2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumCan we drop the "Bernie" in "Bernie Busters?"
Their attitude, that I've read in some Facebook posts, is "... thanks, but we'll take it from here." Some have called him a traitor.
If that's the case, Bernie's name should not be affiliated with them. Bernie made the decision to support Hillary. I trust his judgment and will follow his lead. So will most of his supporters.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)They were Bernie Sanders delegates.
shireen
(8,333 posts)As far as I'm concerned, that ended when they disagreed with Bernie's decision to support Hillary.
They ended up being there primarily as protestors, and were not representing Bernie and most of his supporters.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)They chanted things like "NO TPP" and "No More War". They objected to Hillary in ways that Bernie did during the primary.
Yes, Bernie did decide to endorse and support Hillary, but he also spent many months drawing attention to things about Hillary that he objected to very strongly.
Much of the appeal of his primary campaign was that he was presented as a contrast to Hillary in many critical respects.
Some of the people who devoted blood, sweat, and tears to that campaign still oppose Hillary for reasons articulated by the Sanders campaign over the course the primary.
shireen
(8,333 posts)oberliner
(58,724 posts)In fact, Hillary made the point about how we Democrats are much more accepting of dissent and protest than the Republicans are.
paleotn
(17,778 posts)but so is the pragmatism shown by Bernie Sanders.
Something some of his supporters don't seem to understand.....
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)makes perfect sense. After all, the ones being complained about have.
Good idea, Shireen.
wallyworld2
(375 posts)Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)They were there because of Bernie that is true and many believed he would still be the nominee I think.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)If you are quiet and don't disrupt anything, you generally don't get anyone paying attention.
I do think many of them somehow thought Bernie would still get the nomination, but I also think a lot of them just wanted to register their dissatisfaction with Hillary as a candidate.
Personally I do not agree with their tactics nor their position; however, I understand where they were coming from.
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)People who demand to be heard but shout down anyone they don't like do not have a moral leg to stand on.
They're entitled to their dissent, and we're entitled to ours. We also happen to be the majority of Democratic voters, which means such protests should be attempting to convince us, not prevent us from saying our piece at the convention we organized for that purpose. If their plan was to simply antagonize Democrats until the whole party bowed to their demands, it's not going to work, and they're going to be the ones damaged by the fallout, not us.
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)The Busters who are not Bernie supporters, by the way, want to elect a non-Democrat. So sorry, I can't stand them. They never bother with the real evil that is the GOP but work to elect Republicans by attacking the Democrats. I would have tossed them out. The convention was no place for a progressive protest.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And you believe that the Wikileaks information confirms that the DNC was not impartial with respect to the primary.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)EVERY FUCKING THING he could do. And you thank him by flushing him down the toilet? C'mon and get real!
oberliner
(58,724 posts)My only point is that I understand where they are coming from. I can empathize with a young person, involved in their first ever campaign, having spent the past 6-8 months going door to door trying to explain to people why they should not vote for Hillary in the primary, passionate about their opposition to politicians who are beholden to wealthy business interests, angry about the DNC putting their finger on their scales against their candidate, believing fervently in why Bernie Sanders should be the Democratic nominee and not Hillary Clinton, suddenly being able to applaud politely for the person they have just spent all that blood, sweat, and tears arguing against.
DLCWIdem
(1,552 posts)He was argueing for something not against someone He wasn't supposed to negative campaign. If you believe the other than it says that Bernie failed in that.
FarPoint
(12,207 posts)A few rotten eggs... repulsed the very group needed to elevate their progressive path.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)and he told the people to get behind Clinton; I think he should have done it a lot sooner, but he did it.
I agree with the OP; now they're just "busters".
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Even in the waning months of the primary, Bernie would get a much stronger reaction from the crowd when he attacked Hillary than when he attacked Trump.
And when he recently spoke to his supporters about backing Hillary, the crowd responded very negatively.
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)Isolate them, and let them wither
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Maybe call them Jill Stein or Green Party folks.
kacekwl
(6,993 posts)Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)thus he was trying to win. He had that right. Was it wise? I don't know some say yes and some say no.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)They are no different - or better - than angry RW Tea Partiers, imho.
Maru Kitteh
(28,303 posts)Pity the ones on the convention floor could not see that. Difficult when you have your head straight up you kiester though, I guess.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Green tea is good shit, maynard!
treestar
(82,383 posts)Bernie is not one of them.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)auntpurl
(4,311 posts)It's time to move on, anyway. These protestors are no longer relevant. We are moving forward to the GE and beating Trump!
oberliner
(58,724 posts)The issues that Bernie raised during the primary about Hillary haven't magically disappeared.
Just because we are all working to get Hillary elected and to defeat Trump doesn't mean folks can't also express disagreement with Hillary on areas where they disagree with her.
It is also important to remember that among younger voters, Bernie got more support than any candidate from either party.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)but I seriously doubt it was "the issues Bernie raised during the primary about Hillary". They were holding up signs that said "Intersectionality matters". What that has to do with the wonderfully diverse and inclusive convention, I have no idea. They screamed "BLACK LIVES MATTER" at Cory Booker. Uh, I think he knows that. Their "issues" mostly seemed written on the back of a bar napkin in crayon. They were the very embodiment of the "fringe left" (and I say that as someone who IS on the left) in that they had no organisation, no unifying philosophy, no strong and diverse coalition, and ultimately no power because of the previous three things.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)That is definitely one of the issues that Bernie raised during the primary.
Another common chant was "No More Wars".
There were also "No Oligarchy" signs. This was something that Bernie said throughout the primary campaign also.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)So I don't know what they were screaming about.
"No More Wars" is just reductive. It's meaningless. What the hell does that even mean? No more wars even if someone attacks our country? Or our allies' countries? It's certainly PRETTY F*ING RUDE to chant ANYTHING over a Medal of Honor winner.
"Oligarchy" is a word that has lost all meaning in this primary season. Everything is the oligarchy except them. Nobody passes the purity test in the end - not even Bernie.
PS. I would love for the media to have asked ANY of those young protestors what the TPP actually IS.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)And Hillary just had a prominent supporter say that she could flip and support the deal.
The "No More Wars" chant, I think, was meant as in relation to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria.
Oligarchy, I would agree, has lost much of its meaning, but my point was just that it was a term used by Sanders in the primary.
Look, my point is just that the protestors are people who passionately supported Bernie Sanders throughout the primary, a primary that was focussed on the many ways in which Bernie disagreed with Hillary, so it is natural for there to be some segment of Bernie primary supporters who would want to express their feelings about those distinctions that are still very important to them.
Even in the waning weeks of the primary, Bernie would get a much stronger reaction from his audience when he criticized Hillary than when he criticized Trump.
And when he told his supporters that he was backing Hillary, the reaction from many was less than positive.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)If they change it to the point she's happy with it, she will sign it. It's not complicated. She's not happy with it the way it is because it would cause reduction in US wages. She's never said she disagrees with the CONCEPT of the TPP, just that the current deal isn't favorable enough to the US to sign. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this. This is how bills/laws evolve all the time, right?
So there are two reasons Bernie got a stronger reaction for criticising Hillary. One is because a significant number of people who "supported" Bernie did so only because they were actually just anti-Hillary. Two is because often young people view things in a binary fashion. Bernie's the good guy, so Hillary must be the bad guy. As we get older, our brains process nuance better. This is a real thing.
At the end of the day, of COURSE Bernie supporters are going to be disappointed and of COURSE I have sympathy for that! Hell, I cried my eyes out when Hillary lost the primary in 08 and I wasn't in my 20s. But I put on my big girl pants, built a bridge, and got over it because there was no way in hell I was letting John McCain get into the White House if I was able to do something about it, ie vote and work for the Obama campaign. Trump is ORDERS OF MAGNITUDES worse than McCain. I was talking to my mom tonight and I said, "I would vote for George W Bush over Trump if those were my only two options. And I f*cking HATE George W Bush with the fury of God's own righteous thunder." Trump would hurt the most disadvantaged members of our society FAR more than these young people would be hurt. You want a political revolution? Go out and make one - work for candidates you like, run for office yourself. I will support you. But it is just SELFISH to subject AAs, Latinos, Muslims, LGBTQ, the disabled, the working poor, the poor and homeless to Trump. There is no excuse, I'm really sorry.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)My personal view is that these folks ought to follow Bernie's lead and support Hillary.
I am just trying to make the point that these protestors and disruptors are not just some random jerks but rather young people with passionately heartfelt progressive beliefs that were expressed repeatedly by the Sanders campaign.
In that context, I can understand (though not agree with) what they are doing.
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)Hillary was described by many people who know her well as a listener. I hope she does listen to the people as president. I want her to be responsive and open-minded. That's what she's said she'll be, and she works for us.
Now let's go get her the WH.
PaulHendra
(5 posts)Succinctly and thoughtfully put. Thanks for your understanding!
PaulHendra
(5 posts)I don't find fault with any of these themes. No war. No oligarchy. No TPP. All fine by me! <3
brooklynite
(93,844 posts)skepticscott
(13,029 posts)into the hard, unglamorous work of party building as they do into coming up with new hashtags, they might actually accomplish something.
onecaliberal
(32,478 posts)PaulHendra
(5 posts)I am a Bernie fan. I was disappointed by his loss. That said, I think it's a mistake for Hillary supporters to dismiss progressives as anti democrats. We want what you want! It's hard to switch tracks and jump on an already moving train. Condescending and derisive responses will bring division, not unity! I joined this group because a friend posted that the vp choice had attended a black church for many years. This gives me hope of empathy and compassion to our fellow man. Be kind and patient. We will come if welcomed and loved! Namaste
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)For example, you've said nothing that would lead anyone to think you're not one of us.
Progressives and Hillary supporters are very much overlapping groups. Progressives are not our enemies.
At the same time, those who would help elect Donald Trump--regardless of their ideology--are part of the problem and not the solution.
But I do not sense that you are one of those people who would ever do anything to help elect Donald Trump.
PaulHendra
(5 posts)I do not at all support Trump, or any facet of his bigotry! Hillary has been characterized as corporate and not compassionate. I'm opening myself to the idea that she is capable of caring for middle class, minorities and disenfranchised individuals. I hope to see a fairer trade balance between us and China. I also hope that TPP is reconsidered! We need industrial jobs, too! Thanks, for the gracious welcome. Namaste
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I don't see how dismissing those folks is a smart idea.
BT35
(5 posts)Clinton and her supporters were as inclusive as humanly possible. Clinton thanked Bernie in her acceptance speech as did President Obama and many other speakers. Many of Sanders positions were included in the platform. And yet the Bernie or Bust folks were unmoved. I watched ALL the convention coverage...an obsession...and I was struck by the Bernie or Bust people who did not respond to any of the positive approaches. This suggests that this small group...and it was quite small...was not serious about being in the Democratic Party, which has a hugh tent and room for everyone. That's my take on it.
PaulHendra
(5 posts)I just want to emphasize that it appears condescending to be characterized as small while you refer to yourself as the big tent. There is an ongoing grieving process for the loss Bernie and his group endured. It's akin to the death of an ideal. You may see Hillary's path as an obvious choice. We have yet to fully adopt this alternative. Implied, or forced subservience does not ingratiate new recruits! Show me how I can feel good about it all, not why I should feel bad about where I was. Namaste
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)Speaking in the convention that was controlled from who they preferred be nominated in the primary to who was allowed to speak, the DNC did not provide much in deeds, and fought tooth and nail over words(the party platform).
Terry McAulliffe says that Clinton will spin back to the TPP now that she has the nomination.
Leon Panatte was met with protest chants of "No more war" because he viewed President Obama's caution concerning Syria as a "missed opportunity" for war. A war that he thinks would last 30 years.
Andrew Cuomo a Democratic governor who occasionally talks about leftish social policies while enabling big business and helping Wall Street.
Perhaps worst of all, when Clinton's ardent secret campaign aide Debbie Wassermann-Schultz resigns in disgrace from her position as the impartial DNC Chair, Clinton appoints her Honorary Chair of the new 50 State Strategy. Given her history is it wrong to assume that Debbie will be anointing primary winners in that project? While making sure that "republicans she can work with" run unopposed of course.
Nonhlanhla
(2,074 posts)Many of us who are Hillary supporters self-identify as progressive. We just did not buy into Bernie's rhetoric. The assumption that to be progressive you had to have supported Bernie is false.
musicblind
(4,484 posts)I am very much a progressive. I am also a Hillary supporter.
I voted for Bernie in the primaries, but I am enthusiastic about Hillary as our nominee. It isn't a zero-sum game. I voted for Hillary in 2008 and was enthusiastic about Obama.
Many Hillary supporters are very progressive!
fleabiscuit
(4,542 posts)Protalker
(418 posts)I've been a gay activist for 30 years. I support protest. When a Congressional Medal of Honor speaks it transcends debate.
BooScout
(10,406 posts)It works for me anyway.
sheshe2
(83,324 posts)LostOne4Ever
(9,267 posts)sheshe2
(83,324 posts)JI7
(89,173 posts)jaceaf
(89 posts)Some of their intent is still to follow what he tells them to do and elect "berniecrats." They still want to infiltrate our party by placing Bernie's picks. So, unless they drop that angle, they are still connected to him and his revolution.
demwing
(16,916 posts)honestly...
liberal N proud
(60,298 posts)Stop wearing Bernie shirts and carrying Bernie signs.
As long as they keep associating themselves with Bernie we need to call the Bob's or similar.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)"Bernie's Busters" does it for me
sarae
(3,284 posts)There's a clear difference between his supporters at large and the "Busters" the news now always talks about.
I heard a reporter say that the holdouts decided to wear neon shirts last night so they could be easily picked out of the crowd, but it was clear that out of 1,900 Bernie Sanders delegates the number of neon shirt-wearers were proportionally small. The number actually disrupting was probably even smaller than that.
MSNBC was probably annoyed that their reporter was being honest regarding the amount of disruptors...lol.
Basic LA
(1,704 posts)Let's see, what could it be ... ?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)WE all know that they are a small number of assholes who disrupt things just to disrupt them.
That some are calling SENATOR Sanders a traitor just goes to show they never truly supported him, but more likely attached themselves to him for the opportunity to spread disunity.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)They were more like the anarchists who show up at protests to cause violence than Sanderds supporters
Firebrand Gary
(5,044 posts)They are anarchists who wish to burn down everything.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)floriduck
(2,262 posts)Bernie Sanders from the protesters during and now after the convention? Is this a typical Clinton supporter responses? Or are these people just the fringe of her supporters. Please tell me what we can expect from now through the GE.
rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)Last edited Sat Jul 30, 2016, 10:46 AM - Edit history (1)
A bunch of spoiled, uncivil, loud mouthed non-democrat campus left brats just distracted and protested and disrupted the nomination of the first progressive woman to a major party ticket. They booed war heroes and civil rights movement heroes. They dominated media coverage of supposed "democrats divided" when they aren't even democrats. They're infiltrators.
They were there for one reason. We "opened the party up" to them, as they claimed to represent "millennials" or "progressives" but obviously were NOT "democrats" in any meaningful sense.
Anyway, like a lot of democrats I believe they actually made the case against Bernie better than Hillary ever did. These "supporters" would have created a mortifying leftist spectacle that would have revolted the general electorate had their candidate won.
What they've done is also to make the opposite case to the leftists' optimistic demand that we "open" the party to such people. I think many on DU (those who haven't left us for Jack-in-the-Box radicals -- I note most of the posts there get 3-5 comments) reflect the view of most rank and file democrats who've been around: what we just saw is even more reason to a) do away with caucuses next time and b) close all of our primaries to all but registered democrats and c) require our candidates and delegates to be members of the party for some period of time - at least a full year. I'd say, before running or being a delegate.
In my own view this is our own tea party. Allowing them to take over or even have a loud voice will end up damaging our party's national standing jus as the far right element wound up sticking the republicans with Donald Trump.
The whacked out Sarandon/West/Free Mumia/Lock Her Up/No More Wars! campus left hippie faction doesn't vote. They don't support democrats and never have. They didn't intend to help build our party, even if Sen. Sanders himself did stand for that. He accepted and relied on support from people who have never been anything but a fringe element and it harmed his standing with the majority of democratic voters.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)tried to bring his supporters to support her. At that point, they became responsible entirely for their actions.
The point of the OP was relating to resistance to removing reference to Bernie in the "BoBs" or "Bernie Bros". And I believe it is wrong to encourage the use or condone those terms now that Bernie backed Hillary. Using a term like "extreme bros" or even "former Bernie bros" suits me fine.
Response to floriduck (Reply #84)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Lots of nice Bernie people here decried what was going on in their and Bernie's name, and moreover it is apparent that several of the protestors (a minority of the delegation) are moving over to the Green party now anyway.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)It's what passes for a life, apparently.
The rest of us have moved on.
Blue Idaho
(4,987 posts)Bernie is headed back to Vermont to run for the Senate as an Independent.
Hillary is headed on the campaign trail to run for President as a Democrat.
The "or busters" have mostly wandered over to the Green Party to support Jill Stein. Whatever they were - the "busters" are now just a footnote to history.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)calimary
(80,693 posts)actually supported HIM, at all. If they really did support him and trust his judgment and have such faith in him, why wouldn't they trust him on supporting Hillary Clinton. Seems to me they'd have to know that he didn't make that shift without good reason and a lot of careful thought.
wildeyed
(11,240 posts)liberalmuse
(18,670 posts)Last week my sister told me she was going to vote for Jill Stein, but today she told me she's voting for Hillary because she's not insane and does not even want to chance Trump in our blue state. I'm thrilled!
CaptainTruth
(6,546 posts)Doesn't seem like they've been through many election cycles. How many times do you get the perfect candidate? Almost never. Maybe JFK was close (or could have been) ... but we all know what happened.
I also feel like that small "Bernie or bust" group has a lot of "privileged" folks who feel "entitled." Like the kid who always got everything they wanted & if they didn't, they just had to hold their breath, stomp their feet, throw a temper tantrum & mommy/daddy would give in & give them what they wanted. Newsflash: You don't always get what you want! Especially in politics. Welcome to real life.
They also seem to be missing the bigger picture, which is, if a Republican gets elected (especially Trump) everything Bernie (& they, allegedly) stand for will be DEAD. So by protesting Hillary (& thus helping Trump) they're working against their own best interests ... a trait I normally associate with Republican voters.