People both here and in the larger media universe have been writing Bernie off all year

[Tom Rinaldo]

I can't count how often he has been dismissed as a rapidly fading and "spent" force, with no possible real path forward to the nomination. Mostly though, away from DU, he is consistently ignored and mentioned as an afterthought only, while pundits talk on and on about Elizabeth, and Mayor Pete and Uncle Joe, although Bernie has consistently ranked in the top tier of candidates, frequently polling at number two both nationally and in the early primary states. This despite the fact that Bernie Sanders virtually always ranks just behind Joe Biden in national polls showing who will defeat Trump by the largest margin. If that is noted at all critics contend it is only because Sanders has high "voter recognition" because of his 2016 run. Funny how high "voter recognition" is never cited as a factor underlying support for Joe Biden. The simple truth is that Bernie Sanders has support from tens of millions of voters. Regardless of what one thinks of him personally (or those voters), Sanders remains an important figure in the resistance to Donald Trump

I have watched critics of Bernie Sanders here wage a relentless three year long and counting assault on the Senator from Vermont. It has often been justified in the name of "vetting", but other names for "vetting" are attack politics and negative campaigning. True it is a more or less legitimate part of politics in a Democracy to attempt to gain leverage on a rival by exposing real or potential weaknesses in them. But it does not scrub negative campaigning of negativity to cloak it instead as "vetting". I have seen posts here for years "attacking" Sanders for "attacking" Democrats, and almost never is even a trace of irony acknowledged.

Much anger has been expressed here that Sanders, for example, "attacked" Clinton by raising concerns like the multi millions she earned off speeches given to top Wall Street firms prior to her 2016 run. Few outside of core Sanders supporters acknowledge that raising such concerns could fall under the definition of "vetting". Sanders is said to have "weakened" Clinton. She says so herself in real time today. Maybe so. But the continued years long "vetting" campaign regarding Bernie Sanders, coming from those who do not support him, is the most intense sustained exercise in negative campaigning that I have ever witnessed during inter-mural fighting on our center left side of the political spectrum. And I have no doubt that it serves the purpose of "weakening" Bernie Sanders. Clearly it has done so here, where Sanders consistently polls lower than he does in all national polls and in all primary state polls of likely Democratic voters. Sanders usually even polls higher among African American voters in South Carolina than he does here on DU, a forum that has overall shown a strong willingness to embrace progressive politics.

I watched how sustained efforts to attack Hillary Clinton (who I supported for President in 2008) over many years weakened her overall standing with the general public, and enthusiasm for her candidacy was effected. Right now, in December of 2019, Bernie Sanders is among a small handful of human beings plausibly positioned to win the Democratic nomination for president in 2020. If Sanders does, which he well might despite all of the many proclamations here to the contrary, he will need as much support as is politically possible in order to rid our nation of the Trump cancer. I have my opinions and my preferences and some times express my reasons for them, but I have not expressed a single harsh utterance against any of our potential Democratic candidates (with the possible exception of Tulsi Gabbard).

Bernie Sanders may be our candidate in 2020. Only the willfully blind inside our Democratic coalition can not acknowledge that he has his strengths as well as weaknesses. I hope all of us will, with the the bulk of our comments, strongly acknowledge that any of our plausible possible nominees will powerfully serve our national interests if elected in November. We don't have to relentlessly tear into any of them in order to advocate for one or more of them. If Sanders wins the nomination, which is at least highly possible if not highly likely, I hope none of us will have to later regret the battering he underwent on the way to that nomination.

[getagrip_already]

1. it's laughable to say that he has been vetted...

He has largely been left out of any media or pac investigations or attacks. For whatever reason, he has largely been either ignored or protected.

If this waits until the general, he will be badly beaten.

Just saying.

[Gothmog]

40. There is a ton of oppo research out there on sanders

sanders will not be the nominee of the party. If sanders is the nominee of the party, trump will win 40+ states

[TidalWave46]

2. "Bernie Sanders may be our candidate in 2020"

No, he won't be. The whole argument starts and ends there.

If the Sanders campaign is going to compare one of Bidens policy positions to a terrorist attack, surround themselves by a top campaign team that threw Trump an assist, and relentlessly trash the party by employing hyperbole and bullshit jargon; then take what you get.

It doesn't matter. He will not win because of his campaign.

He has been treated with kid gloves by the media and our other contenders. Clinton damn near swaddled him. The only people who think otherwise are his hard-core supporters.

[Me.]

17. This...

[Cha]

24. thank you!

[Gothmog]

41. I agree

There are a large number of real democrats who will not forgive or forget.

[BeckyDem]

3. The battering will come from WS, M$M and other special interests.

What may or may not happen here will pale in comparison. They are geared for Warren too should the nom go to her. Who do you think Joe Manchin will campaign for?

[Tom Rinaldo]

5. Yes. And you are right that the assualt will be brutal against ANY Democrat running

The subtext will vary from candidate to candidate. It will be customized to whoever we run, but it will be brutal. That simply is a given. My guess is that Manchin will probably not campaign for anyone, claiming that his independence serves West Virginia citizens best.

[BeckyDem]

12. Any? I don't think so. Warren and Sanders are their main targets.

Manchin isn't silent now, so I doubt he would be going forward.


Manchin told Fox News he would “absolutely not” support Sanders’ agenda, calling it “not practical where I come from.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/468278-manchin-says-he-wouldnt-back-sanders-against-trump-in-presidential-race

After Bill Gates Refuses to Say if He'd Back Her Over Trump
https://www.newsweek.com/after-bill-gates-refuses-say-if-hed-back-her-over-trump-elizabeth-warren-says-shell-go-over-1470285

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. Yes. Any.

If Hillary Clinton were to run again do you think the attacks against her would not be brutal? If Joe Biden gets the nomination do you think the attacks against him will not be brutal? Different players may take the lead in opposing this or that nominee, and in some cases that may be because they specifically feel more existentially threatened by one or more candidates than they do by others. But the Republican Party and key forces backing it will do everything in their power to "protect their turf" and for them that starts with the presidency. They have loyal team players who are skilled character assassins and they are not restrained by the boundaries of truth.

Progressives in particular may raise the ire of certain money interests, sure. But dirty politics of the sort Republicans and Russians play makes moderates a juicy target also, when it comes to attempts at Democratic vote suppression (as in "they are all part of the establishment, all corrupt, your vote makes no difference" messaging)

I simply stated that I doubt that Manchin will campaign for Trump. He won't "support" Sanders.

[BeckyDem]

23. The attacks against Warren and Sanders are significantly different.

When you have people who are otherwise in acceptable standing within society, Gates is but one example. When he refused to say he would support Warren over Trump, you have an example of what the elite will tolerate for president (Trump) in order to maintain control over their wealth.

Corporate media likes a horse race, that is why they maintained live cameras on Trump's rallies even while he wasn't there and of course Republicans will go after Joe Biden. The circle will be much wider for Sanders/Warren, Warren/Sanders. Manchin will not be the exception on the Democrats side.

[Cha]

4. I want a Uniter and that is Joe Biden..

We've had enough divisiveness.

Civil Rights Leader Dr.Robert Green who worked closely with Dr. Martin Luther King for many years endorses @JoeBiden for President

“Joe Biden is a statesman, leader, and above all else, a unifier. I had the fortune to tell Joe all of this in person when he visited the west side of Las Vegas last month. More than 50 years ago, I personally witnessed his ability to bring together people of different races, cultures, and backgrounds in Newcastle County, Delaware. Today, that kind of leadership is needed to unify our country. Joe possesses exactly the type of leadership that this country needs now. He will heal and unify the soul of our nation. I am proud to stand with Joe and work hard to make sure he is the next President of the United States of America.”

https://blog.4president.org/2020/2019/12/civil-rights-leader-dr-robert-green-endorses-joe-biden-for-president.html

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287376758

Joe Biden gets major South Carolina endorsement from former Harris backers

Columbia, South Carolina – A prominent group of black women activists in South Carolina that backed Kamala Harris endorsed Joe Biden on Tuesday, further strengthening the former vice president's standing in the first-in-the-South primary state.

Known as "The Reckoning Crew," the group of three dozen women includes current and former elected officials, activists, and faith leaders and has played a critical role in grassroots organizing in the state. Biden's path to the nomination relies heavily on the South Carolina primary, which figures to play an outsized role in determining the party's presidential nominee because of its high percentage of African American voters.

"It's time for us to unite as one and put all of our energy behind the candidate who will not only beat Donald Trump but knows how to fix what he's broken on day one," said the group's founder, Bernice Scott, a former Richland County councilwoman. "And from there, we are confident Joe will continue to build on the history he made with Barack Obama."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=377559

[Tom Rinaldo]

6. An excellent Pro Biden post. Thank you n/t

[Merlot]

8. He didn't "unite" me when he yelled at the guy asking a question

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

28. Me neither, thank you!! Bernie is the ULTIMATE uniter, around progressive issues...

that pro-corporate interests abhor. That's the "winning ticket," as is this one...


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[guillaumeb]

13. You make excellent points, Cha.

But is Biden were not the nominee, I am certain that you would support the actual nominee. And that, I think, is the author's point. That this silly tearing down of other candidates serves nothing but a media narrative of Democrats in disarray, and obscures the clear and present danger of an actual authoritarian imbecile currently occupying the White House.

[PatSeg]

18. And besides being a uniter,

Biden does know how to cultivate relationships and get things done AND there will be a lot to do when Trump leaves the White House.

I've always admired Sanders as an outspoken activist, but I cannot see him as a president. Policies are important, but being president takes certain unique skills, skills I've never seen in Sanders. Meanwhile, there are plenty of moderates, swing voters, and disgruntled voters who will not vote for someone who has been tagged a "socialist". It doesn't bother me, but it is a deal breaker for people who don't understand what Sanders represents. Some may vote for Trump or even stay home.

[JoeOtterbein]

7. K n R ! Thanks for posting!

If Bernie was no problem, as is often claimed, why do they seem to worry so much about him?

[LanternWaste]

19. You're confusing "worry" and idle bemusement" again.

Bless your heart.

[JoeOtterbein]

20. Thanks professor!

Do I get Brownie Points with that?

[LanternWaste]

36. Nope. Simply less and less credibility with every statement of bias.

(not a professor by a long shot... just a guy using standard English above a third-grade level)

[JoeOtterbein]

37. As if!

[LanternWaste]

39. And there's the back of the t-shirt...

And as always, most on-point, well-sourced and colorful... if not exactly relevant.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

29. Hmmmm... makes you wonder doesn't it?! I think they call it "Fear the Bern"!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[LanternWaste]

38. "Bemused by the Bern"

And that's at its most melodramatic; anything beyond that is simply Vladimir and Estragon on the bench in the updated Beckett play, 'Waiting for Bernie'

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

42. I agree, it does make one wonder... fear the reaper, yes, but why the Bern?!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[BannonsLiver]

9. More tales of woe.

It’s always the woe with Bernie.

[guillaumeb]

10. Recommended.

And this "vetting", which you correctly describe as attack politics, is based on one thing.

The person doing the vetting has determined that one candidate is "the ideal candidate", and all other candidates are, at best, less than ideal. And that would be fine if that person did not realize that everyone else who also engages in that same process, this setting one person up on a pedestal, is "vetting" candidates as well.

Better, in my view, is to recognize that, first, no candidate is perfect, and rather than tear down all other candidates, recognize that if one's first choice is unavailable, reason demands ranking the candidates from most to least preferred.

And as you correctly note, on the Democratic side, there are a number of excellent candidates. On the GOP side, there is Trump.

But the US media also encourages this style of vetting/attack politics because it makes for more exciting, if less informative, viewing.

[MrsCoffee]

11. People just don't like him.

That's his own damn fault.

And many of us don't trust him. Also his own damn fault.

[guillaumeb]

14. And the same thing is said about every candidate here.

And who gains by it? Certainly not Democrats.

[MrsCoffee]

25. Yeah, well who gains from the Sanders' constant attacks on the party?

Certainly not Democrats.

[guillaumeb]

27. Agreed.

If Sanders were a member of the Party, the criticism would be taken better. But when AOC criticized Pelosi, AOC was criticized by many here for that. And she is a member of the Party. It might simply be tension between the centrists and more left progressives.

[corbettkroehler]

15. That's Most Fair! In The Interest Of Unity, I Offer The indivisible.org Scorecard

You may enjoy reading how Sanders and Warren effectively tied for the top spot when the drill-down numbers are compared.

http://scorecard.indivisible.org

[JoeOtterbein]

22. Thanks.

That's interesting.

[MrsCoffee]

26. Yeah, sorry. The unity tour was more than a dud.

Sanders has already proven he cannot unite us. Quite the opposite.

[corbettkroehler]

31. I Disagree But Now Know Where You Stand

When he secures the nomination, I expect Democrats to rally behind him. If for no other reason, hatred for Trump will stoke desire for the United States Senate's most popular member among college students.

[Peacetrain]

30. I have been writing him off since 2016... he said he was a Democrat and guess what he ran as in 2018

Just saying, he does not have a chance in hell...not only did he turn his back on being a Democrat, he hired the same people that ran his campaign into the ground last time.

[Renato ray]

32. Many of the media have not written him off

How many pundits have you heard saying the Bernie is flatly not going to win?
But then you have to tell me how many have not said that

[Tom Rinaldo]

34. Many have written off giving him any more than the scant necessary coverage

Presumptions are illustrated via actions. You are correct though. It would be viewed as "unprofessional" to categorically assert that Sanders could not possibly win while he remains a first tier candidate, so few would frame it that way. But they continually look toward other candidates. We will see what they do if Sanders continues his current rise in the polls.

Now, here on DU, it has been a common claim.

[Renato ray]

35. Scant coverage doesn't mean negative coverage

For example, I wish they didn't cover Warren so much the way they are covering her.
There are few hit jobs about Sanders.