Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

CrowCityDem

(2,348 posts)
Tue May 24, 2016, 12:30 PM May 2016

Sanders is filled with contempt for everyone who doesn't agree with him.

http://www.salon.com/2016/05/23/bernie_insults_voters_he_must_drop_notion_that_everyone_who_disagrees_with_him_is_corrupt_or_a_dupe/

Unfortunately, Sanders is also injecting one of the most wrong-headed and frankly embarrassing aspects of lefty thought into our discourse: The tendency to dismiss people who disagree with you as dupes who have been misled by a shadowy cabal of evil masterminds who brainwash the masses in order to perpetuate economic injustice.

This is the premise of Sanders’ “political revolution” argument: That the only reason voters hadn’t backed a socialist in the past is they never really had a chance to.


Sanders is butting up against empirical reality here, which has disproved his theory that a democratic socialist would win if only given a chance. But instead of revising his theory, he’s digging in, making increasingly convoluted arguments to explain away what is quite clearly just a straight-up debunking of his theory of politics.


Sanders likes to portray himself as the champion of the little guy, but his theory of politics is elitist. His rhetoric paints everyone who disagrees with him is either a sell-out or a dupe who doesn’t know what’s really good for them. And that, in turn, is breeding paranoid, vindictive behavior from Sanders and his camp, who are unwilling to accept the possibility that he lost the primary in a fair fight.

In reality, most people who disagree with Sanders are not bamboozled or corrupt. In most cases, they simply have different priorities or values.


There has certainly been ample evidence of this thinking around here, where the very idea that Hillary is a left-of-center politician, let alone a progressive, is routinely laughed at and derided.
49 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sanders is filled with contempt for everyone who doesn't agree with him. (Original Post) CrowCityDem May 2016 OP
Link? pmorlan1 May 2016 #1
Updated. Forgot the link tags don't always work. CrowCityDem May 2016 #4
Thank you pmorlan1 May 2016 #8
Here forjusticethunders May 2016 #6
Thanks pmorlan1 May 2016 #9
Translation: Hillary supporters are filled with contempt for everyone who disagrees with her AgingAmerican May 2016 #2
^^^ +100 Binkie The Clown May 2016 #17
Anyone slightly to the right or left of Clinton is the enemy Armstead May 2016 #34
Winner! Sky Masterson May 2016 #47
Contempt against others is a claim far more aptly applied to HRCs style, speeches and actions. JudyM May 2016 #3
When Salon starts on Sanders, it's time for him to hang it up. apcalc May 2016 #5
Salon pmorlan1 May 2016 #10
More than one writer, lately, in that publication. MADem May 2016 #23
POV pmorlan1 May 2016 #25
Yes, and many of them are tuning up the orchestra and MADem May 2016 #26
Pmorlan, Bernie is FAMOUS for regarding those who Hortensis May 2016 #31
Thank you Dr. Phil pmorlan1 May 2016 #32
You're welcome, Pmorlan. Hortensis May 2016 #43
Welcome back! arcane1 May 2016 #30
For me, it isn't so much that I disagree with Sanders. Tal Vez May 2016 #7
I have trouble seeing any major differences between Sanders and Clinton. pmorlan1 May 2016 #13
Yes, I do believe what I wrote. Tal Vez May 2016 #35
LOL! nt Dawgs May 2016 #18
speaking of projection.. Viva_La_Revolution May 2016 #11
He said himself that he would be a hypocrite if he ran as a Democrat. onehandle May 2016 #12
I'm filled with contempt for shameless liars and sellouts. I can sympathize. hellofromreddit May 2016 #14
Comedy Gold -- here's a "tolerant and understanding" nugget from that writer Armstead May 2016 #15
You're defending TRUMP? That's who she was talking about. MADem May 2016 #24
Not defending Trump or the Christian Right -- Just pointing out that writer's.... Armstead May 2016 #33
I fail to see anything "mean sprited" about calling an asshole an asshole. MADem May 2016 #36
Are you a lawyer? You should because you're great at twisting things. Armstead May 2016 #38
I am not "twisting" a single thing. You're the one who coughed MADem May 2016 #39
I pulled that at random....She is such a wealth of cheap shots Armstead May 2016 #40
Random? You really didn't 'notice' that the article was about Trump? MADem May 2016 #44
P.S. Others on this thread said it in a better and simpler way---- She's projecting Armstead May 2016 #41
She's not 'projecting' at all. She's got opinions and she's expressing them. MADem May 2016 #45
This is callled projection Kelvin Mace May 2016 #16
What utter nonsense you are spouting to trash Bernie. Autumn May 2016 #19
Another author who doesn't understand what a convention is for. Orsino May 2016 #20
That seems to be a 21st century thing. virgogal May 2016 #21
ôSocialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited Tierra_y_Libertad May 2016 #22
Barrier Breakers aren't what they used to be. Is today Amateur Day? arcane1 May 2016 #27
True. boston bean May 2016 #28
Now pointing out corruption and cronyism is elitist? TheFarseer May 2016 #29
Wow! Talk about projection! DebDoo May 2016 #37
I thought he was filled with stinky old socks and rusty car parts. Warren DeMontague May 2016 #42
Before clicking on the link, I'm guessing it's by Amanda Marcotte. frylock May 2016 #46
It isn't elitist to accept people are wrong and their ideology failed. TheKentuckian May 2016 #48
No he's not. LWolf May 2016 #49
 

AgingAmerican

(12,958 posts)
2. Translation: Hillary supporters are filled with contempt for everyone who disagrees with her
Tue May 24, 2016, 12:34 PM
May 2016

More mindless, linkless projection.

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
34. Anyone slightly to the right or left of Clinton is the enemy
Tue May 24, 2016, 03:11 PM
May 2016

They have a very narrow view of what is politically correct -- which is defined by whatever Clinton says or does.

Slightly more conservative than Clinton? You're a right wing crazy.

Slightly more progressive than Clinton? You're an "angry leftist."

It's very depressing.

And that "writer" is complaining that Sanders supporters are narrow minded?

MADem

(135,425 posts)
23. More than one writer, lately, in that publication.
Tue May 24, 2016, 02:03 PM
May 2016
http://www.salon.com/2016/05/18/sorry_bernie_i_love_you_but_this_is_over_and_getting_embarrassing/

Sorry, Bernie: I love you, but this is over — and getting embarrassing

http://www.salon.com/2016/04/20/bernie_has_run_his_course_the_sanders_campaign_has_stopped_being_about_winning_and_is_now_mostly_about_whining/

Bernie has run his course: The Sanders campaign has stopped being about winning and is now mostly about whining

http://www.salon.com/2016/04/19/bernie_sanders_isnt_a_democrat_and_thats_a_real_problem_when_he_needs_democrats_for_his_revolution/


Bernie Sanders isn’t a Democrat: And that’s a real problem when he needs Democrats for his “revolution”


pmorlan1

(2,096 posts)
25. POV
Tue May 24, 2016, 02:12 PM
May 2016

There are many writers that submit pieces to Salon. The fact that you choose to promote the pieces that support your view is no surprise. We all do that. To believe that it's anything more than that is a stretch.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
26. Yes, and many of them are tuning up the orchestra and
Tue May 24, 2016, 02:16 PM
May 2016

starting to play this tune:




That was my point. It wasn't "just one." There are more than that, but I didn't want to pile on overmuch.

It's over.

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
31. Pmorlan, Bernie is FAMOUS for regarding those who
Tue May 24, 2016, 02:22 PM
May 2016

don't agree with him dismissively and even with contempt. There are plenty of stories from people back when he was a mayor, and he's famous for lecturing his congressional colleagues on the proper way to think about issues.

CrowCity, very rigid views and feelings of strong superiority and righteousness, as well as rejection and hostility toward those who don't join them, are strong characteristics of a far-left extremist personality, along with absolutism and often authoritarianism. Of course, there's a range in everything, from mild to strong; and although I've decided Bernie clearly shares the extremist tendencies of some of his followers, I at least haven't been able to guess how strong or weak they are.

Sanders has been able to vote with the Democratic caucus over 96% of the time for 25 years, while at the same time frequently expressing pride in not being a Democrat. I'm just not actually sure if that denotes some ability to flex and cooperate or something else.



Tal Vez

(660 posts)
7. For me, it isn't so much that I disagree with Sanders.
Tue May 24, 2016, 12:38 PM
May 2016

I have trouble seeing any major differences between Sanders and Clinton. I don't think either one of them are corrupt and I think that either one of them would support the same basic goals. Clinton might be more likely to succeed in implementing those goals, but if she is elected, I think Sanders will be supporting nearly all of her proposals. I think it was a real mistake for Sanders to label himself a socialist (particularly since he doesn't seem to be a socialist), but that is water under the bridge. Sometimes we do things that foreclose some of our future opportunities. At this point it doesn't make much difference - Clinton is going to be the nominee and Sanders is not going to run as an independent.

Sanders (and his supporters) will come around. It just takes time.

pmorlan1

(2,096 posts)
13. I have trouble seeing any major differences between Sanders and Clinton.
Tue May 24, 2016, 12:46 PM
May 2016

Wow. And the sad thing is I think you actually believe this.

Tal Vez

(660 posts)
35. Yes, I do believe what I wrote.
Tue May 24, 2016, 04:46 PM
May 2016

And, while I don't see large differences between the proposals of Clinton and Sanders, I do see significant differences between their supporters. Sanders seems to have been successful in persuading his supporters that he is just an ordinary citizen up against all of the politicians of the world. I know that both Clinton and Sanders are political animals with much experience. I know that Sanders doesn't see himself as Little Bo Peep, but a lot of his supporters seem to see him that way.

onehandle

(51,122 posts)
12. He said himself that he would be a hypocrite if he ran as a Democrat.
Tue May 24, 2016, 12:45 PM
May 2016

Who could have guessed that he would be a bitter sore loser after a statement like that?




 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
15. Comedy Gold -- here's a "tolerant and understanding" nugget from that writer
Tue May 24, 2016, 12:49 PM
May 2016

From anotehr article by the author:

Rationally choosing to support a candidate because he’s better at advancing your wholly irrational anti-sex, anti-gay, anti-woman agenda is the perfect distillation of Christian conservatism.


Yeah she never insults or dismisses those who disagree with her.


MADem

(135,425 posts)
24. You're defending TRUMP? That's who she was talking about.
Tue May 24, 2016, 02:11 PM
May 2016

Oh--and you FORGOT THE LINK to that quote. It provides the context you so sorely need. She's not tolerant and understanding of BIGOTS--not sure why that is a problem for you.

Here, I found it for you--so we can all have the full flavor of the context:

http://www.salon.com/2016/05/18/christian_right_voters_get_in_line_behind_trump_because_conservatism_has_always_been_their_true_religion/



Christian right voters get in line behind Trump, because conservatism has always been their true religion


....But, as the New York Times reported over the weekend, the Christian right is coming around at breakneck speed, to back a thrice-married man who described his attempts to avoid STIs as his “personal Vietnam”. While the piece reports that some Christian conservatives, especially the women, are still uncomfortable with supporting Trump, but, as anti-choice activist Marjorie Dannenfelser told the New York Times, “It’s more about rationality overcoming feelings than anything else.”

Rationally choosing to support a candidate because he’s better at advancing your wholly irrational anti-sex, anti-gay, anti-woman agenda is the perfect distillation of Christian conservatism. But some are going a step further than that, and pretending that Trump is one of their own.

“They love a convert because it’s what their faith is all about,” Ralph Reed of the Faith & Freedom Coalition told the New York Times.

Of course, you’d have to be the most naive person alive to think that Trump is actually a convert to the conservative Christianity that the religious right claims fuels them.

Trump doesn’t even bother pretending to know the basic lingo and seems unaware that Christians believe we are all sinners that need to ask for forgiveness. Everyone knows that. It’s the most basic tenet of the faith, however imperfectly practiced by its followers. That’s like not knowing that Muslims use the word “Allah” to refer to God or not knowing that Jesus died on the cross. Trump likes waving the Bible around, but it’s clear that the gesture is similar to when he ate a taco bowl as outreach to Hispanics: Whatever the intention is, the message sent is clearly one of contempt for people Trump clearly believes are beneath him....


I think you confuse an accurate assessment with an insult.
 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
33. Not defending Trump or the Christian Right -- Just pointing out that writer's....
Tue May 24, 2016, 03:03 PM
May 2016

mean spirited narrow minded hypocrisy.

I'm far from a defender of Trump or the right. I actually agree with the writer on many things.

But she's a goddamn hypocrite. She claims to be ever-so-progressive, but her vision of liberalism is limited to the very narrow spectrum that Clinton --- the Goldman Sachs, Monsanto Candidate -- and the so-called "centrists" represent. She attacks anyone who deviates even slightly to the right or left from her self-defined only "political correct" position. Everyone outside of that narrow little spectrum is excoriated.

Meanwhile, he own writing is a perfect example of what she whines about. She gripes that Sanders and his supporters are closed minded jerks who see anyone who disagrees with them as assholes and dupes....But her writing is filled with examples of dismissing anyone who disagrees wither her as being assholes and fools.

His rhetoric paints everyone who disagrees with him is either a sell-out or a dupe who doesn’t know what’s really good for them.


And that, in turn, is breeding paranoid, vindictive behavior from Sanders and his camp, who are unwilling to accept the possibility that he lost the primary in a fair fight. In reality, most people who disagree with Sanders are not bamboozled or corrupt. In most cases, they simply have different priorities or values.


Then in that otehr column she shares this little bit of "understanding" of people with a different viewpoint than her own.

Of course, you’d have to be the most naive person alive to think that Trump is actually a convert to the conservative Christianity that the religious right claims fuels them.


She has no problem with the contradiction between her own claim that anyone who votes for Trump is "naive" and her accusation that Sanders claims people who disagree with him are "duped."

Vindictive? Compared to her form of expression, Sanders is a pink fluffy bunny.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
36. I fail to see anything "mean sprited" about calling an asshole an asshole.
Tue May 24, 2016, 04:49 PM
May 2016

You ARE defending Trump -- you pulled out (without link or explanation) a little snippet from her article, and hoped to stoke some outrage with it.

Anyone who votes for Trump IS a close-minded jerk--and likely a racist, a xenophobe, and an asshole to boot. I've not met anyone who votes for Trump who can't be persuaded with almost no prodding to say something offensive about some minority group or immigrant sector.

Have you read the TOS here, lately?

This is an article by a woman with profound powers of discernment, yet you're getting all upset that she calls Trump as the overwhelming majority of us here see him.

Hmmm. I don't think you understand the goals of this site. We want to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans--not defend racist scumbags like Donald Trump.

And, as for your assertion that she is somehow being "mean to Bernie" you might want to read what you cite:

In reality, most people who disagree with Sanders are not bamboozled or corrupt. In most cases, they simply have different priorities or values.
 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
38. Are you a lawyer? You should because you're great at twisting things.
Tue May 24, 2016, 05:11 PM
May 2016

I'm not defending Trump or the Christian right.

Just pointing to the hypocrisy of a columnist who blasts everyone that does not fit into her narrow view of things and then claiming they are nasty and narrow minded. And a writer who practices the same sins she is criticizing Sanders and his supporters for.

I think you're smart enough to know the difference between defending Trump and Christians and using her attacks on them as an example of her own double standards.



MADem

(135,425 posts)
39. I am not "twisting" a single thing. You're the one who coughed
Tue May 24, 2016, 05:15 PM
May 2016

up a quote without citing it, not me. I was the one who did the work and found out it was talking about Trump.

It's only reasonable to question your motives when you conceal such an important element of the quote you--not me, YOU-brought to the table.

You're the one decrying the writer for saying bad things, and the bad thing you cite is about that lunatic Donald Trump.

There's nothing "bad" about calling an ass an ass.

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
40. I pulled that at random....She is such a wealth of cheap shots
Tue May 24, 2016, 05:18 PM
May 2016

There's nothing wrong with calling an ass an ass -- but if one does it in a way that's also being a hypocritical ass, they are also open to criticism.

Her criticism of the Christian right would be the same whether the subject was Trump or not. Point is she's doing to them what she claims Sanders does.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
44. Random? You really didn't 'notice' that the article was about Trump?
Tue May 24, 2016, 08:53 PM
May 2016

That big fat headline didn't give you a clue?

Christian right voters get in line behind Trump, because conservatism has always been their true religion

MADem

(135,425 posts)
45. She's not 'projecting' at all. She's got opinions and she's expressing them.
Tue May 24, 2016, 08:57 PM
May 2016

Rather like most people do.

But since she hasn't opined that someone you favor is The Way and The Light, she's getting some shade from you.

That's fine, that's YOUR opinion--but let's not pretend this is anything more than you not liking her particular perspective about someone you prefer.

Orsino

(37,428 posts)
20. Another author who doesn't understand what a convention is for.
Tue May 24, 2016, 01:39 PM
May 2016

Confused and frightened when the line between "winner" and "loser" isn't clearly defined. Not qualified to write on modern American politics.

 

virgogal

(10,178 posts)
21. That seems to be a 21st century thing.
Tue May 24, 2016, 01:40 PM
May 2016

Many university students today aren't open to opposing opinions.

Bernie is just following the kids' lead.


 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
22. ôSocialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited
Tue May 24, 2016, 01:48 PM
May 2016
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” ― Ronald Wright, A Short History of Progress

Note of interest: This quote is often attributed to John Steinbeck. However, I think he would agree with it.

TheFarseer

(9,346 posts)
29. Now pointing out corruption and cronyism is elitist?
Tue May 24, 2016, 02:17 PM
May 2016

I thought the corrupt oligarchs were the elites. This whole time it was the people calling them out for screwing over working and poor Americans that are the bad people. Imagine my embarrassment.

TheKentuckian

(25,167 posts)
48. It isn't elitist to accept people are wrong and their ideology failed.
Wed May 25, 2016, 08:28 AM
May 2016

Another right wing dumbass argument or at least a 1st cousin of one. You know the good old chestnut that liberals aren't really inclusive because their idiotic, failed, and generally bigoted nonsense has no place in a western democracy. This time just omit the bigotry and the same lame argument is sitting there.

Guilty as charged, I have nothing but disdain for demonstrably failed, stubborn wrong-headedness that destroys our future abuses our present while making much of our past progress for naught.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Sanders is filled with co...