largely rubberstamping Thomas(folding because Thomas said "high-tech lynching" was weak), Alito, and Roberts did the Democratic Party get reciprocity from the GOP? Has the GOP stopped blocking appointment by Democratic Presidents of Federal Judges to Federal courts that are viewed as "too Liberal"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KPN (Reply #34)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:44 AM

56. "Great paper, but a clear centrist bias."


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:14 AM

37. Has any of the Democratic Party Leadership commented on this?

This is coming from someone who's been very vocally Clinton, and outspoken against a number of the statements Senator Sanders has made.

However, this may be a lot to do about nothing. Unless someone in the Democratic Leadership comes out and comments on Senator Sanders, this is very possibly an agreement between the Senator and Democratic Party leadership.

Trying to look at it critically, there may be good behind-the-scenes reasons why the Senator was so active in Kentucky, but not so much in Georgia for Ossoff.

In the Primary, Sanders won Kansas with a percentage in the 60's, but lost Georgia somewhere in the 20's (may be off on these numbers, but I know it was pretty close.. I'm on the road right now and will correct later if I'm wrong).

Hell, that was one of our sides arguments back in the Primaries was that Senator Sanders was so unpopular in the Southern states with Democrats.

As long as our leadership stays hush hush on this, I'll trust in their judgement, and assume there's some background of agreement on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Amimnoch (Reply #37)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:53 PM

101. How can they? It's pretty clear that outside forces are trying to use Sanders as a wedge...

So the Democratic party is forced to put up with him.

And since Sanders does have legit fans and he likes to go on tv and do interviews, we just have to hope for the best.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:15 AM

38. This is starting to get really cray cray!

Louise Mensch says Sanders is a Russian agent of influence.

I say: get a grip!

Only one thing I know for sure about Sanders: he is anti-
corporate, pro-people.

Sanders also has to fight corporate interests on both sides
of the aisle, and he was hard done by when the DNC wouldn't
help him out.

It's possible that he's just leery of some who might not be as
anti-corporate as they should be ... and rightly so! I sure am.

This doesn't mean he's right 100% of the time, but it sure
DOESN'T mean he's acting for Russia or anyone but the
American people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #38)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:52 PM

98. She seems to have been right a number of times ont the Russian agents issue

She's probably not basing her assumption on what Bernie says.

Though I am taking it with a grain of salt until she provides more information on the topic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #38)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 12:17 AM

167. This is about his campaigning for a pro-life candidate

therefore treating women's rights as optional. It isn't about what Louis Mench says. Bernie's public appearances are documented, as are the bills Mello sponsored in the Nebraska legislature. Claiming you only know that "Bernie is anti-corporate and for the people" is a cop out. You can find out the facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:20 AM

41. Bernie's Envy

Bernie appears to have envy issues, and not just with Ossoff. He is as much about helping himself as he is about helping the Democratic Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:43 AM

54. People all over this site say that all that matters is the D after their names.

And say "let Manchin vote however he wants" because red state, blah, blah, blah. And also that we are supposed to vote for whichever crappy Democrat they decide to throw at us because of the team they are on.

It's pretty fucking hypocritical to complain about this now.

But I guess you (or rather, the author of the article) failed to notice that Tom Perez also endorsed Mello. But Sanders appears to be the devil incarnate today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alarimer (Reply #54)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:18 PM

113. Why would he endorse Mello and not Ossoff, a progressive? And claim not to know

whether Ossoff was progressive?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alarimer (Reply #54)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 07:03 PM

154. Having a majority with a D after their names is what gives a party control over leadership.

It's not a little, trivial thing to have the power of Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:45 AM

57. WASHINGTON POST'S STRANGE BEHAVIOR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)


Response to Post removed (Reply #58)


Response to Post removed (Reply #73)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:31 PM

117. Great post and analysis. I forgot about the debate angle,

but that reminder does explain a lot about his motives. He would not have gained as much traction without those debates. I think there are definitely unspoken motives for his actions now, which unfortunately go to his trustworthiness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #58)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:54 PM

102. No flames from me, my friend.

A couple of names there that I thought I once admired. Until some time passed and I started looking deeper.

Let's not forget Jill Stein sat at that same banquet table with Michael Flynn and Vladimir Putin. In that same photo that was frequently used to excoriate Flynn for his cozy relationship with the Russians.

And as for Julian Assange, I've often fantasized about what I'd do if I were the executive VP for News at some network or cable outfit. I'd issue a memo instituting a new policy: WHENEVER Julian Assange's name is mentioned, the writer/reporter/anchor MUST also include a line to reflect how he's still hiding out at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to avoid facing sexual assault charges in Sweden. WHENEVER Julian Assange's name comes up. That line would HAVE TO be somewhere in the story.

Similarly, when Wikileaks was brought up, there should always be a sentence included that mentions Wikileaks' chief, Julian Assange, who remains in hiding to avoid facing sexual assault charges in Sweden. That fact would ALWAYS have to be included as an identifier, so the public remembers and has perhaps a fuller, more rounded concept of who Julian Assange is - someone who hides out to avoid facing real-life criminal charges leveled against him. Makes you wonder why he wouldn't want to step up, fight to defend his "good name", and prove his innocence.

Just a fantasy of mine...

But I do remember various dictates that did come down from the network brass as to how we were to write and deliver various stories. I remember several big point being made when the Falkland Islands war was happening between Britain and Argentina. It was an order. Because the Brits were America's biggest ally, we were obligated to word things the way the Brits would. Therefore, it was always to be the Falkland Islands, and NOT the Malvinas - which was what the Argentines called it. And as for the Argentines, THAT'S what they were to be called. "Argen-tynes". Because that was the way the Brits pronounced it. NOT "Argentinians." "Argentynes." Long vowel sound in the last syllable. I remember spelling it that way in my scripts, just so I wouldn't make a mistake on the air: "ArgenTYNES."

And during the hostage crisis in 1979 - even as it dragged on with no conclusion, we were ordered to include SOME item about the hostages in Iran. Even when there was no other new angle to it except for a one-day-bigger day count. I remember hearing various anchors forced to resort to using that as a kicker to their newscasts: "... and the American hostages have now been held in Iran for 283 days. And that's the news, I'm (name filled in here for the lockout) ... "

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #58)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:24 PM

149. A Russian agent? I think thats a bit to much into the twilight zone for me to believe to be honest

and before you start I personally voted for Hillary over Bernie as I thought and still think that she made the better candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:51 AM

60. Sanders is not trying to help the Democratic Party

The Washington Post has a good article on Sanders' poor and strange behavior

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:53 AM

63. LOL, someone alerted on your post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FSogol (Reply #63)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:01 PM

67. Wow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:58 AM

64. I give up on everyone.

Bernie touting ossof as progressive would NOT HELP OSSOF in the red state!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:00 PM

65. Et tu Bernie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #65)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:33 PM

87. But when you point things out its back to your bashing him , etc...wake up to REALITY

he stood on a stage with Perez when the "following" of his revolution, shouted down the DNC.

Bernie isn't interested in the DNC or Democrats he is interested in the revolution His revolution, Democrats are just the means to him. He is giving the GOP ammo.


The GOP is using this already...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4421656/Crowd-Maine-Democrats-BOOS-new-party-chairman-rally.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Historic NY (Reply #87)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:34 PM

88. Yep. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Historic NY (Reply #87)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:11 PM

138. That is just horrible. There is no excuse for him allowing

or not speaking out about that. He is encouraging Democrats to be scorned and ridiculed -- just like the Repubs do! How utterly nasty and inappropiate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:01 PM

66. It seems ever since an article published

a couple of weeks or so ago with regards to Sen. Sanders being the most popular member of congress there have been numerous negative articles and postings regarding Bernie Sanders' positions or questioning his motives. Whatever. I'm not playing along. I like Sen. Sanders positions and his policies. He's for single payer healthcare for all and wants to tax risky Wall St. speculation to help pay for it and higher education. He has good ideas about our infrastructure among many others too numerous to mention here.
I see an attempt to simply play the 'divide and conquer' card because republicans are sinking with the Trumptanic and it's about all they have left. I'm not buying this 'all of a sudden Bernie is bad' bullshit. I voted for Hillary. I didn't agree with some of her positions but, she was highly qualified and would have been infinitely better than what we're saddled with now. She would've been presidential from day one.
DU has been infiltrated before. I believe it is happening again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr. Evil (Reply #66)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:04 PM

69. So you like how he handled the Omaha election and Ossoff?

Are we not allowed to point out inconsistency here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mr. Evil (Reply #66)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:45 PM

95. That article was mislabeled. Sanders is the most popular member of Congress for Vermonters.

He lives in a state with a highly homogenous demographic.

That he'd be highly popular with his residents is not much of an achievement.

He doesn't have to deal with multiple demographics and their issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:08 PM

72. For the love of shit, can't we move forward.

This is why we keep getting our ass kicked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chicago1980 (Reply #72)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:22 PM

79. Agree attacking Bernie does nothing but help Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:22 PM

80. DNC should limit ,,,,,

their candidates to people who are professed Democrats!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:24 PM

82. They both know it would have hurt Ossoff.

Progressive? Alabama? Ossoff was running centrist. I imagine there were discussions, with consensus being it not a good idea. I don't think it's fair to anyone to make assumptions and run with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:24 PM

83. I think most of us have had it with his arbitrary decrees of

who and what counts as progressive. Bernie is divisive as hell. If he can't stop being unnecessarily divisive, he should sit down and shut up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:25 PM

84. Yay! Another Bernie Thread!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:47 PM

96. He endorsed a pro-life candidate before

I forget her name. I can't say I'm surprised by this. He's made a number of comments indicating that women's reproductive rights aren't a priority for him. The fact is my rights don't rate in comparison to economic issues he cares most about. I don't know if he's never learned that reproductive rights are an economic as well as a civil rights issue. Without access to them, far more women are relegated to poverty, even greater poverty than they face now. It's unfortunate that Bernie thinks about economic issues in terms of the white working class to the exclusion of the rest of us. Women are poorer, and that means children,the future generations of America, are poorer. Treating abortion rights as negotiable can only make that worse.


Did Mello endorse Bernie last year?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 12:53 PM

100. So I guess...

Only Bernie is the sole arbiter of who is progressive and who is not.
Not like there are other progressive voices throughout the party.


And what exactly does he use for criteria to determine his ratings scale?
Could he transparently show this criteria to the rest of us so we can be awed?

I love the guy - but sometimes he's a parody of himself.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 02:04 PM

110. It's so confusing. Sanders is bad because he isn't a Democrat. Mello is bad but he is a Democrat.



So hard to keep up!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #110)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 05:43 PM

144. He is pro-life. That is the issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #144)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:06 PM

145. As is Manchin. As is Casey. As is Donnelly. As is Lipinski and Peterson in House. I don't

agree with Anti Choice candidates. But I don't agree with pro-trade Democrats or anti-universal healthcare Democrats. If Mello were running against a progressive pro choice Democrat it might bother me more. But he's not. He's running against a much more dangerous ideologue . . . a Republican. Mello is running on bread-and-butter city issues. As Mayor I don't think he is going to be working to change a woman's right to choose in Omaha. Sometimes you have to pick your battles. If I lived in Omaha I'd be much more afraid of Jean Stothert's reelection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #145)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:10 PM

147. I would vote for him if I lived in that city, but I would not endorse

a person who is pro-life. And to not say that Ossoff is progressive or not 'know' and then endorse this person. Also, this guy is running for mayor...I would not get involved in this race as it won't have any effect nationally...I mean Georgia is so important...a mayor's race not so much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #147)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:50 PM

152. Well that's fine. Sanders obviously feels differently. Maybe he was asked to do this. Maybe

there's a reason he isn't sharing with you. Maybe there was a strategic reason re Ossoff for not going to Georgia. Maybe he will in the future. I don't get the insider info on these decisions. So I wouldn't make assumptions. I support people based on policies they stand up for. I like Sanders. But that's me. I'm obviously a dying breed on this board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #152)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:01 AM

175. There is no reason that would be sufficient.

First of all, it is a waste of time to spend money on a mayoral race when we have house races and Senate races to win...hell, the state legislatures and governorship's are way more important. I don't see any reason for even getting involved in this race...bigger fish to fry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #175)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 01:35 PM

177. Well I guess Democrats think differently than you. DCCC is making an investment to back Quist

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is making an initial six-figure investment into the Montana state party to back Quist’s campaign, DCCC spokeswoman Meredith Kelly told The Huffington Post.

But I'm sure you can contact them and tell them to stop wasting their time . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #177)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 04:04 PM

178. Perhaps but in my opinion the other race for mayor...absolutely no reason

to endorse a pro-life candidate or got there... the viable House race is what is important.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #178)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:11 PM

179. Well everyone is entitled to an opinion. I thought pro-life Kaine was a crappy VP candidate but . .

what the hell. I feel much better that a woman's right to choose is protected with a Democrat in power rather than a Republican - even if their personal stance is different than the party's platform. Mello's opponent is much more scary to me. I'm not privy to discussions Sanders may or may not have had or what his reasons are - or what the DCCC's reasons are . . . they aren't giving me the inside dope.

So frankly - there's a boatload of other things I'm way more concerned about right now than Sanders supporting Heath Mello.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #179)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:57 PM

183. Kaine had evolved on the issue...as you know.

But one has nothing to do with the other. Why spend time and money on a mayor's race?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #183)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:42 PM

184. Like I said - ask the DCCC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #184)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 08:22 AM

186. Like I said...why waste money and endorsements on an obscure mayor's race

when the candidate is anti-choice? We have a chance to pick up a House seat...I will never understand how this makes sense. It has also angered women and this so called unity tour needs to end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #145)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:55 AM

174. I would vote for the Democrat always...but picking a mayoral

candidate who will not even help with the Senate and the House who is pro-life and endorsing said person makes no sense...why even bother with a Mayor's race...way better ways to spend our money...and while many of us hold our nose and vote for a Dem who holds pro-life views. (Tim Ryan evolved on this issue and I voted for him, but had he been primaried, I would not have), but why would you endorse one?

Oh and one other thing...I consider a woman's right to choose way more important than other issues like banks or even single payer (which I do want). It is a civil rights issue. I would never vote in a primary for a candidate who had previously endorsed a pro-life person for any office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #144)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 06:18 PM

148. Unless he is vegetarian and against the death penalty, he is not "pro-life"

He is probably against abortion rights, but no one who believes in state-sponsored ritual murder or killing animals to eat their flesh can reasonably be expected to claim the label "pro-life."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #148)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:51 AM

173. Nice try...but it doesn't work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to QC (Reply #153)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:51 AM

172. Really,he tried to force women to look at ultrasounds before abortion.

They can say what they want...I still don't understand why a Mayor's race is important enough to use our resources...I always vote for the Democrat...but in a primary I would never support a Mello...Let's work on the House and the Senate...and time to end the unity tour also...waste of time and money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nanjeanne (Reply #110)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 12:10 AM

163. Women's rights are the issue

While you clearly believe Bernie matters more, many of us consider the equal rights of half the population of the country as more important than his career. Your glib dismissal of the issue speaks volumes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:05 PM

129. These tweets are in the WP article

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fnews%2Fthe-fix%2Fwp%2F2017%2F04%2F20%2Fbernie-sanderss-strange-behavior%2F


?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fnews%2Fthe-fix%2Fwp%2F2017%2F04%2F20%2Fbernie-sanderss-strange-behavior%2F

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #129)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:42 PM

133. First do no harm. You would think he would at least have that common sense

consideration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gothmog (Reply #129)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:37 AM

171. BS said ..he "isn't prepared to back Democrats just because of

..a party label.."..


But, he backs an "aggressively anti-choice" dem who he calls "progressive".

Why Is the DNC Embracing an Aggressively Anti-Choice Democrat

snip//

He was endorsed in 2010 by anti-choice group Nebraska Right to Life.

Heath Mello has sponsored a range of anti-choice measures, including a 20-week abortion ban.

Heath Mello is a sponsor of the final version of a 20-week abortion ban approved by the governor in 2010, and cast anti-choice votes in favor of requiring physicians to be physically present for an abortion in order to impede access to telemedicine abortion care, and a law banning insurance plans in the state from covering abortions.

Try that ol Establishment Planned Parenthood.

snip// Dkos pulls their endorsement of Heath Mello

The Daily Kos, which describes itself as “a news organization, community, and activist hub,” pulled its endorsement of Mello after revelations about the Democrat’s stance on abortion. The site said it had been unaware of Mello’s anti-choice stance, but that “as soon as we learned this information, we withdrew our endorsement, because this legislation clearly runs contrary to Daily Kos’ deepest values, including our support for women’s reproductive rights and our staunch opposition to laws that in any way impede women’s access to reproductive health care.”

musette https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8955986

https://rewire.news/article/2017/04/20/why-is-dnc-embracing-aggressively-anti-choice-democrat/

When, Jon Ossoff, who is Pro-Choice, actually is one.. but BS "doesn't know him"..

"Jon Ossoff on the issues, presented in a way Bernie Sanders can understand"

snip//

Women’s Heath & Planned Parenthood”

Ossoff is an unapologetic supporter of the concept of women being able to make their own decisions regarding reproductive health care, and Ossoff is a strong supporter of Planned Parenthood.

What a concept for a "progressive"!!!

snip//

National Security”

•Ossoff has promised to “oppose unnecessary military intervention overseas and...only support the use of force where US national security is at stake”
•Ossoff opposes the use of torture
•Ossoff has called for an investigation into "Russian interference in American politics”
•Ossoff referred to the Iraq War as “reckless”

Much More.. https://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/04/19/1654449/-Jon-Ossoff-on-the-issues-presented-in-a-way-Bernie-Sanders-can-understan

Jon Ossoff took the high road in Georgia.. I hope he wins so badly.. Nancy Pelosi was there for him as was Samuel L Jackson.. Hollywood came out for him! Alyssa Milano and Christopher Gorham got the Vote out!

We'll never know if a few positive words instead of dismissal could have made the difference from the "most popular politician in America".

Not sure why BS wouldn't want to have gotten to know Jon Ossoff who would have immediately gone to Congress if he had won 50% and we would have had one more Dem to fight the Fascistrumps.

Thanks for the tweets from David Nir, Goth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 04:52 PM

134. It's not strange for Bernie

I'm a woman who supported Sanders. And this doesn't particularly surprise me from Bernie. I supported Ossoff, but I don't consider him a Bernie type of progressive. Bernie's an economic populist. Love him or hate him he's singularly focused on the rich vs everyone else conversation.

He's personally a solid vote for social progressive ideals as well. But these aren't his bread and butter. He is an old white guy from one of the whitest states in the country. He introduced language back into public discourse that we haven't been using or talking about publicly since Reagan. I considered tremendously important.

But he isn't the second coming.

PS - it's also possible Ossoff hasn't reached out and Bernie's being a bit of an ass as a result. Ossoff started off with strong support from Congressman Lewis who attacked Bernie's Civil Rights record during the primary. This could be attached to that. Pettiness in politics can know few bounds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)


Response to Post removed (Reply #156)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 08:15 PM

157. No, he's not helping about anything

that I can see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #157)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 08:54 PM

160. Yes and the question is why is he so actively not helping

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to underthematrix (Reply #160)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:32 PM

162. I know.. but

the truth is ugly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:25 PM

161. I'm not a member of any organized political party

I'm a Democrat





Sometimes Independents can act very independently and it may seem a bit strange

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrnst (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 01:40 AM

168. Bernie said on NPR:

"If we are going to protect a woman's right to choose, at the end of the day we're going to need Democratic control over the House and the Senate, and state governments all over this nation," he said. "And we have got to appreciate where people come from, and do our best to fight for the pro-choice agenda. But I think you just can't exclude people who disagree with us on one issue."


He's been pro-choice all his life. He's trying to pragmatically do what will work best for women in this very conservative area. And that certainly would not be a Repug victory.

As a woman I don't like this. At all. But, by the same token, as a woman, I realize how much better off women will be with a Democrat in office, someone who is an economic, justice and health policy progressive. I blame Omaha for not being in the 21st Century.

If Mello wins and does well for the people of the area, then we'll start shifting the whole place into being Democratic and get pro-choice policies way faster and surer than we'll ever get them by being pure and having this candidate lose to a Reptile.

And too, as a woman and very pro-choice, there are issues which are even more important to me than that. Racial economic justice for example. Women with jobs, educations and life opportunities, often find it possible to avoid unwanted pregnancy altogether.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zentrum (Reply #168)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 11:21 AM

187. NO

The majority of Americans are pro-choice. It's not even close. Polls consistently show that. Bernie's tactic is to claim pragmatism about issues like guns and women's rights but completely ignored it for the issues he cares about. Pragmatism is irrelevant when it comes to the wallets of the demographic that already make 2-7x the median income. His much lauded "white working class" earns well above the average. Meanwhile, single women and their children suffer alarming rates of poverty.

Bernie approves of virtually no one, yet he has signaled out this guy, even though a mayoral race has zero impact on the party or anyone outside Nebraska. Bernie is for the second time choosing to back an anti-choice, anti-equality candidate. To pretend there is anything progressive about abandoning half the population is ludicrous. Women are already poorer than men. Without access to reproductive rights poverty rates rise. Bernie has been in DC for three decades. There is no way he hasn't heard that argument.

He voted for women's rights when presented to him but he has on a number of occasions now indicated they aren't central to his cause. The effect he is having is to convince his supporters than your rights and mine are a "wedge issue," a "distraction from what really matters." That is a position that can only lead to greater inequality. If you want to sacrifice your equal rights and relegate yourself to second-class citizenship, that's your problem, but I will not be subjugated to advance the careers of a few men.

There is absolutely nothing progressive or just about what is happening now. We are seeing the party taken sharply to the right under the guise of progressivism. We are supposed to be tolerant of racism, of the denial of our rates and our own increased poverty so that the already privileged can become even more so. I am standing for none of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #187)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 12:56 PM

188. Yet he spoke up first

...way early, for gay rights, marriage equality, worker's rights, stands for medicare expansion for all, was against the Iraq war (which everyone has forgotten--and all the women and children who died then), stands for students and workers, which, you know, includes women.

But, for sure, let's demand purity and perfection from him even though it is demanded of no other democratic candidate.

He was my first choice but when the crunch came, I vote for Hillary, made calls to GOTV. I gather that this does not go both ways when it come to Bernie. Funny, how that works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zentrum (Reply #188)

Sat Apr 22, 2017, 07:31 PM

189. Bernie is your focus, not mine

Last edited Sat Apr 22, 2017, 08:38 PM - Edit history (1)

I care about equal rights and the fact he has convinced you and others like you to settle for second-class citizenship. I care about efforts to move the country toward greater inequality. Take your fan girl appeal to someone who shares your commitment to the career of one over the rights of the many.
The facts refute your campaign rhetoric, but you've had plenty of opportunity to investigate that yourself.

Bernie isn't running for president. I don't live in VT. I have no responsibility to support him. To claim some sort of equivalency between a presidential election and enforced fealty for its own sake is absurd. You are more than within your rights to abandon principle, but don't you dare insist I go along with my own subjugation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread