HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The hypocrisy of ...

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:17 AM

 

The hypocrisy of the latest round of Bernie-bashing

In almost all American elections, only two candidates – the Democrat and the Republican – have any realistic chance of winning. A thoughtful citizen will usually have disagreements with each of them on one or more issues. Some people take the pragmatic course of supporting the candidate who’s better overall, even if not perfect. Others say “the lesser evil is still evil”; refusing to vote for a candidate with whom they disagree, they stay home or vote for a no-hoper minor-party candidate.

Bernie Sanders faced this situation. He came down on the side of the pragmatists. He voiced his support for the Democratic nominee because he looked at the Republican and said, “We’ve got to keep that guy out.”

Did he do the right thing?

Well, here’s where the hypocrisy comes in. Some of the loudest pro-Hillary people on this board are now spewing vitriol at Bernie because he’s supporting a Democratic nominee with whom he’s not in complete agreement, while ignoring that he did exactly the same thing by supporting Hillary last fall.

The hypocrisy is compounded with intellectual dishonesty, as they pretend that support for the Democratic nominee means deprecating the issue of reproductive rights. My view, and I think Bernie’s view, is that reproductive rights are important. So are issues of war and peace, international trade, economic inequality, etc. That all these issues are important doesn’t change the problem I described in the first paragraph: Sometimes, the choice is between two candidates, neither of whom is perfect on all important issues, but one of whom is better than the other overall.

People like Bernie and me voted for Hillary despite our major disagreements with her. That doesn’t mean that we suddenly decided those issues were unimportant. It means only that the Democrat was better than the Republican.

248 replies, 16388 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 248 replies Author Time Post
Reply The hypocrisy of the latest round of Bernie-bashing (Original post)
Jim Lane Apr 2017 OP
boston bean Apr 2017 #1
Jim Lane Apr 2017 #3
boston bean Apr 2017 #8
R B Garr Apr 2017 #23
BrooklynTech Apr 2017 #235
retrowire Apr 2017 #52
Post removed Apr 2017 #76
ehrnst Apr 2017 #80
retrowire Apr 2017 #94
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #95
retrowire Apr 2017 #98
pnwmom Apr 2017 #223
retrowire Apr 2017 #225
pnwmom Apr 2017 #227
NurseJackie Apr 2017 #230
arthritisR_US Apr 2017 #238
Adrahil Apr 2017 #241
DownriverDem Apr 2017 #157
retrowire Apr 2017 #158
ciaobaby Apr 2017 #204
stopbush Apr 2017 #97
Kentonio Apr 2017 #113
stopbush Apr 2017 #122
Kentonio Apr 2017 #123
stevenleser Apr 2017 #187
LiberalLovinLug Apr 2017 #186
stopbush Apr 2017 #208
LiberalLovinLug Apr 2017 #246
YOHABLO Apr 2017 #191
ciaobaby Apr 2017 #206
JCanete Apr 2017 #216
InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2017 #104
Akamai Apr 2017 #142
JTFrog Apr 2017 #108
emulatorloo Apr 2017 #148
onit2day Apr 2017 #228
LiberalLovinLug Apr 2017 #247
Alice11111 Apr 2017 #234
cwydro Apr 2017 #5
SCantiGOP Apr 2017 #75
Bohunk68 Apr 2017 #243
R B Garr Apr 2017 #22
boston bean Apr 2017 #28
R B Garr Apr 2017 #43
grahampuba Apr 2017 #90
R B Garr Apr 2017 #125
moriah Apr 2017 #165
grahampuba Apr 2017 #199
moriah Apr 2017 #205
grahampuba Apr 2017 #209
InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2017 #105
Chevy Apr 2017 #138
R B Garr Apr 2017 #139
stonecutter357 Apr 2017 #29
masmdu Apr 2017 #37
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #74
Sculpin Beauregard Apr 2017 #2
stevenleser Apr 2017 #12
uponit7771 Apr 2017 #27
Paladin Apr 2017 #31
retrowire Apr 2017 #55
stevenleser Apr 2017 #84
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #87
retrowire Apr 2017 #96
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #128
retrowire Apr 2017 #130
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #152
retrowire Apr 2017 #156
moriah Apr 2017 #167
retrowire Apr 2017 #168
snort Apr 2017 #171
karynnj Apr 2017 #63
stevenleser Apr 2017 #81
Kentonio Apr 2017 #118
stevenleser Apr 2017 #135
NastyRiffraff Apr 2017 #144
karynnj Apr 2017 #120
stevenleser Apr 2017 #134
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #93
karynnj Apr 2017 #131
stevenleser Apr 2017 #136
karynnj Apr 2017 #182
liberal N proud Apr 2017 #64
ehrnst Apr 2017 #82
Tom Rinaldo Apr 2017 #126
stevenleser Apr 2017 #129
Tom Rinaldo Apr 2017 #137
Name removed Apr 2017 #192
boston bean Apr 2017 #17
LexVegas Apr 2017 #4
Demit Apr 2017 #25
thesquanderer Apr 2017 #161
Demit Apr 2017 #163
betsuni Apr 2017 #34
Starry Messenger Apr 2017 #72
comradebillyboy Apr 2017 #110
Tanuki Apr 2017 #6
Jim Lane Apr 2017 #15
Tanuki Apr 2017 #18
R B Garr Apr 2017 #45
ehrnst Apr 2017 #83
tecelote Apr 2017 #221
betsuni Apr 2017 #59
ProfessorPlum Apr 2017 #7
Amimnoch Apr 2017 #239
George II Apr 2017 #245
chwaliszewski Apr 2017 #9
Dustlawyer Apr 2017 #14
JudyM Apr 2017 #62
seaglass Apr 2017 #10
Post removed Apr 2017 #11
Volstagg Apr 2017 #13
LineLineLineReply .
demmiblue Apr 2017 #19
grossproffit Apr 2017 #21
Act_of_Reparation Apr 2017 #24
TDale313 Apr 2017 #32
Raster Apr 2017 #36
stonecutter357 Apr 2017 #42
padfun Apr 2017 #44
JHan Apr 2017 #46
thesquanderer Apr 2017 #141
JHan Apr 2017 #149
Demit Apr 2017 #169
Post removed Apr 2017 #196
thesquanderer Apr 2017 #218
chervilant Apr 2017 #53
retrowire Apr 2017 #57
karynnj Apr 2017 #92
berksdem Apr 2017 #124
m-lekktor Apr 2017 #16
JHan Apr 2017 #48
Cha Apr 2017 #99
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #100
emulatorloo Apr 2017 #109
PJMcK Apr 2017 #20
betsuni Apr 2017 #26
fleabiscuit Apr 2017 #143
betsuni Apr 2017 #240
fleabiscuit Apr 2017 #248
Kaye_NY Apr 2017 #30
brer cat Apr 2017 #54
yuiyoshida Apr 2017 #121
Jim Lane Apr 2017 #170
DanTex Apr 2017 #33
tammywammy Apr 2017 #51
oberliner Apr 2017 #35
dsc Apr 2017 #38
karynnj Apr 2017 #39
disillusioned73 Apr 2017 #40
scipan Apr 2017 #226
Cryptoad Apr 2017 #41
LOL Lib Apr 2017 #56
DownriverDem Apr 2017 #47
Jim Lane Apr 2017 #175
Demit Apr 2017 #193
Jim Lane Apr 2017 #203
Demit Apr 2017 #212
samnsara Apr 2017 #49
betsuni Apr 2017 #65
DownriverDem Apr 2017 #155
Post removed Apr 2017 #181
ananda Apr 2017 #50
hrmjustin Apr 2017 #58
Fla Dem Apr 2017 #60
NurseJackie Apr 2017 #79
Zing Zing Zingbah Apr 2017 #86
tiredtoo Apr 2017 #61
betsuni Apr 2017 #68
Fla Dem Apr 2017 #107
betsuni Apr 2017 #117
tiredtoo Apr 2017 #164
Cha Apr 2017 #102
Nitram Apr 2017 #66
Roy Rolling Apr 2017 #67
Zing Zing Zingbah Apr 2017 #69
KittyWampus Apr 2017 #70
Cha Apr 2017 #88
bettyellen Apr 2017 #229
NurseJackie Apr 2017 #231
bettyellen Apr 2017 #233
betsuni Apr 2017 #71
Orrex Apr 2017 #73
klook Apr 2017 #194
Starry Messenger Apr 2017 #77
RedWedge Apr 2017 #78
Chicago1980 Apr 2017 #85
Demit Apr 2017 #173
JoeOtterbein Apr 2017 #89
stevenleser Apr 2017 #91
InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2017 #112
stevenleser Apr 2017 #116
InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2017 #119
stevenleser Apr 2017 #127
thesquanderer Apr 2017 #145
stevenleser Apr 2017 #147
Post removed Apr 2017 #179
katmondoo Apr 2017 #101
InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2017 #115
leftofcool Apr 2017 #103
George II Apr 2017 #106
Jim Lane Apr 2017 #185
emulatorloo Apr 2017 #111
alarimer Apr 2017 #114
Post removed Apr 2017 #132
stevenleser Apr 2017 #140
certainot Apr 2017 #133
emulatorloo Apr 2017 #146
certainot Apr 2017 #177
emulatorloo Apr 2017 #178
certainot Apr 2017 #183
emulatorloo Apr 2017 #184
Saviolo Apr 2017 #154
certainot Apr 2017 #176
Mr. Evil Apr 2017 #150
KPN Apr 2017 #151
peggysue2 Apr 2017 #153
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #159
retrowire Apr 2017 #160
tonedevil Apr 2017 #162
Bobbie Jo Apr 2017 #166
TonyPDX Apr 2017 #189
WoonTars Apr 2017 #172
snort Apr 2017 #174
lovemydogs Apr 2017 #180
Name removed Apr 2017 #198
LiberalLovinLug Apr 2017 #188
Name removed Apr 2017 #190
Name removed Apr 2017 #195
zentrum Apr 2017 #197
Name removed Apr 2017 #200
zentrum Apr 2017 #207
Post removed Apr 2017 #213
tonedevil Apr 2017 #214
Name removed Apr 2017 #201
dchill Apr 2017 #202
lexington filly Apr 2017 #210
Progressive dog Apr 2017 #211
hamsterjill Apr 2017 #215
Jim Lane Apr 2017 #220
Chathamization Apr 2017 #232
beam me up scottie Apr 2017 #217
Amaryllis Apr 2017 #219
pecosbob Apr 2017 #222
DRoseDARs Apr 2017 #224
BrooklynTech Apr 2017 #236
Ladygrey Apr 2017 #237
hjh3rd Apr 2017 #242
Adrahil Apr 2017 #244

Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:24 AM

1. oh, this is just too much!

I'm afraid to say much else as to get a hide for re-living the primaries...

This is a joke, right??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:28 AM

3. I had to edit several times so as not to be refighting the primary

 

A more honest exposition of my opinion would have involved elaborating on my disagreements with Hillary Clinton, but I thought it more polite to keep to generalizations.

Meanwhile, if you want to get beyond your hilarious witticisms, feel free to explain why supporting an imperfect Democrat is mandatory when it's someone you like but absolutely unacceptable when it's someone you don't.

I guess it depends on whose tri is being angulated, eh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:33 AM

8. You did it again. LMAO! this is just too rich!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #8)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:54 AM

23. It really is too rich!

Amazing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #8)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 03:23 AM

235. Just began reading this thread

 

There are three posters I can count on to express their disgust with the OP if it's at all supportive of Bernie, expressed or implied, no matter how non-inflammatory that OP might be.

At the end of the thread I'll state whether those three posters were heard from. (I'm sure they will have been.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:22 AM

52. I am appalled at the amount of people that are mocking you at all

What you said is totally moderate thinking. It's on point. It is why I voted for Hillary. Sure Hillary told us free healthcare would never happen at one point and legalization of marijuana was not in her wheelhouse but I voted for her because it was the right thing to do, just like Bernie.

These purists are truly "too rich" and they're very similar to the Bernie or Busters in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #52)


Response to Post removed (Reply #76)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:57 AM

80. +1000 (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #76)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:05 AM

94. But he endorsed Hillary. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #94)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:06 AM

95. So? That is the primary. Why are you refighting the primary? My comments are concerned

 

SOLELY with the last several months and have nothing at all do with Clinton or the primary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #95)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:08 AM

98. Hillary didn't perfectly align with him

But he endorsed.

He endorsed this other guy who didn't perfectly align with him.

It's called being a big tent party. Just like pelosi said, there can be pro life dems.

Big tent.

Stop with the purity tests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #98)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:51 PM

223. He didn't endorse Ossoff till AFTER there was an uproar because he endorsed Mello but not Ossoff.

Don't think we don't remember.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #223)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:10 PM

225. That was explained as him not knowing Ossoff.

I remember that, dont you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #225)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:29 PM

227. He didn't "know" Mello, either. That excuse was a joke. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #225)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 12:09 AM

230. That was his unprepared bullshit response when cornered.

Did you believe him? You were impressed with that off the cuff diversion and dodge? Wow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #223)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 04:07 AM

238. Some have difficulty with facts...nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #98)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 06:55 AM

241. No purity test. He can join the party.

 

What? He doesn't want to? Then I don't give a fuck about his opinion as to what we should do. It's cowardly to stand on the outside and throw rotten tomatoes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #94)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:33 AM

157. Supporters didn't get it

Bernie did endorse Hillary, but it was too late for many of his supporters. He trashed the Dem Party and Hillary during the primaries. Then he expected his naïve supporters to switch to Hillary. In the real political world, that is what you do. In the naïve world of many Bernie supporters, they said hell no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DownriverDem (Reply #157)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:34 AM

158. And I hoped they had thought better than that. :/ Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DownriverDem (Reply #157)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:36 PM

204. and Hillary's trashing of Obama was A. O.K.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #76)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:07 AM

97. People forget that due to Sanders, Hillary ran on - in his words -

the most-progressive platform in decades.

How'd that work out for us?

Now, he wants the D Party to embrace his ultra-progressive ideas and reshape the Party in the image of an Independent. Why would we do that?

Sanders. Bashing Hillary throughout the campaign, pulling the Party way to the left and now bashing the Ds as much as he bashes the Rs. Sounds like a winning strategy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #97)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:31 AM

113. Hahahahaha

Oh I'm sorry, that is just too funny. So now we lost because we supposedly ran on Bernie's platform? Brilliant..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #113)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:48 AM

122. The point is that embracing Sanders' strategy is no guarantee for success.

He held up the whole committee process to get his progressive agenda into the platform, as if that would garner votes. All it did was highlight the divisions between Sanders and the Dem Party. All it did was give him an excuse to delay his endorsement of Hillary, which came very late in the process. All it did was fuel his fantasy that he would challenge the convention on the question of super delegates.

Some of us well remember the boorish and counter-productive behavior of his followers at the convention. That colors the way we view his actions and pronouncements now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #122)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:49 AM

123. Gee, I'm sorry they hurt your feelings..

Also interesting to see people still supporting the super delegates system which is basically a kick in the face of democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #122)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 01:41 PM

187. You are far too nice to be engaging with the kind of person who made the response to this post

 

that they did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #97)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 01:39 PM

186. Sanders platform and the revised Sanders/Clinton platform was not what lost the election

And if you are saying that his "ultra-progressive" ideas, which are just normal moderate laws in every other western democracy, (single payer, maternity leave...) are unpopular, why was he the one with the least negatives? The one that got more independent popular support? And continues to have popular support?

Why would not the Democratic leadership, if they are smart, listen and learn from the popularity of his ideas and the appeal to younger Americans? Why would we NOT do that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalLovinLug (Reply #186)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:42 PM

208. The election was lost due to

1. Media giving tRump a free ride, billions in free ads and clobbering Hillary at every turn

2. James Comey

3. tRump collusion with the Russians.

It has nothing to do with all the "reasons" Sanders is citing for the loss.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #208)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 02:14 PM

246. "nothing" is a big word

Yes those were factors as well. It was a compounding of elements into a perfect storm. I'd also add voter suppression, and Crosscheck, and gerrymandering to your list.

But it does no good denying to even consider that Democrats themselves also made mistakes. Or that Hillary, mostly through no fault of her own but the success of a decades long propaganda war against her, was a flawed candidate, (not a flawed person). And the DNCs assumptions and arrogance about their standing in key states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #97)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 02:31 PM

191. If Bernie Sanders hadn't run Hillary's platform would have been very different.

I voted for Hillary, I think she is one of the U.S.'s most treasured. But I do agree that Bernie Sanders rhetoric pushed her agenda more to the left. I think Hillary actually is more to the left, but she is pragmatic about having to juggle Corporate America, BigBanks etc, as campaign contributors and power brokers, with the needs of the middle classes and the poor. When people say ''way to left" I don't get it. Just what do you mean?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #97)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:38 PM

206. the "progressive" platform Hillary was forced to run on is what got her the majoity of actual votes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stopbush (Reply #97)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 05:52 PM

216. wait, you think that is why we lost? Really? or did it just feel clever? nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #52)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:12 AM

104. Same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #52)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:08 AM

142. Retrowire -- I sure agree with you on this issue. "My absolutely pure way or the highway!"

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:20 AM

108. If you had to edit so many times, I guess that says it all.

 

Do you want me to go on and on about Bernie's team hacking Hillary and his campaign manager's ties to Russia?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure at that point you won't want to be rehashing the primaries anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:20 AM

148. Please proceed, Governor

your fellow DU'ers are not your enemy, Jim.

Everyone here is on the left and shares the same core values.

I'm done with ALL of these divisive threads. My policy now is to let them sink.

You want to fight? Take it to the Republicans. Not your progressive and liberal brothers and sisters at DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:24 PM

228. Some dems just hate Bernie no matter what he does

 

He speaks for all progressives by his idea that all dems should be heard. This riff with the DLC or corporate dems who think we need bankster and lobbyist money to survive should never dominate the voice of the people or the democratic platform. It's the issues and not the personalities we should focus on. As a Bernie supporter I don't bash Hillary and point to how she should act or be because the issues bind us together.n The alternative is destructive to democracy and valuable only to the 1% and a host of deplorables. Principles before personalities. Trump has neither. Bernie has both and brings a lot to the party and for the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onit2day (Reply #228)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 02:17 PM

247. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #3)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 02:06 AM

234. I agree, and I voted for Hillary both times, and I would again. Bernie Bashers, let it go...

We will never beat the Repubs if we use our time and energy beating up the people on our side. Plus, it ruins our credibility.

I'm sure I'll get creamed for this statement, but that's part of our problem. Some people want us divided and on the right divided side, rather than united against the Repubs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:31 AM

5. I've held off on renewing my star.

This foolishness, this divisiveness is making DU suck. I'll renew it whenever the primaries end...

Not to mention a laughingstock for other sites to enjoy.

In the meantime, I'll start trashing these threads.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #5)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:52 AM

75. Agreed

I used to Trash 2-3 posts a month. Now I can't spend 15 minutes on DU without trashing a dozen or more Bernie/anti-Bernie posts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #5)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 07:17 AM

243. I have done the same thing. Tired of all the trashing and going over and over the damn primary.

I supported Bernie during the primaries because I had followed what he spoke about for a few years. When Hillary won the nomination, as a good Democrat, I supported her in the GE. Continuing the trashing of Bernie is counter-productive and if those supporters go and form another party, then Dems should not be surprised if they continue to lose elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:53 AM

22. That is unmistakably the latest fake out --

any current comments about Bernie based on his own current actions on current races is about the primaries. Spread the word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R B Garr (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:02 AM

28. We do have to admit that there were some issues that they were always willing to compromise on.

yet others there was quite obstinance...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #28)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:12 AM

43. Exactly, and it always depends on what enhances

Bernie's image. That remains the No. 1 goal...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R B Garr (Reply #43)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:01 AM

90. They, image

pathetic. this is exactly why you'll keep losing and why im quitting this board.

They. You have your own little happy circle jerk going on we get it.

Bernies image? WTF. maybe we are all out of freaking salve for these DNC/loyalists that keep burning their hand on the stove and we just want it to stop. stop burning your hand. stop grabbing on to the that fancy Le Cruset that is exactly your color, and fits your perfect casserole just right and matches your table cloth and gets you into the enameled cookware club. im so sick of losing to corporations and shitty politicians. i could't give two squirts about anyone's image. goddamn people are dense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahampuba (Reply #90)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:51 AM

125. Oh, ffs, image as in you twist yourself into pretzels just

to justify everything that comes out of his mouth, and then pretending it's about the DNC.

And corporations, now enameled cookware corporations, Le Creuset being French, but ice cream corporations or any other industry that he supports are just fine.

And "you"ll" keep losing is very telling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahampuba (Reply #90)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:03 PM

165. Don't let the door hit ya where evolution split ya...

... er, I mean, Welcome to DU! Sorry you didn't enjoy your stay....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moriah (Reply #165)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:10 PM

199. Since 2008

Check the profile. and that was starting over from a discontinued email.
I just dont make it my priority to weigh in, on everything.
But this current infighting has become too hard to witness daily, a low point for DU.

Hillary lost - Bernies fault.
Dems polling more out of touch than GOP - Bernies fault

Im witnessing the same party loyalty and inertia bowl over the caucusing processes here in my and my friends and associates wards, where a groundswell of new and newly energized voters are showing up looking to engage more than in the primaries and generals but getting out-procedured if you will. I know its up to everyone to do their homework and get up to speed on the process, but the attitude of the officials has been so opportunistic, dismissive and trite, its pathetic.

Im lucky enough to live in a district represented by both Al Franken and Keith Ellison and a ward that is as diverse as Minnesota gets. But I dont let this bubble cloud my perspective of the sentiments of greater MN and the US.
Id like to think we are an enlightened society or species even, but where's the evidence. If the Dems do not figure out how to tap into the wave of global populism and channel that into directions that can align with core progressive values, then the GOP and whatever other factions will continue to appeal to the populist vote and channel it towards their agenda. If those allies would have been just a little too crude and slow to engage and hopefully sway over time, then I cant imagine surrendering them to 4 more years of bullhorned dogma and fearmongering is going to be the best answer.

If DNC loyalists are still able to dismiss the degree of mobilization that the Sanders campaign tapped into, when the door hits after next election they'll have their necks there to soften the blow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahampuba (Reply #199)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:37 PM

205. Sorry, there's a FB profile that comes up with your ID...

.... of a follower of Duck Dynasty's "Robertson Family Values".

Looks like some RWNJ in CT shares your moniker. You both seem to like pubs, though. Guess everyone except me likes beer or ale of some kind (I prefer hard cider unless I can get real imported German dark beer where a bottle is as filling as a loaf of bread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moriah (Reply #205)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:48 PM

209. Robertson

My mothers maiden name, but it stops there.

The only use I have for Duck Dynasty is that it is a handy reminder that a good portion of our society prefers the spectacle, regardless of how fraudulent it may be, over the truth of the matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to R B Garr (Reply #43)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:15 AM

105. You know, there IS a reason Bernie is the most popular politician in the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #105)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:04 AM

138. All because the media

 

wants him to be until like everyone else they will tear him down. And all his past will come out for all to see. Recall HRC at 65% approval?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #105)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:05 AM

139. Right, because he is never challenged or held

accountable. HuffPo and others have written about this before. Now you see as he is challenged more, his conflicts emerge, like they inevitably do with every politician who isn't coddled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:02 AM

29. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:06 AM

37. Jim is correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:51 AM

74. Prime example of how to try and refight the primaries without appearing to do so.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:28 AM

2. People need to face reality here: it's either a vote for

Dems or USA fascism becomes entrenched and intractable. The GOP are treasonous thieves who have loyalty only to money and power, and are pulling all the levers to make sure they keep it.

What's happening now is just a polite preview. Look at Turkey and Russia to see USAs political reality in a year or two if people/ Dems can't take the country back. The GOP are going to try to make protests illegal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sculpin Beauregard (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:41 AM

12. That's a message Sanders really needs to take in because I am not sure he gets it

 

He's at least as interested, if not more so, in attacking the Democratic Party as opposing Trump.

The example needs to start with him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:02 AM

27. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:04 AM

31. +1000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:24 AM

55. Woow

Attacking the dems but also endorsing them?

Can't explain that!

/S

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #55)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:58 AM

84. You are unintentionally correct. Your first sentence is a troublesome reality. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #55)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:59 AM

87. The only way to not see this is ignoring Sanders' constant stream of belittling comments

 

Last edited Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:44 PM - Edit history (1)

And last week Sanders endorsed ONE Democratic candidate who was anti-choice and did not even give a generic positive statement about a Democratic candidate who is pro-choice but doesn't embrace Sanders economic ideology 100%.

Those are the literal facts you have to ignore to agree with the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #87)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:07 AM

96. I just see everyone focusing on the negative perspective

Just like in the primaries.

He's not tearing the party down. The party is clearly shifting but he's not the destroyer. It's this bullshit infighting that's the destroyer.

Drop the rope if you don't want tug of war.

But what am I saying, that'll never happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #96)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:54 AM

128. calling it "feeble" and "failing" isn't tearing it down?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #128)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:55 AM

130. I don't think so.

Calling a racehorse those things isn't destroying it. It's making a statement that begins the discussion of what kind of carrots we should feed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #130)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:24 AM

152. Calling Pelosi 'feeble' amidst a rant ripping into the Republicans on health care isn't destructive?

 

She held her caucus together on that health care bill.

That was the ANTI-THESIS of feeble.

Sanders' comment was gratuitous. Totally unnecessary and completely false considering the facts of the matter.

No leftist or Democratic should support the insulting rhetoric coming out of Sanders' mouth nor his willingness to embrace pragmatism when it comes to women's rights but his insistence on ideological purity when it comes to economics.

Unless your goal is to tear down the Democratic party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #152)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:31 AM

156. Oh he said that to a PERSON

and not an entity? Why'd you leave that detail out?

And hold your disrespectful horses. Your last sentence is uncalled for. This is a fucking discussion, have it or don't.

That said, Bernie's not perfect. NO ONE IS. But I still voted Hillary and that's all I need to say right there. Hillary wasn't perfect on all the issues I cared about but I voted her because....

It was pragmatic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to retrowire (Reply #156)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:16 PM

167. So many people take the generic "you" and "your" so damn personally...

... which is often a sign that they fit into the group they don't like the implications of being in, but can just be the misunderstandings that happen often in text.

I try to replace "you" in those cases with "they" or "their".

Would you feel would have been less rude had the poster said:

No leftist or Democratic should support the insulting rhetoric coming out of Sanders' mouth nor his willingness to embrace pragmatism when it comes to women's rights but his insistence on ideological purity when it comes to economics.

Unless their goal is to tear down the Democratic party.


?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moriah (Reply #167)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:20 PM

168. It would be less direct yes.

Are you excusing someone else implications? How are you sure of what they meant? Do you know each other?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #87)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:34 PM

171. Please list all belittling comments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:43 AM

63. I disagree -- you see only a self selected subset of articles on what Sanders is doing

He is fighting Trump - and doing so working with other Democratic Senators. The main thing he has done since Trump became President is the major effort that he and Schumer did together on health care, which really did get people out in many many cities. Ignoring that would be as silly as ignoring the woman's march which has led to resistance groups. These are two of the forces that actually complement each other. Although they have a big overlap, they compliment each other and each reaches some people that the other didn't. As have the march for science and the rallies against Trump climate change policy.

I can not say that the woman's march, the Schumer/Sanders healthcare rallies, or both made the difference on the Republican health care plan failing -- nor can I say that there is a way to win this issue outright, but I can say that both, in their own ways, have reawaken what had been a rather complacent left.

I suspect what you have reacted to is that - as in almost all elections where we lose, there is a reaction against the nominee for failing us. In DU's history, which started in the wake of 2000, there was only one campaign/election cycle where we lost - 2004. Like many, I was stunned by the nastiness and hid out in DU JK. Years, later, my friend, Tay Tay, explained that he was treated far better in Massachusetts than Dukakis was after he lost AND she pointed out that there were many times when he went about his job as Senator, there would be threads here where he was praised for who he really was. Sorrow and grief likely drove the anger of the posts that had sickened me.

I see the same things happening now with Clinton. There is praise when she speaks out on things she has always spoken out on, but as more "inside" stuff comes out, there are the threads on why she lost. Even with proof that the Russians helped the Republicans, there were also - as in any campaign - things that the campaign or nominee could have done better. From previous elections, those discussions will eventually become far less common.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #63)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:57 AM

81. You proved my point. Sanders needs to understand what his position is. He wanted leadership

 

he has it. When you are the leader of an organization, people pay extra attention to you, particularly that organization's opponents who are looking to exploit what you say to undermine your organization.

If you are in that situation you say NOTHING that could undermine that organization.

Sanders is acting like he doesn't understand that.

Either that or its his agenda to undermine the Democratic Party.

Either way I don't care. He needs to stop or the party needs to cut ties with him completely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #81)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:38 AM

118. Oh bullshit

There's a small groups of centrists like you who are determined that you will drive this guy out of the party. He endorses someone and you scream and shout. He doesn't endorse someone and you do exactly the same. He calls for unity and you scream about how he didn't show unity during the primary. He calls out the party on issues that might cost us the next election and you accuse him of attacking us.

Frankly its pathetic. The guy could discover the cure for cancer tomorrow and you'd find a way to denounce him for putting hospitals out of business.

We need to find ways to heal our divisions and all you care about is ripping open old wounds and driving a significant part of the party away. Well done, have a fucking cookie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #118)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:02 AM

135. See my #134, if you are determined not to see what is obvious, that is your issue. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #118)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:15 AM

144. Sanders isn't IN the party

How can anyone "drive him out"? By HIS OWN WORDS, said multiple times, he is NOT a Democrat. That's not a slam against him; it's simply the truth.

Sanders can consistently and repeatedly trash the Democratic Party and that's okay. If we all him out on it, we're persecuting poor, poor Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #81)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:40 AM

120. I completely disagree that he has undermined the Democratic party at all

Had he done that Schumer would have taken that position away.

What you and others are doing is not far from attacks on Hillary where her actual response - purposely interpreted in the most jaundiced way possible. Did you see the WV town hall on health care that he did which MSNBC covered? It is things like that that he can do - and do well - that led to Schumer giving him that position.

First of all, where would you find the list of the official Democratic positions? If HRC had won, she would not have been constrained by the Democratic platform. (my answer - of course not) Is there a single leader of the Democratic party? (no) Second, even when we have the Presidency and one might reasonably say the President's position is the Democratic position, are you saying that no one in leadership can argue against that position?

Has Schumer always been quiet if he was against the party's position? His statements on the Iran deal were far more at odds with the Democratic position than anything Sanders has said. Yet, he was in the Democratic leadership then - and Menendez was the Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Both leadership positions.

A Senator is really his own boss - even as they all say that their "boss" is all the people in their state. However, they are chosen to represent the state and they have the liberty to follow their own conscience. Note that people like Clinton and Kerry were completely free to give whatever opinions they had on anything as Senator, but were representatives of Obama during their years as Secretary of State. IMO, Schumer was 180 degrees wrong on Iran, but he was 100% within his rights as a Senator and in the Democratic leadership to completely oppose President Obama. Now, with no clearly defined Democratic position, I doubt you can find an example where Sanders is going against the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #120)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:01 AM

134. When you are a leader of an organization you don't publicly criticize that organization.

 

It's that simple.

If you do, you undermine that organization. If you are a good leader, instead of publicly criticizing an organization for any perceived faults, you are supposed to be working to fix any faults privately.

It's not complicated. If you don't see this, you are working hard not to see it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #63)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:03 AM

93. We are pointing out Sanders REPEATED continuance of negative rhetoric about Democrats

 

especially now that it's obvious he's willing to be pragmatic about some issues and not others.

He's head of Democratic Party Outreach. His negative comments need to stop but they won't.

Your entire post ignores his negative comments.

Your entire post ignores his willingness to forgo his ideological purity when it comes to women's rights but not when it comes to economic issues.

Your entire post ignores the fact the Democratic party has given him a national role and his words and deeds are NOT strengthening the Democratic party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #93)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:56 AM

131. Should Schumer have been forced out of leadership over his active role in fighting the Iran deal?

That was a FAR more obvious case of working against the Democratic President.

I think your statement that Sanders is using "negative rhetoric about Democrats" shows evidence of cherry picking and ignores the very real outreach that he (with and without Schumer) did on healthcare. NO successful active politician can really have "ideological purity". They would be absolutely useless because they would never find any bill good enough to vote for.

If Hillary Clinton would have supported the same guy running to be mayor, you would NOT be making the case that she has given up her "ideological purity" on woman's rights. Some here had a problem BEFORE Kaine was picked, but very few people blamed HRC for his more nuanced support of abortion rights. Nor, did many object when Biden, who voted for the 2003 partial birth abortion bill that did not have a provision for women's health. So, if Obama and HRC are not faulted for selecting these people to potentially become President (who I like, but disagree with on this issue), why blame Sanders for simply endorsing or speaking for the DEMOCRAT running against a Republican who is not good on that issue?

I disagree and think that his efforts on ISSUES like healthcare have been positive. I specifically like that he was willing to speak to coal miners in West Virginia at a town hall, where everyone was civil and respectful - and issues were discussed seriously. That is getting our message out. If there are people - not on our side - willing to listen to Sanders, that is more significant than anyone throwing red meat to the base. Did you watch the Chris Hayes show that documented that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #131)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:03 AM

136. This is about Sanders not Schumer and your example is apples and oranges otherwise. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #136)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 01:30 PM

182. Abortion is not the only issue there is

And Sanders' own votes on that are fine.

The Iran desl, that Schumer would have killed, very likely avoided another war. I think that is as big a deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:44 AM

64. This is the problem, he continues to divide the party

And the BOBs are complicit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:57 AM

82. +1000 (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:52 AM

126. A "neutral" observer of DU could easily conclude that many posters here...

are at least as interested, if not more so, in attacking a member of the U.S. Senate Democratic Forum leadership team (and the winner of 45% of the votes nationwide in the last Democratic presidential primaries) than they are in opposing Trump. The example should be set here.

I am on record, on numerous threads, saying I agree it is both important and productive for us to have a wide ranging debate about what degree of adherence to an absolute pro-choice set of policies moving forward should be expected of any Democratic politician (but especially of those who hold personal "prolife" beliefs). Further, that to fully explore that issue we should look to our current attitudes toward current leading Democrats who hold personal "prolife" beliefs while promoting public "prochoice" policies. That can seem rather straight forward if they have been totally consistent about that throughout their entire political careers. But what about the cases where those Democrats have "evolved" over time toward reaching a 100% (or in some cases near 100%) embrace of those policies?

It has been my personal experience that some Democrats have adhered to supporting polices that I find at least highly objectionable while they are coming up in politics from the "local" level in Republican leaning districts - where voters hold hot button beliefs that tend to sink the campaigns of even highly respected Democratic candidates. One experience I had in that realm concerned Kirsten Gillebrand when she first ran for Congress to represent New York's 20th congressional district in 2006. I live just over the border from that district so I personally did door knocking for Kirsten that year. I was motivated by the urgent need for Democrats to retake the House of Representatives and to send a strong message to the world that America did not support "our President" regarding Iraq.

Kirsten was a good candidate for that clearly Republican supporting upstate district. Traditionally conservative, the district and its electoral offices had been in Republican hands for all but four years since 1913, and as of November 2006, 197,473 voters in the district were registered Republicans while 82,737 were registered Democrats - (those facts courtesy of Wiki) But Kirsten had star qualities, she is extremely bright and has strong leadership skills. She had also been a prosecutor. My problem was that she campaigned as a strong supporter of many NRA positions on Guns, among other issues. Again, from Wiki; "The American Conservative stated after her eventual victory, "Gillibrand won her upstate New York district by running to the right: she campaigned against amnesty for illegal immigrants, promised to restore fiscal responsibility to Washington, and pledged to protect gun rights"

When Kirsten entered Congress she joined the conservative leaning Blue Dog faction in the House. But she also voted to make Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the House. I was pleased that Democrats had picked up Kirsten's seat though I wasn't thrilled by her then political leanings relative to other Democrats. I strongly opposed her on gun policies among other issues. And then, surprise, NY's Democratic Governor decided to appoint Kirsten to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Hillary Clinton. I gotta say I was pretty concerned about that move. It was one thing to support Kirsten for a up to then safe Republican House seat, it was another to elevate her to fill a safe Democratic Senate seat.

Well the rest is history. Kirsten's voting record in the U.S. Senate, representing all of NY, has been remarkably different than her voting history representing NY's 20th CD. Now I am really proud to have her as my Senator (and pleased that I played some small roll in launching her political career.) Gun issues are not the same as one's stand on Reproductive Rights - which strike to the root of the concept of equality for all. But when I reflected back on my involvement in support of Gillibrand on a local level, I began to suspect that there can be a correlation to how Democratic politicians "evolve" as they rise from representing conservative constituencies at the State level to the positions they take on the national level as Democratic U.S. Senators. And Tim Kaine came to mind. He's a good man overall, always has been, but Tim Kaine the U.S. Senator comes a damn lot closer to well representing my views on Women's Reproductive Rights than he did as Virginia's Governor, or before that as Mayor of Richmond.

Finally let me note that the irony that I initially thought the author of this OP was referring to was the fact that Sanders (who so many claim is constantly attacking the Democratic Party) has come under continual attack here for supporting the candidate selected and supported by Nebraska's Democratic Party - campaigning for that person in response to their request that he do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #126)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:54 AM

129. I wouldnt care about that. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #129)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:03 AM

137. I guess not, based on the amount of effort that went into your reply. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tom Rinaldo (Reply #126)


Response to Sculpin Beauregard (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:49 AM

17. This is certainly not what has been proposed by many up until this recent debacle with ....

bernie saying a pro life dem candidate was progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:30 AM

4. Can more men weigh in on reproductive rights? I am not sure what the male perspective is yet. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:58 AM

25. LOL.

They think it's important BUT. And, of course, what follows the but is: "other things are more important."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #25)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:45 AM

161. Or equally important.

But this sub-thread led me to write more on the topic, please see

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028976448

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #161)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:56 AM

163. I'd rather hear what you have to say that's relevant to this thread here.

I keep my home page set to Latest Threads. If your thread title looks interesting, I'll probably look at it later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:05 AM

34. Good one!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:50 AM

72. xoxoxox

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LexVegas (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:25 AM

110. I'm a man and I'll give you my perspective:

Your body, your choice. And it's a major economic issue as well since the costs of pregnancy weigh more heavily on women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:32 AM

6. If you want to stop the tug-of-war, drop the rope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tanuki (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:48 AM

15. That was my reaction at one point.

 

Let it die down, I figured. But the stupid attacks just go on and on.

I decided to set forth my views so that I could read the substantive responses from the Bernie-bashers. Perhaps I'll have that chance. The day is young.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #15)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:50 AM

18. So, you're acknowledging you wrote the OP as flame bait. Got it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tanuki (Reply #18)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:16 AM

45. Yeah, it's so obvious. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tanuki (Reply #18)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:58 AM

83. ..... (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tanuki (Reply #18)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 07:10 PM

221. All you have to do is have "Bernie Sanders" in the title and you get flamed on DU.

No need to put this much effort in to it unless you're sincere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #15)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:30 AM

59. A former DU member said about his posts:

"Pssst ... here's a secret for you ... . Every time it gets kicked, I know I have stuck a nerve. Don't tell anybody."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:33 AM

7. excellent post

waiting for this very programmatic behavior to die down. In the meantime, ignore let's people who are obviously being intellectually dishonest eat static.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProfessorPlum (Reply #7)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 04:55 AM

239. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProfessorPlum (Reply #7)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 10:44 AM

245. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:37 AM

9. Agree with the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chwaliszewski (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:44 AM

14. +1!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chwaliszewski (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:36 AM

62. Yep. Good articulation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:38 AM

10. Let's end this now. The unity tour is over. Hopefully we will return to resisting Trump and

discussing how Democrats can win going forward without the mention of any of the former 2016 primary candidates.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:42 AM

13. Nate Silver said it was Comey.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Volstagg (Reply #13)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:50 AM

19. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:54 AM

24. Interesting.

Not at all how party politics functions in a bipartisan system, but interesting nevertheless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:04 AM

32. Welcome to ignore.

Keep telling yourself that's why we lost this election 🙄

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:05 AM

36. THAT IS NOT TRUE.

And just as the Never Hillary clan threw their hissyfit and departed, perhaps it's time for the ALWAYS HILLARY clan to do the same.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:09 AM

42. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:14 AM

44. On the contrary

Hillary cost Bernie the election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to padfun (Reply #44)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:17 AM

46. Cuz he woulda won right?

Uh huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JHan (Reply #46)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:05 AM

141. Many people think he would have. It's impossible to know, but one thing is sure...

...if he had lost, we'd have the same president we have now. So at least to that extent, maybe he could have done better, maybe not, but he couldn't have done worse!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #141)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:20 AM

149. those many people are part of the problem.

he lost the primary.

All the "he coulda won" people are doing to distracting us from focusing on the real enemy - the GOP and Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #141)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:24 PM

169. Sure he could've done worse. He could've lost the popular vote.

Which Hillary won by an almost 3 million vote margin, remember?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #169)


Response to Demit (Reply #169)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 06:04 PM

218. And what difference would that have made?

As they say, close only counts in horseshoes...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:22 AM

53. Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

I just have to laugh...

I am so very thankful for the IL option...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:25 AM

57. Hillary won tho nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:02 AM

92. No he didn't.

It is completely conjecture that Sanders' supporters did not vote for Clinton. For the most part, they did. I would argue that more independents followed his lead and voted for Clinton than would have happened had he not existed. One thing that was rarely noted was that there were more Republican votes than Democratic votes in the MI and WI primaries. One state I know where the Sanders people helped is NH, which Clinton narrowly won after Sanders blew out the primary. In the general election, there were many Sanders Vermont people who went to NH and many spoke to people they won for Sanders (often against voting for Trump in the Republican primary.).


Sanders authored the legislation that improved the VA -- so, he did author legislation that actually passed. That was a joint bill of Sanders and McCain - they chaired the veteran's committee or were the ranking member, changing as control of the Senate changed. In fact, if you want to play that game, what significant piece of legislation did Hillary author that passed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:50 AM

124. agree w/ the above poster

about the Comey letter and it is an interesting read... it also did not help that HRC ignored entire states and failed miserably at gaining votes from white woman. It is time to move on. No matter if you like Bernie or not he has a voice in the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:49 AM

16. The people who railed against "purism" at those critical of Hillary now proclaim purism a virtue.

"MY issue is different erp derp" I say welcome to the club of people who are principled! I, for one, am not comfortable with prolife/anti choice, candidates but I wasn't aware this guy is running for mayor and not a congressperson who will be voting in congress. You would think Bernie himself came out against choice. This is obvious just yet another excuse to go after Bernie. again. they are on a mission and nobody is fooled!

The hairsplitting to rationalize this from them is precious

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to m-lekktor (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:18 AM

48. That's some nice projection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to m-lekktor (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:09 AM

99. BS is the one who gives the Purity Tests..

Sanders has most recently set out to define what it is to be progressive by refusing to campaign for Democrat Jon Ossoff in his contested congressional race in Georgia’s 6th Congressional District. “He’s not a progressive,” Sanders told The Washington Post about Ossoff — who is pro-choice, supports increasing the minimum wage, is anti-war and supports immigration reform. Meanwhile, Sanders set off to campaign with Heath Mello, the Democratic nominee for mayor of Omaha, who has a strong anti-choice record including having introduced legislation restricting abortion, and was quick to call Mello a progressive.

http://www.salon.com/2017/04/24/bye-bye-bernie-the-self-appointed-captain-of-the-democratic-ship-needs-to-stop-chasing-the-great-white-male/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to m-lekktor (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:09 AM

100. No, it's Sanders' who is willing to forgo his ideological purity when it comes to women's rights

 

but not when it comes to his economic class warfare message.

Clinton and most Democrats are pragmatists at heart when it comes to getting elected and governing.

Sanders is not.

That is the whole point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to m-lekktor (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:22 AM

109. Nope. The people who insisted on purism are now proclaiming pragmatism is a virtue.

The hairsplitting to rationalize a problematic endorsement of an an anti-choice candidate is precious.

There is a sense among some here that Bernie is infallible. He's one of my favorite politician, but he's human and makes mistakes.

In a misguided mission to "protect" Bernie from criticism, some are twisting themselves into pretzles and realigning their positions on choice simply because Bernie illadvisedly campaigned for and endorsed Mello.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:51 AM

20. This discussion is a waste of pixels

Donald Trump is our enemy. For now, all who oppose him are our allies.

End of story.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:00 AM

26. "Some of the loudest pro-Hillary people"

From DU TOS: "The primary framing of Hillary supporters vs Bernie Supporters is a thing of the past."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #26)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:12 AM

143. That pricked an irony nerve in me for some reason. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fleabiscuit (Reply #143)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 06:17 AM

240. 2017 is The Year of Irony.

I need to go and buy a large package of patience because I have run out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #240)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 10:59 PM

248. Ain't it!

I could be wrong, but I don't think TOS covers patience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:03 AM

30. Women's reproductive rights are not a side issue that can be compromised.

 

What an absurd post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaye_NY (Reply #30)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:22 AM

54. I agree.

Welcome to DU where we are being pushed back 40 years on reproductive rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brer cat (Reply #54)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:41 AM

121. If Republicans had their way

Women, Minorities and Poor people wouldn't be allowed to vote. I am guessing they will be having meetings very soon, to figure out how to write it up, so Donald Trump will sign it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kaye_NY (Reply #30)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:29 PM

170. Neither is economic inequality. Neither is American imperialism and wars of choice.

 

It's one thing to say that a particular important point is "not a side issue that can be compromised." It's quite another to say "I will never support a candidate who disagrees with me on this issue, regardless of what the political situation is."

Compromising reproductive rights would mean voting the wrong way on a bill in the Senate. AFAICT no one has accused Bernie of having done that. What he has done is to support Democratic candidates who didn't agree with him on all the issues.

Given that he disagreed with Hillary on trade policy, foreign policy, economic inequality, etc., would you characterize his support for her in 2016 as an example of compromising on those issues? Do you think he did the right thing to support her?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:04 AM

33. Umm, Bernie said he wasn't sure if he supported Ossoff because Ossoff wasn't progressive enough.

You're missing the entire point. Pragmatism is necessary, but Bernie is not an across-the-board pragmatist. He's a selective pragmatist.

If someone disagrees with Bernie's economic agenda, Bernie either withholds or gives a tepid endorsement. But if someone disagrees with him on choice, he doesn't consider it a big deal.

And this is not new from him. For years he's been talking about how the Democrats need to hold the line on economic issues, but be more flexible on issues like choice, LGBT rights, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #33)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:20 AM

51. Yes. Exactly. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:05 AM

35. Do we really need more posts about Bernie Sanders?

 

I am not sure what this is accomplishing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:06 AM

38. that is a totally dishonest reading of what the complaint about Sanders current behavior is

He he endorsed both Mello and Ossoff virtually no one would have said a word. But that isn't what he did. He pointedly refused to endorse Ossoff until after this whole thing blew up and wholeheartedly endorsed Mello. That isn't remotely like the argument being made in the fall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:07 AM

39. Thanks for saying this so articulately

Reading DU, especially the last week, has been painful. I hope posts, like yours, can help the some understand that ALL of us are devastated that Trump is President. Both Sanders and Clinton might be good, powerful voices in helping us regain some power. Not the only voices, but powerful voices because of who they are and the messages they have to speak. A party is NOT a soloist, no matter how good, but a chorus. A chorus would not work well if everyone had the same voice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:08 AM

40. The truth is..

 

this whole fiasco has nothing to do with Heath Mello.. and just more power struggles within the corporate DNC, it is sad really...

If anyone wishes to here the whole story;

[link:https://www.thenation.com/article/why-was-heath-mello-thrown-under-the-bus/|

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to disillusioned73 (Reply #40)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:20 PM

226. Thank you, very eye-opening. Love how this gets ignored.

Read the article, people. This...thing...was started by the WSJ:
Instead, on April 19, The Wall Street Journal ran a story noting that Mello, a practicing Catholic, is pro-life. The story also falsely claimed that Mello had co-sponsored a bill “requiring women to look at an ultrasound image of their fetus before receiving an abortion.” A similar error was made by The Washington Post, which claimed that Mello had “previously backed a bill requiring ultrasounds for women considering abortions,” and then again the following day by David Nir, political director of Daily Kos, who announced the site was withdrawing its endorsement of Mello—a move applauded by Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, who’d launched a 12-part Twitter storm linking to the WSJ article and accusing Sanders and Perez of kicking off their tour with the message “shame women; we’ll support u anyway.”
Here’s the truth about Mello’s record: Back in 2009, he co-sponsored a bill requiring a physician performing an abortion to tell a woman that an ultrasound is available (as most already did). It neither mandated that the ultrasound be performed nor, if performed, that it actually be viewed by the woman—although it did require abortion providers to position the screen in such a way that the ultrasound was easily viewable. Daily Kos member Nova Land—a Tennessean who had never heard of Mello before the controversy—posted a comprehensive, well-sourced correction to this effect the same day. That didn’t lead Nir to reconsider. Nor did it stop Perez from issuing a statement announcing that he “fundamentally disagree[s] with Heath Mello’s personal beliefs about women’s reproductive health,” which was worded in a way that appeared to cast doubt on the sincerity of Mello’s pledge that he “would never do anything to restrict access to reproductive health care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:08 AM

41. Beat it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cryptoad (Reply #41)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:25 AM

56. You BEAT me to it.

[img][/img]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:17 AM

47. My Problem

What bothered me was that after Bernie lost, he quit the Dem Party. We have a two party system. We are not Vermont. Having said this, I hope I don't get banned from posting on this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DownriverDem (Reply #47)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:42 PM

175. That's not my understanding of the facts

 

Before the 2016 campaign began, Bernie was not registered to any party (because Vermont doesn't have partisan registration). In the Senate, he listed himself as Independent and always caucused with the Democrats (as he had done when in the House).

During the 2016 campaign, all that was still true.

After the conclusion of the 2016 campaign, all that is still true.

The only thing that's significantly different about his role vis-a-vis the Democratic Party is that he's put time and effort into the unity tour, by making several joint appearances with the Democratic National Committee Chair.

I don't see what he did that constitutes quitting the Democratic Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #175)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 02:45 PM

193. Bernie officially identified himself as a Democrat when he filed papers with the FEC.

When he filed with the Federal Elections Committee to run for president, he listed his party affiliation as “Democratic Party.”

Also, New Hampshire requires a candidate to fill out a form that states that the candidate swears “under penalty of perjury” that they are a registered member of the party. To get on the ballot there, Bernie swore he was a Democrat.

You're right, he didn't have to do anything official to quit the party. Once the advantage of being a Democrat was over, he just gave up the pretense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #193)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:32 PM

203. I'm still not clear on what Bernie allegedly did differently after the campaign.

 

He didn't change his answers to any questions about party. All that happened was that governmental authorities like the FEC were no longer asking him the question.

What really counts to his colleagues in the Senate is whether he caucuses with the Democrats or not. He does. If a few more of the supposedly more electable "centrist" Democrats -- say, Patty Judge, Patrick Murphy, and Ted Strickland, all of whom won primaries against progressive opponents -- had actually won their general-election races, then the Senate would have been 50 Democrats (counting Angus King), 49 Republicans, and Mike Pence ready to break any tie in favor of the GOP. At that point, it would have been crucial that Bernie did not quit the Democratic Party. His continued his membership in the Democratic caucus would have given Chuck Schumer control over the Senate agenda and would have given committee and subcommittee chairships to a whole bunch of Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Reply #203)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 04:33 PM

212. Right, there was no need to swear under penalty of perjury he was a Dem anymore.

But he did have to swear he was so that he could HAVE his campaign. Then he loudly abandoned the Dem label when it was of no more use to him. That doesn't seem to faze you, but it bothers me a lot.

Yes, we all know he caucuses with the Democrats. But we have a two party system. Someday, not too far in the future, Bernie will be gone from the scene, and we will still have a two party system. Oh my, we'll say, Bernie sure stayed true to his fierce independence! (Well, for the most part.) But I can't for the life of me see what difference he will have made in strengthening the Democratic party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:18 AM

49. i just cant get the images out of my head of....

...that young black woman bravely running thru a gauntlet of protesters, the image of ppl throwing $bills at Hillary's car on her way to a fund raiser, the sound of the mans voice over the Microphone in front of thousands of young people, calling Hillary a 'corporate whore' and then cheers and applause for it. I thought we were all on the same side but apparently some supporters didn't and still don't get that message from their leader.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samnsara (Reply #49)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:44 AM

65. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samnsara (Reply #49)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:30 AM

155. They didn't bother

to check out the Dem Party Platform that was full of Bernie's ideas. That is what Hillary ran on. Since many of those protesters were young, they are the ones whose lives will be a living hell with a right leaning Supreme Court. They were warned, but let naivety and foolishness get in the way. I wrote many time that this was a long ball election. Too bad folks didn't get what that would have meant for all of us. Now we just have total insanity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to samnsara (Reply #49)


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:19 AM

50. Thank you

We really are all against the corporate right wing
takeover now holding us hostage and attempting
to divide us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:26 AM

58. We are human so hypocrisy will always be involved when we make political points.

 

That is the point that those who criticized Bernie in the past week are making. I know it may not be a popular or pleasant but it is true.

And yes I have my own hypocritical moments in politics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:32 AM

60. No one was kicking sand in Bernie's face until he started dissing the Democratic Party.

Last edited Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:06 AM - Edit history (1)

For God's sake the Dems have bent over backward to include him in their strategy. He responds by being a crotchety old man wagging his finger at the Democrats. If he has an issue with the Dems take it to the leadership and work with them. Don't disparage Democratic candidates who have a chance to take a Red congressional seat. It's his self aggrandizing, nasty, off the cuff, underhanded comments that are red meat to his followers and gets him exposure on national cable shows. That's why Democrats are upset.

WASHINGTON -- Bernie Sanders will now have a Senate leadership post to help further his “political revolution.”
The Vermont independent will be the chair of “outreach” for Senate Democrats next Congress, Senate Democratic Leader-elect Chuck Schumer of New York announced Wednesday. He will be the first independent to hold a party leadership position since the modern leadership structure began in the early 20th Century, according to the Senate Historical Office.

More>>>>

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/11/16/senate-democrats-tap-bernie-sanders-lead-outreach/93960822/


<<<<<Snip
Mr. Schumer announced the leadership also is set to expand to include Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who ran a hard-fought primary campaign against Hillary Clinton, as well as Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia — who comes from the more liberal and conservative poles of the party.
More>>>>

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/16/chuck-schumer-named-senate-minority-leader/


Schumer to head Senate Democrats, as Sanders gets key budget panel spot

Published: Nov 16, 2016 11:52 a.m. ET
By Robert Schroeder
Fiscal policy reporter

Charles Schumer of New York will take over as Senate Democratic leader in the next Congress, while Vermont’s Bernie Sanders is getting a key role on the Senate Budget Committee.
More>>>

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/schumer-to-head-senate-democrats-as-sanders-gets-key-budget-panel-spot-2016-11-16


Sanders wins greater say in Democratic platform; names pro-Palestinian activist

By Anne Gearan May 23, 2016
Sen. Bernie Sanders was given unprecedented say over the Democratic Party platform Monday in a move party leaders hope will soothe a bitter split with backers of the longshot challenger to Hillary Clinton — and Sanders immediately used his new power to name a well-known advocate for Palestinian rights to help draft Democratic policy.

The senator from Vermont was allowed to choose nearly as many members of the Democratic Party platform-writing body as Clinton, who is expected to clinch the nomination next month. That influence resulted from an agreement worked out this month between the two candidates and party officials, the party announced Monday.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanders-scores-platform-concessions-from-democratic-national-committee/2016/05/23/e9ee8330-20fc-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html?utm_term=.9a98a0cc6cb3

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #60)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:56 AM

79. That's exactly right. Perfect. Nailed-it!

It's his self aggrandizing, nasty, off the cuff, underhanded comments that are red meat to his followers and gets him exposure on national cable shows. That's what's upset Democrats.

This covers most everything perfectly. This, of course, could be expounded upon with more details and examples... but as a brief summary, this is absolutely perfect.

Thank you.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #60)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:59 AM

86. Yes, I totally agree. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:34 AM

61. Excellent OP Jim

You nailed it. Reading through the replies pointed out a few that i suspect are trolls, here just to agitate.
Carry on, carry on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tiredtoo (Reply #61)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:49 AM

68. You are calling DU members who support Democrats trolls.

Think about it. How does this make sense? On a forum for Democrats, Democratic members who support Democrats are trolls?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #68)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:18 AM

107. Does make you scratch you head and say, "Say Wut?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fla Dem (Reply #107)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:33 AM

117. Yes, I am this dog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to betsuni (Reply #68)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:57 AM

164. Are you suggesting there are no trolls here? EOM

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tiredtoo (Reply #61)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:11 AM

102. All you have are personal attacks.. that means you have

nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:45 AM

66. Yawn...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:45 AM

67. CURRENT Bernie Bashing

CURRENT BASHING. That topic is not rehashing the election. From the responses I read here, the point that the Bernie bashing is CURRENT is ignored. It's the same same way for years leading up to the election there was a steady drumbeat of negative Hillary stories.

That is the effect of propaganda, it divides.

Stop the Hillary versus Bernie brawl when the real culprit is an opponent willing to break the law and commit treason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:49 AM

69. Hypocrisy... like when a certain Independent used the Dem party to run for president

I honestly don't give a shit about Bernie Sanders anymore. Can we move on? Not all of us are in love with Bernie Sanders. He is OK, but not infallible.

I honestly think he shouldn't have been allowed to run for president as a dem candidate without ever actually joining the party. I see that as something that was very damaging to our party and it came at a very bad time for the country when the dems needed party unity and strength. Bernie should have ran for president as an independent because that is what he is. That would have the right and honest thing to do. You talk about him voicing his support for the democratic nominee because he is a pragmatist and he wanted to prevent the repubs from winning. The thing is, he had an obligation to support the dem nominee because he used the party to run for president himself. He took too damn long to come around and support Hillary. That was damaging to the party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:49 AM

70. This is gas lighting. Sanders is an ideological purist who points fingers

 

at other from his imagined high ground that only he occupies.

Sanders is the one who has trashed the Democratic party repeatedly for being pragmatic and not ideologically pure and then goes on to endorse a candidate who is anti-choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #70)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:00 AM

88. "Aggressively Anti-Choice" and BS wouldn't call Pro-Choice

candidate, Jon Ossoff, who is in a super Important Congressional race in Georgia.. a "progressive"... it boggles.

He's bringing this all on himself.. there's no way they can spin this.. but they keep trying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #88)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:32 PM

229. I'm amazed at how many Dems are getting thrown under the bus for not

 

Being supportive enough of reproductive rights. Amazed because I don't buy these people actually give a shit.
It's not a priority- you'd think after the women's march and the hard work so many women have done the past six months we'd get better than this BS lip service.
I am pissed off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bettyellen (Reply #229)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 12:12 AM

231. Amazing, sad and ...

... Disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #231)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 12:46 AM

233. Like I need a man to splain to me that Biden has problems-

 

I knew about that and his connection to banks, and stood in belwilderment that he was so damned popular with people despite that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:50 AM

73. Threads like this make me wish that the Trash-Word filter worked on DU's front page

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #73)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 02:48 PM

194. This is why I've made the Greatest Threads tab my home page.

I recently not only trashed General Discussion but also changed the link in my browser to point to https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=greatest_threads, not the DU home page. I've also put several more of the most persistent and obnoxious bashers on Ignore, which goes against my grain but I've had it up to here with the hypocrisy and toxicity (gestures at a point a foot above top of head).

Every now and then I succumb to the temptation to sneak a peek at the DU home page just to see what's there, which is the only reason I saw this thread today.

Sometimes the current favorite flamebait fuel makes its way into another forum, so then I resort to hiding individual threads. If this keeps up, I may make the Crafts group my home page.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:56 AM

77. Here's what "pragmatism" on the issue of bodily autonomy gets us:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:56 AM

78. "while ignoring that he did exactly the same thing by supporting Hillary last fall."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 09:59 AM

85. There are like the threads during the primaries...

They're so boring and tiring.

Can we worry more about the midterms and on who's going to challenge the orange bastard in 2020?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chicago1980 (Reply #85)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:40 PM

173. So start a thread, with your ideas on 2020 candidates.

Maybe all the other posters who are tired of these threads & comment on them anyway will be attracted to yours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:00 AM

89. Thanks Jim. The truth is hard for some to swallow. Hillary lost to Trump, not Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:02 AM

91. All of this flailing to be apologists for Sanders attacking the Democratic Party. Here's a thought

 

get Bernie to stop attacking the Democratic Party.

Simple.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #91)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:29 AM

112. Could it be that Bernie is trying to SAVE the Democratic Party?!...From itself!!

The people bashing Bernie should be THANKING him!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #112)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:33 AM

116. No. Please let no one ever try to save any organization that matters to me this way.

 

It's destroying the party and its ability to oppose Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #116)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:38 AM

119. Sorry Steven, you're so right about a lot of things, but not this time...

The party has been destroying ITSELF... taking an HONEST look at why it's taken a beating at EVERY level of government for years is a GOOD thing.

Bernie wants it to stop... shooting the messenger is NOT the answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #119)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:53 AM

127. I am right and it is easy to illustrate why.

 

Before the changes that came to the party with the Clinton's in 1992, the Democratic Party had lost five of the last six elections and by landslide margins. The one election they won in 1976 they won by a small margin and that was because of threat of impeachment/resignation/Watergate. Otherwise we would likely have lost 1976 as well.

From 1992 until this last election in 2016, we won the popular vote in six of seven Presidential races, winning four of the seven races electoral colleges as well.

The Clintons and the changes they made saved the party and made it competitive. That's why the Republicans hate them so much.

What you and Sanders are working to do is undo that and return us to the time where we lost by landslide margins every four years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #127)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:15 AM

145. You seem to assume that the voting population is static.

It is possible that the tact that started winning elections in 1992 may not be the best approach by 2022. Pendulums swing both ways.

You talk about elections that go back to 1968, but in many respects, Nixon would be left-ish by today's standards. (Founding the EPA? Wage-price controls?)

Hopefully, even the right will some day become more moderate again, but it's not going to happen by itself, the leftward pressure has to come from somewhere, and it's not lkely to come from their side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #145)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:19 AM

147. Nothing that I wrote would suggest that. You are reaching for a reason to criticize my facts. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #127)


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:09 AM

101. Just the mention of Bernie gets lots of attention

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to katmondoo (Reply #101)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:32 AM

115. As it should... Bernie is showing us the way out of the political wilderness.

Follow him and the rewards will be sweet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:11 AM

103. Please, just stop. I don't care

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:16 AM

106. Can you give some examples of "vitriol" that has been spewed at Sanders by....

..."some of he loudest pro-Hillary people"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #106)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 01:39 PM

185. I could. I won't.

 

You'll find some of it in this thread, and even more in the barrage of threads criticizing Bernie.

I won't give specifics because (a) it would arguably be a ToS violation to call out individual DUers, (b) it would take up more of my time and I've already spent too much on this thread, and (c) opinions have hardened so much that I don't think a long list of links would change anyone's mind on the subject. (The worst thing about the Clinton-Sanders divide was how many people on each side saw only virtue among their allies and thought all vice was on the other side. That tendency persists.)

If you piously believe that none of your allies have spewed vitriol at Sanders, and take my failure to give links as proof that you're right, well, you can go right on believing that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:26 AM

111. Unadulterated flamebait

By now you should realize that Democrats are independent thinkers and don't do the whole lockstep thing. I am a Bernie supporter. I find his endorsement of Mello problematic.

You don't really have the right to dismiss the real concerns that some DU'ers have about the need of some here to purity test everybody except when it comes to choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 10:31 AM

114. Exactly.

I'm so tired of this. Bernie is right on many things but not on all. But so is everyone else. And the most important lesson for Democrats is to return to being a party of all the people, instead of a party by, of, and for white-collar professionals. I'm not saying white-collar folks do not have legitimate concerns. We do, especially when it comes to health care and various job-issues. The grassroots gets it. The DNC and DCCC, especially, not so much.

The middle class has been GUTTED. Income inequality is worse than ever. We all know this. Funnily enough, many people here were opposed (at one time) to NAFTA and similar agreements because of the effects on jobs and the failure to account for environmental problems. Now, of course, the talking point I see thrown around is that free trade doesn't cause job losses but automation does. This point is now espoused by the very same people (pundits) who shilled for NAFTA in the first place, people largely in charge of the Democratic Party then and now, so I am suspicious of its veracity.

The jobs that replace the jobs lost pay shit wages and no benefits and I see no one with any really good ideas as to what to do about it. People who are suffering are more prone to blaming others for their issues (helped along by a right-wing which has always been good at "catapulting the propaganda". Why we can't see it for what it is (right-wing manipulation of people) and keep blaming voters for being stupid or racist (though plenty are), I'll never know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)


Response to Post removed (Reply #132)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:05 AM

140. At least you are honest. Better than other folks here saying he is trying to help the party. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:01 AM

133. i just made a whole pot of crappy coffee and i've been drinking it

instead of making some new stuff.

i don't know if i put too much cold water into the boiled water before i poured it into the grounds, or not enough.

siince it's a rainy day and i'm not working i'm going to throw it and make some more

all i know is democrats lose to a pack of ignorant lying assholes because they are fucking stupid about talk radio and even let their 'liberal' universities keep it going.

arguing about hillary and bernie? the real question should be why the fuck was trump even close? why is the gop so fucked up and irrational? how do they even compete except in alabama and mississippi?

putin rode 25 years of talk radio clinton hate that dems ignored. all those 1200 radio stations would have beeen screaming commie this and commie that the whole election if bernie was the candidate and his left supporters would be listening to music.

stupid fucking liberals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to certainot (Reply #133)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:19 AM

146. I like your style.

Just decided to stop posting in all of these threads. Gonna let them sink.

It has gotten ridiculous and toxic. Everybody here is on the left and shares the same core set of values.

So why are we fighting each other? Fight needs to be taken to Trump and the Republicans. They are the ones trying to take away choice, not DU'ers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emulatorloo (Reply #146)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:51 PM

177. there is probably a fair bit of trolling still going on whenever these

fights come up

maybe bernie and hillary should do a john and yoko bed scene!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to certainot (Reply #177)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:57 PM

178. I think you are onto something regarding trolling.

Would love to see Bernie and Hillary do a bed-in for peace!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emulatorloo (Reply #178)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 01:32 PM

183. i actually just looked at the john and yoko pics doing that,

thinking of photoshopping-----

but it would take me many hours at my speed - can't do it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to certainot (Reply #183)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 01:36 PM

184. Don't have the skills either but that would be a wonderful image

Loved the bed-ins for Peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to certainot (Reply #133)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:29 AM

154. There it is.

I'm always reminded of this from Will McAvoy's opening rant from HBO's Newsroom (written by the sharp-as-a-tack Aaron Sorkin):

Sharon, the NEA is a loser. Yeah, it accounts for a penny out of our paycheck, but he gets to hit you with it anytime he wants. It doesn’t cost money, it costs votes. It costs airtime and column inches. You know why people don’t like liberals? Because they lose. If liberals are so fucking smart, how come they lose so goddamn always?


Someone up above was talking about how the changes that the Clintons made to the party helped rebuild the party. Well, sure, Bill Clinton was hugely popular, and then there were 8 years of Bush, and then 8 years of actually progressive Barack Obama in the oval office.

But while Obama was in power, how many Congress and Senate seats did the DNC lose? Over the past eight years, Senate seats have fallen from 55 to 46, and in Congress it's gone from 256 to 194. Even Democratic governors have fallen from 28 to 16. Obama could have done so much more if he'd had a friendly Congress and Senate. Can't focus only on the big office, gotta get those state races front and center. So, Hillary won the popular vote by almost 3million votes. How was Trump not an also-ran?

And there's no simple answer, despite what everyone will say (and everyone's answer is different). Russia was involved, Comey was involved, bad messaging was involved, lack of outreach in key races, white nationalism and a racism, frustration with the status quo, and on and on and on. The analysis will go on for years, but if we don't learn anything from it, liberals will continue to lose, and lose big.

Here's the whole rant from Newsroom:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Saviolo (Reply #154)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:48 PM

176. thanks, that is a good rant. i saw a bunch of those the first

season or two. i think he even mentioned rw radio a few times.

we've been analyzing symptoms. talk radio is so invisible democrats can't even poll for it re trump, probably the closest association outside of 'white'. rust belt, wheat belt, cattle belt - what they all have in common is talk radio - they're all in the radio belt.

when liberals, even thom hartmann, blame money in politics, or media consolidation, they forget democracy was designed to counter or minimize money in politics and keep media honest. they forget that before the tel com act in 96 (and fox), reagan killed the fairness doctrine in 87 and was a decade where 1000 radio stations screamed money is free speech, corporations are people, deregulation will lower cable costs, liberal media are turning your kids into drug addicts, unions give as much to politics as corporations, etc.

so liberals have been getting their asses kicked by a few hundred ignorant think tank scripted and coordinated liars on 1200 radio stations while they listen to music and tweet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:21 AM

150. This thread does nothing to give me hope for 2018.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:21 AM

151. Excellent post. I can't agree more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:28 AM

153. O.M.G.

Can we please stop talking, whining and speculating about freaking Bernie Sanders. Who, btw, lost the primary and was not nor ever would have been a contender in the General Election. Unless you really believe the Republicans would have pussy-footed around on Sanders' actual political history. Death by a thousand cuts was Hillary Clinton's unfortunate fate. Bernie would have been put in a meat grinder and spit out as cat food.

2016 has come and gone. Trump and his circle are the enemies that tunneled beneath the gate and are now intent on burning the house down. Water pistols of regret and resentment will not put the blaze out. Neither will Bernie Sanders.

Stop it already. We have more important things to concentrate on, things that will require our full attention and energy. Dividing the Democratic Party plays right into the Republican playbook. It's the way they win, even when they run a despicable and unhinged candidate.

Will we ever learn??? I'm beginning to wonder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:40 AM

159. Good morning Jim


K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:40 AM

160. The best post on all this bullshit

Hands down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:55 AM

162. I agree with you...

and think you wrote it well, but it seems your point is best illustrated by the negative responders in this thread. Any of those is a vessel of unimaginable hypocrisy. The Derangement over Senator Sanders is sick and sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:13 PM

166. Holy crap, give it a rest

I've been away for months, only to come back and find the same cast of characters, stirring the same crap.

Good grief, people, let it go already. Think I'll show myself back out. Ugh...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bobbie Jo (Reply #166)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 02:24 PM

189. Same here-- the hatred goes on. Maybe I'll try again in another six months.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:38 PM

172. Right on point, even though i can see that the purists are still attacking...

....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 12:40 PM

174. Lets say we're on the field of play.

THE OTHER TEAM HAS THE FUCKING BALL.



We must elect all the Dems we possibly can. Purity tests come later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 01:16 PM

180. Why are so many angry about Bernie supporting

a person he is not in lockstep with when I don't recall anyone in the party howling when Bob Casey ran as a pro life democrat for the senate.
There are pro life democrats.
I find this whole walking in lock step 100 percent to be silly and very republican.
You can be a real democrat even if you diverge from an issue or two.
Being in lockstep is what drove the republicans crazy and made them a cult rather then a political party.
Having a person who may have a different view on an issue is not evil.
I am pro choice but, if someone is pro life, as long as they are not Operation Rescue types, they have a right to their own opinion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lovemydogs (Reply #180)


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 01:50 PM

188. You are going to confuse some folks

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:02 PM

197. Well done. Excellent points.

It's not just the hypocrisy that's shocking to me, but the degree to which they can tear down Bernie and yet, if there's any criticism of Hillary, there's an alert.

Do I wish the Democrats had been able to come up with a better candidate in Omaha? Yes. Do I wish Democrats had been organizing for years in these smaller venues the way the Repugs have been doing for 30 years? Yes. Will women be better off under Mello than under any Repug? Yes.

Let's hope all these purists have a practical, action plan ready to go, in case the Repug does win---and does typical Repug things, like reduce community oversight on police--not to mention how under assault Planned Parenthood will be, which they would not be under Mello.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zentrum (Reply #197)


Response to Name removed (Reply #200)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:39 PM

207. Your exaggerated, inaccurate

...and flaming points, trying to link Sanders with the Russians among other things, plus your final sentence of slur against him here on DU is beyond the pale, and makes this not worth engaging with. I'm done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zentrum (Reply #207)


Response to Name removed (Reply #200)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 04:59 PM

214. I am a Democrat...

I registered Democratic in 1974 and voted for Governor Brown on his firsr run. I have not given up on Senator Sanders perhaps you can dial it back and speak for yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zentrum (Reply #197)


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:20 PM

202. K&R.

I believe that you have successfully avoided refighting that which shall not be refought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 03:49 PM

210. I've not had any part in a hateful Bernie v Hillary and

my issue doesn't involve either of them. What newly opened all this up is a Kansas candidate for mayor which has absolutely nothing to do with "war and peace" except within our party. Many times I've voted for a lesser of two evils candidate. This doesn't fall into that category. Too many people are trying to persuade women that what WE find extremely important, isn't 'that' important, in the balance, and perhaps in the interest of winning elections, we should 'go along to get along.'

This is a "our bottom line" category. Many of us on this Board know in our bones that there's no such thing as equal rights without reproductive rights. Women of means or access to means enjoy these rights in America as did all women until the ultra Religious Right took over the Republican Party. A willingness and duty to stand-up for Reproductive Rights aren't bargaining chips in our Democratic elections. Not in a local super red Kansas race or a state-wide or national race. Anywhere. The ultra Rel Right can't have our rights or our Party. And that's on my list of 'hills to die on' rather than a wish list or the lesser of two evils.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 04:21 PM

211. It is not hypocrisy, not even close

One of the few Democrats ever endorsed by BS is one who is anti choice.
If BS actually endorsed many Democrats, this might be hypocrisy, but he hasn't and it isn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 05:10 PM

215. What was he "not in complete agreement" with Hillary over that merits the same stature as control of

one's own body?

He may have wanted single payer whereas Hillary didn't. He may have wanted free college tuition.

Are you suggesting that any of those issues are equal in stature to a woman's right to control her own body? They are not in the same league.

Shall we discuss restricting men's rights to jacking off?

There are different levels of "issues" and some are certainly more personal than others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hamsterjill (Reply #215)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 07:02 PM

220. I mentioned a few things.

 

It's pointless to get into an argument like "is reproductive freedom more important than correcting a militaristic foreign policy, exemplified by the Iraq War" or "how important is income inequality" or "within the area of income inequality, how important are single payer and free college and Glass-Steagall and TPP compared to each other" or... etc.

You would also have to factor in the office. How much can a Mayor do about reproductive rights? I don't know the setup in Omaha. It's probably not as much as a President has to do with imperialistic wars of choice. If a Democratic nominee opposed single payer, I'd care more about that in a race for Congress than in a race for Mayor.

You ask, "Are you suggesting that any of those issues are equal in stature to a woman's right to control her own body? They are not in the same league." I don't think it's useful to try to reach agreement on such questions. If you want my view, though, I'll note that there are scores of thousands of Iraqi women who no longer have the right to control their own bodies, what with them being dead and all. For some people, Clinton's vote for the IWR, even with her belated confession of error, was a deal-breaker. They would say that, regardless of whether these issues are in the same league, they would not (and did not) vote for Clinton just because of that one issue. I'm saying it's hypocrisy for Clinton supporters to denounce those Stein voters as "purists" who helped elect Trump, but then turn around and proclaim their own single-issue deal-breakers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hamsterjill (Reply #215)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 12:14 AM

232. They disagreed on that. Sanders was in favor of no restrictions, Clinton was in favor of some

restrictions.

Late-Term Abortion Debate Reveals a Rift Between Clinton and Sanders:

During a Fox News town hall on Monday night, Clinton and Sanders were asked about their position on late-term abortions. Sanders' stance was easy to discern: He opposes abortion restrictions, full stop.

***

Clinton's comments on Monday were largely in line with statements she has made over the years supporting bans, with exceptions, on late-term abortions. Last month, PolitiFact reviewed Clinton's statements on late-term abortions over the years and concluded, "Clinton does not believe that all abortion should be legal. Instead, she's said she supports restrictions on late-term abortions except in cases of rape, incest and when the mother's life and health are in danger." This would mean that despite being the nominee endorsed by the nation's leading pro-choice groups, she is more open to abortion regulation than Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 05:59 PM

217. DURec!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 06:05 PM

219. This explains it very well:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:26 PM

222. I would like to take this opportunity to encourage others to vote progressive

I urge you all to stop voting for centrist neoliberals. Those of use who have voted for Dems for decades have been ecouraged by the movement of millions of former Republicans to the Democratic Party. The Republicans' war on minorities, and women, and science and pretty much everyone else in the country that's not poor, white, uneducated and easily swayed to vote for them has driven many people to the Democratic Party in recent years. This will create problems for the Democratic Party in the near future as all of 'us' try to come to grips with what 'we' all want.

At some point some within the Democratic Party decided it was okay to cozy up to the junk bond salesmen and payday lenders of the world. They saw the Repugs raking all that money in from their benefactors like the Kochs and the CoC and the drying up of their own traditional funding sources such as labor unions and decided they would fight fire with fire. They cooperated with the Repugs in trade agreements that enable predatory corporations to ignore labor unions and wage standards and environmental laws. They helped to push moronic infrastructure investments on cities and small municipalities that benefited no one but the predatory corporations behind them. They've enabled the Repubs to begin wholesale privatization of our education system, dismantling of social security and Medicare and Medicaide.

TLDNR; If you're 'new' to the Democratic Party, try to remember that 'we' are the party of acceptance and inclusion. We do not exclude someone because their views differ from ours, up to a point. I agree that it is a mistake to enforce purity tests for the Party...the time for that is at the Democratic National Convention, where 'we' will decide on our platform. Until, then, again I encourage all of you to vote progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 08:54 PM

224. Amazing the tonedeafness. So predictable and petty.

 

These are grown adults too! They know it, they'll loudly deny it, and they'll browbeat you bloody for calling them out on it.

It's absurd, confounding, and disheartening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 03:29 AM

236. Only Two This Time

 

Which isn't completely surprising. Number 3 is probably too busy writing their daily column.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 03:56 AM

237. To Each His/Her Own

I have been reading DU for years before joining last week, but this ongoing argument has been totally cray. Personally, I have been on Team Bernie since day one. But I get that for some there will never be anyone but Hillary. I just don't get all the teeth-gnashing & breast beating over who's the best, Mom or Dad. Can't we just praise & take joy in our favorite without feeling the need to trash the non-favorite? And, as far as I know, there has never been any kind of test to prove you are a 'true' Democrat. There's no rigid dogma. Do you agree with most of positions held by various Democrats you know personally or hear on TV or social media? Then you probably are a Democrat. I have pretty much considered myself a Democrat for more than 4 decades, but I only very recently actually joined. I would like to think I joined a big family that might have an occasional squabble, not one of those dysfunctional families where whisper campaigns & back stabbing are the norm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 07:06 AM

242. I usually don't post here and given the tone hear lately

I am probably making a mistake. At the end of the day, Bernie and Hillary were not that far off on their positions during the primaries. One went further here and the other went further there but at the end of the day, one could support either candidate without feeling like they were selling their soul. I supported Hillary throughout but would have gladly voted for Bernie in the general. What I do take issue with from the original poster is the characterization that Bernie did nothing wrong by supporting Mello. I get that you are not going to get perfect candidates every time especially in Red States and you need to support the Democrat/Liberal even if they are not perfect. I also understand that there are people on the Left who do not support abortion as crazy as that seems to me. Tim Kaine is the perfect example. What I do not support is someone who actively advocates any legislation that in any way puts a roadblock up to a woman getting an abortion. That is the sin that Mello committed and it should automatically disqualify him from getting support from the Left. As a gay man, I don't really have a stake in the matter except that impacts over 50% of the political party I affiliate myself with, so if I want to have support for my issues which do not impact them directly, then I better damn well support them. There are just certain issues that you shouldn't be ready to compromise on and if that gets me tarred with the "identity" politics flag, so be it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jim Lane (Original post)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 07:37 AM

244. You argument might be compelling...

 

If he hadn't ignored the GA race.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread