The Root: Pipe Down, Bernie Sanders

[bravenak]

(I changed the title because it was too bombastic in my opinion. I decided it was too rude, though I totally get it)

Of course, Sanders, like our president-elect, the Marigold Manchurian Candidate, can rightly lay claim to scoring huge, albeit majorly melanin-deficient, crowds that found kinship in campaigns rallying against a corrupt political system. Unfortunately, only one of those men could seize a major political party’s nomination with a mostly white vote. So, while Sanders was successful in pushing political foe Hillary Rodham Clinton to more progressive stances, he was never a real threat to her campaign. Not only that, but he failed to make real inroads with the folks whose backs the Democratic Party stands on. This is the part where you conjure an image of a black auntie.

After doing so, riddle me this: Who in the hell is this Democrat-come-lately to scold Democrats on all they’ve done wrong?

Following the stunning win of the hatemonger and Republican nominee for president in the 2016 election, Sanders regurgitated the very rhetoric that made him a distant-second-place primary loser in the first place. Indeed, Sanders spoke against “identity politics” while simultaneously repeating the falsehood that Clinton lost because she didn’t appeal to the “working class.” The problem with such viewpoints is that they conveniently gloss over the notion that “Make America great again” is one of the most successful campaigns of “identity politics” in contemporary political history.

http://www.theroot.com/shut-up-bernie-sanders-1791165976?rev=1484338258642%2F%3Futm_source%3Dfacebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=theroot

[tecelote]

1. He's fighting for us.

Why disparage one of the warriors on our side?

[bravenak]

3. Why does he disparage democrats if he is on our side?

I dont think folks who decry 'identity politics' are on my side.

[tecelote]

4. Mention Bernie on this site and watch out.

It's a lot like how Bernie Bros treated Hillary.

He's working with Democrats and trying to make us stronger. Something we need since nearly 40% of the country are Independents and we lost the country during this election cycle. We need to take a hard look at our message and not push people away but bring them in.

Go ahead. Alert my post. Expected.

[bravenak]

11. So we cant complain about him but he can complain about us. Got it. He's more important

[LisaM]

16. Exactly.

I don't know how to phrase this in a politic way, so I will just say it. I am not 100% positive that he is sorry that Hillary lost.

[bravenak]

29. I feel the same way. Seems positively giddy

[LisaM]

36. Thank you!

I thought I was the only one who felt that way.

[radical noodle]

58. You're not

I sense the same thing.

[BlueCaliDem]

102. You're not the only one who feels that way.

Trust me.

[brush]

152. Ditto.

And he didn't even stay in the party — went back to being an independent but he keeps up his attacks on us.

Try attacking trump and the repugs for God's sake.

He could do that for weeks without having to even mention the Dems and the alleged reasons we lost when any 'woke' person knows very well why we 'lost' — Comey, Putin, Assange, Interstate Crosscheck, vote suppression, and on and on and on — plenty of issues for Sanders to attack and propose solutions to.

[JTFrog]

92. +1 nt

[redstatebluegirl]

242. It keeps him on the front page and groups keep paying to have him speak.

[bravenak]

243. And sells them books too I bet

[liquid diamond]

84. You can see that in his subtle "I told you so" post election comments.

I want this man to just go away.

[womanofthehills]

281. You want one of our most vocal progressives to go away

Very sad.

[otohara]

86. Very PC

and 100% correct...I think.

[lunamagica]

105. Oh, yes, that's quite obvious

[MrPurple]

106. Bernie campaigned aggressively for Hillary

He didn't try to exploit her email issue in the primaries. He has focused on a legitimate issue that the party has been too much in the pocket of corporations and Wall St.

He unambiguously spoke out about the extreme danger posed by Trump and made countless media appearances emphasizing that it was necessary to vote for Hillary.

Attacking Bernie as a voice in the party is an unfounded internecine struggle that is the LAST thing we need now. We can have slight philosophical differences without denigrating different segments of the party. Bernie is now one of the primary voices in the party and attacking those who are enthused by his perspective rather than coalescing around them is incredibly counterproductive.

[jonno99]

275. +1 nt

[KPN]

204. Anyone (yes I read the responses below) who feels this way

is irrational. Healthy skepticism is a good thing as long as its not irrational; in that case, it's self-defeating.

[R B Garr]

278. Oh, you are not alone in this! I have noticed he seems very giddy lately.

Unusually happy for a party member who just lost an election. I so agree with you. Things that make you go, hmmm.

[tecelote]

17. Shut Up

That's the title you, respectfully, changed to "Pipe Down".

Now, read your comment. Telling Bernie to "Shut Up" or "Pipe Down" and then saying "So we cant complain about him...". A bit hypocritical?

[bravenak]

24. He should do so until he reflects on HIS OWN FAILURES with minority democrats

Becayse what he is saying is making things worse with us. What we think matters too.

[tecelote]

32. Walk the Talk.

You're right. "What we think matters too." Absolutely.

So don't go around telling people to shut up or pipe down.

[bravenak]

34. That's what I'm telling him. Walk the walk. Can't learn from anybody if he's the one doing all

the talking. Gotta shut up to hear

[tecelote]

35. Introspection is good for everyone to practice as often as possible.

[George II]

66. Speaking of "walk the walk", have we heard a single word in defense of Rep. John Lewis...

...who "walked the walk" and got his head bashed in, was tear gassed, and jailed for "walking the walk"? He wasn't just one anonymous face in a crowd of hundreds of thousands of people.

[Eliot Rosewater]

76. Good question

[Gothmog]

101. I was also wondering about this

Sanders needs to take a position here

[bravenak]

173. He has never once defended Civil Rights Legend John Lewis from attacks

[George II]

175. Color me surprised!!!

[sheshe2]

177. Yes!

Good Question.

You would not believe the trolls that came on a John Lewis thread. The images were disgusting and vile. I saw and alerted on two before MIRT got them. One had over 20 images that I can't unsee. George they were so awful. I cried.

[mcar]

225. They were horrific, she

MIRT banned 6-8 racist trolls (or one who kept coming back) last night. They all left the same awful array of racist, violent images.

I, too, cannot unsee them. They were sickening.

[sheshe2]

228. Ye Gods.

6-8 of them?!

[mcar]

229. Yeah, it was intense

[KPN]

206. Yes -- you obviously just chose not to see his statement. It was posted on this site

Saturday afternoon/evening I believe, also appeared on Huff Post.

You folks are sounding and acting just like Trump on this Bernie vendetta of yours.

[George II]

212. I "chose" not to see it? Before I said anything about it I checked his website. Not there (yet)

[KPN]

216. He also denounced Trump's attack on Congressman Lewis in his appearance

yesterday morning on "Meet the Press" I think it was. There was a post both here at DU and Huff Post mentioning his response to trump re: Lewis yesterday. You obviously didn't see them.

These attacks on Bernie are characteristic of people who somehow feel threatened -- that's the way I see it based on my 66 years' life experience.

[George II]

218. I see it differently based on my 69 years' life experience.

[KPN]

219. I'm sure you do. I haven't heard a single substantive argument against

Bernie in this entire Postmortem -- they are all about feelings; woulda, shoulda, coulda; he's not a real Democrat, and we -- the Democratic Party -- are the victims. I don't buy that. Its all very small minded stuff frankly. So how else am I to perceive these arguments except that they flow from a "victim" mentality.

Here's the point: if Elizabeth Warren said the very same words that Bernie is saying (by the way, she says the same things in her own words), nobody here would be screaming SHUT UP, stop attacking the Democratic Party.

I'm just tired of listening to a bunch of righteous people who seem to think they have all the answers and its only their view that matters, especially when that view strikes me as not only wrong but petty and irrational. I'm not going to sit on the sideline and ignore that kind of behavior or thinking.

[George II]

226. Substantive is in the eye of the beholder. As for "woulda, coulda, shoulda", perhaps....

....you should read some of the OPs that have popped up in the postmortem forum.

I've never seen so much wailing and gnashing of teeth as I've seen since the primaries began right through the Convention (where Sanders' delegates and people in the gallery were as disrespectful to speakers as ever seen) and even through today.

[Gothmog]

236. Sanders campaign is premised on this revolution which did not occur

If you want substance, then look Sanders' unrealistic platform. There is no way that any of this platform could come about in the real world but Sanders lied to his supporters and claimed the he could force the GOP to accept this platform. Sanders lie was based on the premise that a magical revolution would come about where millions or billions of new voters would rise up and force the GOP to reasonable. The concept of this revolution was so silly that it cause a number of loyal democrats to run away from Sanders.

Guess what, the sanders revolution did not occur and never had a chance of occuring Here is how Sanders thinks that he will be able to force the GOP to be reasonable http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/21/1483791/-Imagine-Bernie-Sanders-wins-the-White-House-Then-what

Bernie Sanders has made some very big promises when it comes to his legislative priorities: He says he’ll make college free, pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, and institute a generous single-payer national health insurance program. And when he’s asked how he’ll turn these promises into reality, he says that he and his supporters will help bring about a “political revolution.”

That’s a phrase Sanders uses often, but what does he mean by it? Sanders has said that if he wins the presidency, his victory will be accompanied by a “huge increase in voter turnout”—one that he thinks might end Republican control of Congress. But Sanders acknowledges that the House and Senate could, in spite of his best efforts, remain in GOP hands come next January.

Given that likelihood, Sanders offers an alternate means for achieving his political revolution. He says he knows that a Democratic president can’t simply “sit down and negotiate” with Republican leaders and forge a series of compromises. Anyone who's observed the GOP’s behavior over the course of Barack Obama’s presidency would not dispute that, and in any event, no compromise with Republicans would ever lead to single-payer anyway.

So what then? How would a President Sanders get Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan to pass any of his big-ticket items? This is the model he proposes:

What we do is you put an issue before Congress, let’s just use free tuition at public colleges and universities, and that vote is going to take place on November 8 ... whatever it may be. We tell millions and millions of people, young people and their parents, there is going to be a vote ... half the people don’t know what’s going on ... but we tell them when the vote is, maybe we welcome a million young people to Washington, D.C. to say hello to their members of Congress. Maybe we have the telephones and the e-mails flying all over the place so that everybody in America will know how their representative is voting. [...]

And then Republicans are going to have to make a decision. Then they’re going to have to make a decision. You know, when thousands of young people in their district are saying, “You vote against this, you’re out of your job, because we know what’s going on.” So this gets back to what a political revolution is about, is bringing people in touch with the Congress, not having that huge wall. That’s how you bring about change.

The rest of the DK article debunks that concept that Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell could be influenced by these new voters but we never get to this issue and Sanders himself admits that he will not bet elected without this revolution. This so-called revolution never came to pass.

It was hard for me to take Sanders' proposals seriously because this revolution only existed in Sanders imagination. Again, where were these millions/billions and millions/billions of new voters?

[Gothmog]

235. Do you have a link? I do not remember seeing Sanders on MTP

Reince Priebus and John Lewis were on with Senator Feinstein.

[Exilednight]

199. this is why I can't take you seriously.

You're too busy attacking Bernie. Talk about the issue and you might actually have a leg to stand on.

[KPN]

207. Exactly --

instead they walk Trump's talk it seems -- attack, attack.

[aikoaiko]

73. Didn't the polling data suggest that the more Bernie campaigned, more POC voted for him?

True he only earned about 25% of the Black primary vote, but on the other hand, his numbers were slowly and steadily increasing from near imperceptible Black polling numbers when he started.

I think I understand why people like you and the OP (and some other Hillary loyalists) want Bernie to shut up, but at least the Democratic party is having a conversation about values and priorities that differ, statistically, between different races.

#BowDownBernie isn't going to bridge our racial divides.

[bravenak]

163. I said pipe down not bow down

When have i ever said bow down? That was one lady who Bernie offended at Seattle who said that.

[WhiteTara]

85. As a woman,

I felt totally disenfranchised by him. His focus was on the white men and their needs.

[MadCrow]

143. As a Bernie supporter I think you are wrong.

I have listened to Bernie for years and his message has been consistent. He has always stood up for women's rights and been a strong advocate for civil rights. I was for Hillary until Bernie decided to run. My daughter who is 53 and my grandsons who are millennials heard his message and backed him enthusiastically. I am sick and tired of hearing people on this site disparaging Bernie every chance they get. We are from a state that went for Bernie in the primary, but voted Trump because Hillary didn't address the issues that concern us the most. Hillary lost because she spent more time and effort telling the American people why they shouldn't vote for Trump instead of why they should vote for her. I admire Hillary and all that she has accomplished, but as a candidate her unfavorable s.

[WhiteTara]

151. Well, you lost me on this one.

Have a great time on DU.

[k8conant]

182. Exactly

and that's what we said in Philly.

[sheshe2]

183. So

Human rights are equal rights never spoke to you?


Millions of Americans live with autism—and we’ve got to do more to support them and their families. Never spoke to you?

“We should ban discrimination against L.G.B.T. Americans and their families so they can live, learn, marry and work just like everybody else.” Never spoke to you?

“If we really want to strengthen families, then we have to finally, once and for all, have to fix our broken immigration system.” Never spoke to you?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

On domestic policy, Clinton has struck a decidedly populist tone, emphasizing issues like college affordability, income inequality, and workplace policy reform to demonstrate her attention to Americans' basic economic concerns. She's stood behind the Affordable Care Act, arguing the Republicans would undo a law that's extended health insurance coverage to millions. And she's talking tough on Wall Street, accusing the GOP of having "mass amnesia" about the financial deregulation that preceded the last recession.

snip//

Her approach to economic issues like Wall Street reform and to social issues like gay rights and criminal justice reform is considerably more progressive than that pursued by her husband, former President Bill Clinton, during the 1990s - a fact that may have more to do with the passage of time than anything else.

snip//

While her campaign risks getting sidetracked by the continued focus on her use of a private email server as secretary of state, which has generated an avalanche of GOP attacks on her character and judgment, it's obvious Clinton's team would rather focus on her policy proposals. In the months since she announced her bid, she's delivered substantive speeches on green energy, higher education reform, foreign policy, and criminal justice reform, to name just a few.

http://www.cbsnews.com/media/hillary-clinton-what-does-she-stand-for-election-2016/

So. None of this spoke to you?

Now we have trump that is going to take all our safety nets away. ACA, SS. Medicare. Medicade. PP. Snaps. Then our climate. Our lives. He will take our lives from us, yet none of this spoke to you.

Her unfavorables.

Hillary lost because she spent more time and effort telling the American people why they shouldn't vote for Trump instead of why they should vote for her. I admire Hillary and all that she has accomplished, but as a candidate her unfavorable s.

Sad you never listened to what she was for. You only listened to the perceived "unfavorable".

[KPN]

213. Why are you defending Hillary in this thread when all the other posts are

about Bernie and how shameful his campaign, his supporters and his current visibility/speaking is?

STOP PLAYING VICTIMS and focus on the future for crying out loud.

This whole thread strikes me as just a bunch of whining by people who can't come to grips with reality.

[bravenak]

247. Chill

That's my buddy you are talking to

[LenaBaby61]

187. With all that's coming out about the ruskies cyber-hacking and perhaps more than that...

I'm now more fully convinced than EVER that NO Dem was going to win the 2016 GE. Bernie's unfavorables would have gone UP had he been the Dem nominee because the Nazi Bannon was going to "vet" him, and it wouldn't have been nice. Bernie would have spent the whole rest of the campaign combating the lies and other horrible and more than likely racist things Bannon was going to throw at him, and we know that the media probably would have given him less coverage STILL even though the Dem nominee because they were too busy giving tRumputin $2 billion in free air time because he was good for ratings as Les Moonves said over at CBS, so when would Bernie have had time to get HIS message out? I guess during the debates in which the moderators allowed tRumputin to lie his ass off. But then again, the fix/rig was in at that point. All of the voter purging, voter cross-checking, voter disenfranchisement/voter suppression, 800 polling stations closing in NC, shenanigans in Michigan, WI, PA., russian cyber/hacking (And whatever else they were probably doing to the voting machines/voter rolls) and fake news would have befallen Bernie as well. He wouldn't have been spared just because he was not Hillary Clinton. I'd have voted for Bernie in an incapacitated state over that vile thing tRumputin, but make no mistake about it--NO Dem was going to win the 2016 GE.

[KPN]

208. That was a personal choice. My wife and daughter

were all about him during the primary.

[WhiteTara]

210. That was their choice too.

I saw a lot of women and girls who were looking at him like "Big Daddy" and the kindly "Grandfather" who would take care of them. Not saying that's what the women in your family thinks.

[NWCorona]

88. I don't think Bernie is trying to shut down any criticism

His supporters will take offense and come to his defense but that will happen with almost any politician.

[bravenak]

156. They need to pick their battles

[NWCorona]

157. Yes

[Cha]

142. Excellent point, bravenak. But, we won't be

stifled. So they can forget it.

Thank you for giving us a platform

[Gothmog]

93. Sanders was rejected soundly by Jewish, African and Latino votes

Sanders was rejected by Jewish, African American and Latino votes. Sanders did not come close to getting enough votes.
http://pleasecutthecrap.com/a-message-for-hardcore-bernie-stans/

Hillary Cinton won the nomination because of democracy. She received more than 57% of Democratic votes cast. Bernie Sanders virtually only won caucuses, which are the least democratic aspect of the primary process. And most of those he won only because she decided to save her money for the General election. He won very few primaries, except for his “home states” and Michigan and his clock was cleaned in virtually every other state that mattered. Demographically, he only won white liberals. The fact that YOU think he made it close, or only lost because of “Super Delegates” is a hallmark of your delusion. Bernie Stans largely didn’t seem to notice that she reached out to you repeatedly and you bit her hand off, making you more like Republicans than you should be comfortable with.

Sanders could not win the popular vote and was in the process only due to caucuses

[sheshe2]

158. Why does your post sound like a threat?

Last edited Mon Jan 16, 2017, 01:54 PM - Edit history (1)

You said...

Mention Bernie on this site and watch out.

......................... Go ahead. Alert my post. Expected.

[bravenak]

174. That's so weird

Everyone knows that it is the hillary supporters (you know, DEMOCRATS) who have to watch every word

[sheshe2]

178. Bingo.

So very sad.

[LanternWaste]

223. Right. Sanders criticizes a democratic to make us stronger.

Right. Sanders criticizes a democratic to make the party stronger. Any democrat who criticizes him however, are simply disparaging him.

I certainly understand the political and ethical convenience holding two of the same to different standards can be... as long as we admit (to ourselves if no one else) that it's irrational to do so, and advertises our bias much more than our wit.

And far be if from me to alert any post in which the poster manages to imagine, create and struggle upon a cross of his very own creation.

[kacekwl]

8. Maybe if you replace Democratic with

Americans it would not bother you so much.He's on our side.

[bravenak]

12. No.

[KPN]

211. Yup

[Uponthegears]

20. By the way

I agree that Bernie is wrong about "identity politics." We ABSOLUTELY need to play "identity politics." In fact, it is the only way for us to regain power before people like me are returning to dust.

Our party lacks the credibility to do anything else because a majority of our party's high-profile voices long ago openly rejected "class politics" and, in fact, still adamantly deny that class struggle even exists. ONLY an outsider can carry that message and an outsider would lose their "outsider" status in the unlikely event they became the nominee (yes, I am admitting that Bernie probably would not have won the GE either). In addition, those of us who have the "identity" live with THAT (the identity) struggle every day of our lives and, accordingly, hear that message and vote accordingly.

Might I respectfully suggest that, while I wholeheartedly agree Hillary was the best choice we had among primary candidates to carry that message in the last election (and worked for her post-primary for that very reason), in the next election it would be better if someone who shares our "identity" is on the ticket.

[bravenak]

26. Maybe we should find somebody besides either candidate?

This effort to promote him is just causing those of us he irked topoint out how bad he failed with us and why. Sanctifying him leads to people noticing he is no saint.

[Uponthegears]

39. Truth n/t

[Eliot Rosewater]

81. This is the answer, too much hurt feelings and distrust left over from this election

and there is NO way to rally us around either Bernie or Hillary.

Has to be somebody new and someone not beholding to Wall Street.

I have no investment in either candidate, they are just people like me. If a machinist came along with all the right ideas, I could vote for her or him, as an example.

Doesnt have to even be a current politician, but they MUST be within the TWO party system. Until we change the two party system and we wont, we have to elect a DEMOCRAT and stop acting like children voting for 3rd party candidates.

[krawhitham]

68. Because a lot of democrats are not on our side

quick easy example

[bettyellen]

145. And Bernie's pharma donations? Also full tax returns? Yeah I thought so.

[KPN]

209. Bingo!!

[secondwind]

126. We always call out our own.. this isn't something new.

[RBInMaine]

285. He is trying to help fix a party that has been GUTTED all over the country at every level!

It is absolutely positively right to say that "identity politics" is a serious problem and has helped to GUT this party all over the country in small towns and rural areas. Look, let's get it CLEAR. We abhor and will NEVER tolerate bigotry of ANY kind. But it is not enough to say, "Vote for me because I am a woman." Or "Vote for me because I am a person of color." Our also candidates have to stand for the right kinds of populist progressive economic policies and job creation policies that attract voters. And if we are going to be the "Party of the People" as we have always claimed, then that means ALL the people EVERYWHERE. That means the cities and suburbs, and it also means rural areas and small towns. It means white people AND people of color. It means EVERYONE. We have been gutted because we have ignored too many areas of the country and their concerns and values, and we have not messaged well at all on the economic issues that unite EVERYONE. People in cities need good jobs. People of color need good jobs. Women need good jobs. Young people certainly need good jobs. White people need good jobs. Smalltown America needs good jobs. We are certainly for social justice, but we must also be for economic justice and opportunity EVERYWHERE. They are not mutually exclusive. They are BOTH needed. And this, FINALLY, is what Sanders and others are CORRECTLY saying.

[bravenak]

286. His ideas wont work everywhere

He could never get elected in my state. Best we can get is Begich. And he is wrong about identity politics. Trump just won using white male identity politics. I refuse to play colorblind since in that situ only the coloreds get harms and nobody can see cause they be blind

[EffieBlack]

15. He may be fighting for you - but he's not doing a thing for me

Last edited Sun Jan 15, 2017, 11:29 AM - Edit history (1)

except lecturing me about why my party is paying too much attention to me and others like me.

[tecelote]

19. So, you vote for shut up.

Why? Why silence someone who is fighting for so many progressive goals?

We need more people with his passion and views, not fewer.

[bravenak]

30. So, you think it's cool to tell us 'identity folks' that we are the problem?

[tecelote]

33. What?

Explain what you are trying to put on me?

[bravenak]

37. Ok

They complained that he says the party is listening to us (identity folks; you know, us 'minorities') too much.

You said we need more like him doing what he is doing.

So it follows, that if she complained about him saying we are getting too much attention, and you respond with 'we need more like him' that you agree with what he said about too much identity politics.

See, because to us black folks, trashing identity politics is trashing our identity being involved in politics in a way that we get 'too much' attention.

[tecelote]

40. I don't agree 100% with everything anyone I support (as far as I can tell).

Not only is America around 40% Independents, we're becoming a minority country where no single race will be as powerful as whites have been. I know you know that this is a big part of the Trump win. It's the last big hurrah.

I've always believed our nation's strength is in our diversity and if we survive these four years, we may finally be able to move on.

[bravenak]

41. Then why is he decrying identity politics and political correctness

Both of those things help minorities more than anybody else, but he hates them. Should we not see this as an attack? Should he not find out why we are hurt by his words?

[tecelote]

46. Yes. Yes. Yes.

You absolutely should. Just don't tell people to shut up or pipe down. Yell if you need to. It's needed right now.

If I can, I'll help get the message across. Here, I don't disagree with you. But I may other places and I respect you more if you argue.

Overall though, I do usually defend Bernie most times and only criticize him sometimes. I think he's a powerful voice and we need as many as we can get.

[bravenak]

49. I only criticise him based on his views of issues important to me

He has been saying this stuff for years. It's hurtful and the author of this piece voted for him. Even he is tired of it. I think the automatic reaction is to defend him on all points rather than just accepting that others see it from a unique pov

[KPN]

215. How do his views actually differ with your views of issues important to you?

[bravenak]

244. Identity politics are like the most important thing along with political correctness and things of

that nature. Identity politics is how blacks got the vote, got freedom to own themselves and educate ourselves. Political correctness means not being able to call me the nword in public without people being horrified. Him being against that is being against me. Until he knows what he is talking about he needs to pipe down and learn

[forjusticethunders]

273. And once again, black people and other minorities are the MOST reliable members

of the working class coalition (parties are simply vehicles, or tools for the interests of a given coalition). The more powerful minorities are socially, economically, and politically, the more powerful the working class coalition will be, and the more powerful the coalition is, the more powerful our chances of achieving working class change will be.

[bravenak]

277. We always come through and are treated like an afterthough

No matter how many time the white working class ignores our solutions, it will always be more important to help them at all times, even when they are still doing better than the rest of us.

[EffieBlack]

71. No - I vote for him to stop telling ME to shut up

[Gothmog]

94. Sanders ran in the Democratic primary for media coverage

Sanders admitted that he was running for media coverage and money http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/bernie-sanders-independent-media-coverage-220747

Bernie Sanders on Monday told NBC’s Chuck Todd that he ran as a Democrat to get more media coverage.

During a town hall-style event in Columbus, Ohio, the independent Vermont senator said, “In terms of media coverage, you have to run within the Democratic Party.” He then took a dig at MNSBC, telling Todd, the network “would not have me on his program” if he ran as an independent.

Money also played a role in his decision to run as a Democrat, Sanders added.

“To run as an independent, you need — you could be a billionaire," he said. "If you're a billionaire, you can do that. I'm not a billionaire. So the structure of American politics today is such that I thought the right ethic was to run within the Democratic Party.”

[brush]

153. He can fight for progressive goals without fighting the Dem party. Fight the effin repugs...

for God's sake. Leave us out of it.

There are so many reasons to fight the repugs without ever mentioning the Democratic Party.

We heard that all through the campaign. STFU on that already.

[LisaM]

21. Well said.

I plan to totally steal this sentiment. I remember being asked on this site why I supported Hillary over Bernie (yes, really) and when I said, "she....is me", being told that was part of the problem. Because, you know, feminists in their 50s, so irrelevant.

[randome]

18. He is not the hero who will sweep us up in his arms and carry us from danger.

He needs to stop bad-mouthing everyone else. Whatever 'magic' he has has not worked, has it? You'd think he'd try some different tactics by now.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[tecelote]

22. Badmouthing or criticism?

We lost the country this round. Maybe we should be listening instead of saying "Shut Up" or "Pipe Down".

This shut up attitude sounds like it's coming from the GOPee, not Democrats. We are the party of ideas.

[randome]

25. Maybe Sanders should become a Democrat. That would be "walking the walk", IMO.

I'm certainly not telling him to shut up. But maybe he could talk up the good points of the Democratic Party more often. Convince people to support it instead of staying at home in a 'show' of apathy.

But then the natural question arises: "Why then, Senator Sanders, are you not a Democrat?" And there doesn't appear to be any good answer for that, does there?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[tecelote]

28. Maybe because 40% of America is Independent?

Think beyond labels.

[betsuni]

42. Maybe Democrats shouldn't be labeled as worse than Republicans

with these things:

neoliberal
establishment
elitist
authoritarian
oligarchy
third-way
corporatist stooges only out to send jobs overseas
status quo
1%
lesser of two evils
corrupt
don't care about the working/middle class
playing gender/race cards/identity politics
hippie-punching
hubris
puppets of Wall St.
evil/sold soul to devil
warmongers
only out to amass fortunes
cult of personality/hive mind/echo chamber/blind allegiance

And so much more. Think beyond labels.

[tecelote]

48. Where did you see "worse than Republicans"?

[betsuni]

59. I found all of those things right here, of course.

Search for those words and phrases on this site and I guarantee most will be about Democrats. Try it!

[mcar]

118. +1000!

[randome]

44. Sanders likes that label 'Democrat' when it benefits him, doesn't he?

'Independent' is no better than 'Libertarian', imo. It's a designation that applies to anyone who doesn't bother to commit to something. The illusion of independence is more important than getting one's hands dirty doing the actual work.

It's always easier to say it's someone else's fault.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[tecelote]

51. What if being anti-war is very important to you?

Democrat or Republican? Which one?

[randome]

54. How could there be a choice? Democrat, of course.

Unless by 'anti-war', you mean never war under any circumstances. Then I would suggest someone start an Anti-War party because expecting the Democratic Party to be something it is not is a fruitless endeavor.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[tecelote]

57. You answered your own question.

And, you are wrong. "...because expecting the Democratic Party to be something it is not is a fruitless endeavor."

It's exactly what's needed. We just lost the country. Every Democrat should be working for change. We are an evolving party by nature.

[randome]

61. Well, yeah, change is inevitable. And should be welcomed.

But because the Democratic Party is a big tent, it's extremely unlikely that it will do the bidding of a small faction, such as an anti-war faction. The one thing that the vast majority of Democrats believe in, I think, is that war sucks. That in itself is the polar opposite of Republicans, who think war is simply a means to an end.

That's the kind of positivism that should be trumpeted by anyone who is in favor of the Democratic Party, which Sanders apparently is, just not to the extent necessary to be involved in it.

It's human nature to look with disdain at an outsider who pretends to know what's best for you. That applies to individuals and small groups (like families) as it does to political parties. And that's why Sanders keeps getting push-back, imo.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[tecelote]

65. Well said. I don't disagree other than the anti-war bit but I'll leave that alone.

The problem I see here with Sanders is one Democrats share. You don't feel he represents you. That is definitely something he should work on whether it's approach or policy. But I see many that do not believe they are welcome in the big tent either.

[randome]

67. Definitely too much conflict between factions. We need to emphasize working together more.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[Gothmog]

98. Sanders was on the ballot in 2016 and under performed Clinton

Your theory is undercut by the fact that Sanders was on the ballot in 2016 and Sanders underperformed Hillary Clinton https://extranewsfeed.com/bernie-sanders-was-on-the-2016-ballot-and-he-underperformed-hillary-clinton-3b561e8cb779#.jbtsa3epl

Of course, this narrative ignores the facts — that despite Clinton’s supposed flaws, she easily defeated Sanders in the primary via the pledged delegate count, that Sanders inability to convince minority voters doomed his campaign for the nomination, and that the attempt to use superdelegates to override the popular vote was an undemocratic power grab.

And the white workers whose supposed “hate for corporate interests” led them to vote for Trump? They don’t seem upset that Trump has installed three Goldman Sachs executives in his administration. They don’t seem to be angry that Trump’s cabinet is the wealthiest in US history. And we haven’t heard any discontent from the white working class over Trump choosing an Exxon Mobil CEO for Secretary of State.

The devil is in the details, and at first glance, it is easy to see why so many people can believe that Bernie actually would have won. He got a great deal of positive media coverage as the underdog early on, especially with Republicans deliberately eschewing attacks on him in favor of attacks on Clinton. His supporters also trended younger and whiter, demographics that tend to be more visible in the media around election time. A highly energized and vocal minority of Sanders supporters dominated social media, helping him win online polls by huge margins.

But at some point, you have to put away the narrative and actually evaluate performance. This happens in sports all the time, especially with hyped up amateur college prospects before they go pro. Big time college players are often surrounded by an aura, a narrative of sorts, which pushes many casual observers to believe their college skills will translate to success on the next level. But professional teams have to evaluate the performance of these amateur players to determine if they can have success as professionals, regardless what the narrative surrounding them in college was. A college player with a lot of hype isn’t necessarily going to succeed professionally. In fact, some of the most hyped up prospects have the most underwhelming performances at the next level. In the same vein, we can evaluate Sanders’ performance in 2016 and determine whether his platform is ready for the next level. Sanders endorsed a plethora of candidates and initiatives across the country, in coastal states and Rust Belt states. He campaigned for these candidates and initiatives because they represented his platform and his vision for the future of the Democratic Party. In essence, Bernie Sanders was on the 2016 ballot. Let’s take a look at how he performed.

After looking at a number of races where sanders supported candidates under perform Hillary Clinton, that author makes a strong closing

If Sanders is so clearly the future of the Democratic Party, then why is his platform not resonating in diverse blue states like California and Colorado, where the Democratic base resides? Why are his candidates losing in the Rust Belt, where displaced white factory workers are supposed to be sympathetic to his message on trade? The key implication Sanders backers usually point to is that his agenda is supposed to not only energize the Democratic base, but bring over the white working class, which largely skews Republican. Universal healthcare, free college, a national $15 minimum wage, and government controlled prescription drug costs are supposed to be the policies that bring back a white working class that has gone conservative since Democrats passed Civil Rights. Sanders spent $40 million a month during the primary, and was largely visible during the general, pushing his candidates and his agenda across the country. The results were not good — specifically in regards to the white working class. The white working class did not turnout for Feingold in Wisconsin, or for universal healthcare in Colorado. Instead, they voted against Bernie’s platform, and voted for regular big business Republicans.

Why did Sanders underperform Clinton significantly throughout 2016 — first in the primaries, and then with his candidates and initiatives in the general? If Sanders’ platform and candidates had lost, but performed better than Clinton, than that would be an indicator that perhaps he was on to something. If they had actually won, then he could really claim to have momentum. But instead, we saw the opposite result: Sanders’ platform lost, and lost by much bigger margins than Clinton did. It even lost in states Clinton won big. What does that tell us about the future of the Democratic Party? Well, perhaps we need to acknowledge that the Bernie Sanders platform just isn’t as popular as it’s made out to be.

If your theory on the importance of independents was correct, then Sanders should have out performed Clinton and not under performed

[kacekwl]

139. Exactly , I don't care what you call yourself

As long as you stand for me and everyone who has / is being devastated by backward thinking.

[kacekwl]

141. I'd rather believe in unicorns

than corporate trickle down scams.

[RazBerryBeret]

133. would you be jumping up and down to join a party

that treats you like this? not me.

[randome]

202. Would you be welcoming someone who keeps bad-mouthing you? It works both ways.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[RazBerryBeret]

237. and yet we keep talking about it. n/t

[Gothmog]

250. But Sanders has not joined the Democratic Party and is running for re-election as an indie

[womanofthehills]

282. Actually, Bernie has been so successful in passing amendments

because he is an independent.

[LisaM]

60. We did NOT lose the country.

There are more of us than there are of them. We.lost because of an archaic system.

[tecelote]

64. We lost on many levels.

We honestly won the Presidency but legally lost because of an archaic system.

[SMC22307]

260. The hell we didn't.

Democrats fully control only six states, an historic low.

Why is that not registering with so many on this site?

[LisaM]

268. I'm fully aware of that.

We are still being hamstrung by bad voting rules. All over the place.

[SMC22307]

271. That's one component...

but not all.

[brush]

154. Ok, how many times? Are you stuck on "stop saying "Shut Up" or "Pipe Down"?

We got that the the first and second and third time.

Deal with the issue the thread is about already.

[Orsino]

274. Good. Holding out for magical heroes is how the nation got here.

I consider Sanders an important part of a balanced breakfast, but only part. I lived and voted for his agenda, and long-term success is going to depend in large part on morivating and empowering more progressive voters. It's also going require more pinko progressives working with Establishment Dems. 2016 was a great lesson in this practice, and more of us need to follow that example.

The billionaires, the wingnuts and the media are all on-message against us. We have a winning platform, if only more voters knew about it.

Testify.

[Gothmog]

276. I like the real world and for me Sanders' platform was not realistic and was based on a "revolution"

I live in a deep red state and so I am faced with the real world on a daily basis. A number of Sanders proposals sounded great but they were not realistic in the real world. Sanders based his unrealistic proposals on a mythical voter revolution where millions/billions/trillions of new voters would magically appear and somehow forced the GOP to be reasonable. That revolution exists only in a fantasy world and has not been evident in the real world http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/articles/2016-04-15/bernie-sanders-bad-delegate-math-and-fantasy-revolution

He went on to argue that he's going to win because he'll pile up votes now that the contest has moved out of the Deep South. This is a shorthand version of an argument that Sanders and his allies have been deploying recently in an attempt to downplay Clinton's lead in pledged delegates – "having so many Southern states go first kind of distorts reality" he told Larry Wilmore, host of "The Nightly Show," earlier this week.

There's a lot wrong with this formulation, as Paul Krugman wrote in The New York Times this morning. It suggests a world view redolent of former half-term Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's toxic pandering to "real America." In Sanders' case, he's saying that red-state Democrats should be discounted because they're too conservative. But that's simply wrong, Krugman notes: Clinton isn't "riding a wave of support from old-fashioned Confederate-flag-waving Dixiecrats," she ran up the score by scoring lopsided victories among black voters ("let's be blunt, the descendants of slaves," he writes).

And the fact that the Deep South is conservative should be irrelevant, given that Sanders argues the principle obstacle to his super progressive agenda is campaign finance corruption rather than, say, ideology. Either he's leading a national movement, as he claims, or he's not.

Thus more broadly, his attempt to delegitimize a swath of voters lays bare a fundamental inconsistency of the Sanders campaign: One of his basic answers about how he's going to accomplish his aims – whether winning the Democratic nod, winning the general election or enacting his agenda – is the forthcoming revolution. His super-ambitious agenda will prove to be achievable substance rather than unicorns-and-rainbows fantasy, he said Thursday night, "when millions of people stand up, fight back and create a government that works for all of us, not just the 1 percent. That is what the political revolution is about. That is what this campaign is about."

And that's fine: If he can summon the revolution, then more power to him, literally and figuratively. But the Sanders revolution is breaking on the hard realities of math. The revolution will not be televised, the old song goes; but it can be fantasized – and it can be measured, in votes and delegates. And in every calculable respect, it's coming up short. That leaves Sanders to bank on an anti-democratic sleight of hand to secure the nomination. That's not a broad-based revolution; that's a palace coup.

You are welcomed to support Sanders but some of us have to live in the real world. Sanders platform turned me off in that it was based on a revolution that was unlikely at best. Clearly the millions/billions/trillions of new voters that sanders promised never showed which is why he lost so badly in the primary. It is hard to take Sanders positions seriously when such positions all require a political revolution that has not materialized and will not materialize.

[George II]

63. He's been disparaging Democrats since Autumn.

[Gothmog]

96. He is selling his book

[Gothmog]

91. No he is busy selling books

Sanders was in the race for media coverage

[GreenPartyVoter]

122. Agreed!

[putitinD]

252. +1000

[melman]

2. "too bombastic in my opinion. I decided it was too rude"

[betsuni]

5. Saw this at Jezebel earlier today and regular commenters said,

usually we get few comments for The Root posts, but mention Bernie Sanders and the bat signal goes out, we have a flood.

[Cha]

7. I saw it at The Root.. I agreed with it and was grateful for Michael

Arceneaux's analysis. A former supporter.

[bravenak]

9. The swarms never rest

[betsuni]

43. Buzzing insects are so annoying!

[bravenak]

45. We used to have some good swatters around here

[SidDithers]

80. The Protectorate must defend all things Bernie...

even here.

Sid

[Uponthegears]

6. Not that Michael isn't legit

But your attempt to replay the primary "Bernie is a racist" meme might carry more weight among anyone other than the "who else can we blame" crowd coming from someone who didn't call Nate Parker a rapist because he was "only" found not guilty at a trial (in an article, btw, that basically ignored the fact that the criminal justice system, while both unfair and racist, is a million times more the latter, when he attacked Parker's supporters for pointing to his acquittal when simultaneously attacking the criminal justice system when it lets cops go free after they murder poc)

[bravenak]

10. Nobody ever called him racist. It was called tone deaf. And the point stands with his anti PC

crusade and derision of identity politics. It just proved the point that we were right to be uncomfortable. Nothing has changed

[Uponthegears]

23. See #20

I agree with your view on identity politics completely but please don't act like I can't hear.

[Gothmog]

97. There are good reasons why Sanders is not appealing to African American and other voters

The Sanders campaign did not appeal to many demographic groups (including the Jewish vote) for a host of reasons. One good reason is that Sanders repeatedly attacked President Obama which alienated a large number of key demographic groups. There is a vast difference in how Sanders supporters and Sanders view President Obama and how other Democrats view President Obama. I admit that I am impressed with the amount accomplished by President Obama in face of the stiff GOP opposition to every one of his proposals and I personally believe that President Obama has been a great President. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-sanders-obama_us_56aa378de4b05e4e3703753a?utm_hp_ref=politics

But lurking behind this argument about the future is a dispute that's really about the past. It’s a debate over what Obama accomplished in office -- in particular, how significant those accomplishments really are. And it's been simmering on the left for most of the last seven years.

On one side of this divide are activists and intellectuals who are ambivalent, disappointed or flat-out frustrated with what Obama has gotten done. They acknowledge what they consider modest achievements -- like helping some of the uninsured and preventing the Great Recession from becoming another Great Depression. But they are convinced that the president could have accomplished much more if only he’d fought harder for his agenda and been less quick to compromise.

They dwell on the opportunities missed, like the lack of a public option in health care reform or the failure to break up the big banks. They want those things now -- and more. In Sanders, they are hearing a candidate who thinks the same way.

On the other side are partisans and thinkers who consider Obama's achievements substantial, even historic. They acknowledge that his victories were partial and his legislation flawed. This group recognizes that there are still millions of people struggling to find good jobs or pay their medical bills, and that the planet is still on a path to catastrophically high temperatures. But they see in the last seven years major advances in the liberal crusade to bolster economic security for the poor and middle class. They think the progress on climate change is real, and likely to beget more in the future.

Again, I am not ashamed to admit that I like President Obama and think that he has accomplished a great deal which is why I did not mind Hillary Clinton promising to continue President Obama's legacy. There are valid reasons why many non-African American democrats (me included) and many African American Democratic voters did not support Sanders and will have issues with Keith Ellison as DNC chair.

I like living in the real world. In the real world there were valid reasons why Sanders was rejected by key demographic groups and you can not pretend that these groups will support Sanders plans to remake the Democratic Party in his own image with Ellison.

[Uponthegears]

114. And there are good reasons why many African American

Democrats (INCLUDING ME, although clearly I was not part of the majority) DID support Sanders and a lot of us resent people like you telling us what we should think (every bit as much as we resented Bernie supporters telling us what we should think).

Btw, Obama is the greatest president this country has ever seen NOT because every policy he supported was the best one out there BUT because he did more for this country any president who came before him in the face of more opposition than any president who came before him.

[Gothmog]

131. As you noted, you were in the minority of the African American community on this issye

I am amused by your post in that it normally the Sanders supporters telling other African Americans that they had to support Sanders due to his limited role in the civil rights movement. There is a thread on JPR right now attacking Congressman John Lewis for not endorsing Sanders and blaming Lewis for trump winning which has a ton of recommendations.

Do you deny that Sanders attacked President Obama and wanted to primary him in 2012? Were those actions acceptable to you? Do you remember any of the threads on the AA board attacking John Lewis and others for support Clinton? Was it acceptable to you for the Sanders delegates to boo Congressman John Lewis at the national convention? (I was there and I was appalled at the conduct of the Sanders delegates at the convention).

[tonedevil]

147. A very good...

example of whitesplaining. It is really cool the way you explain to non-white people what is important for them. Funny how that behavior seems to offend you if it is a white person explaining why non-white people need to support Senator Sanders.

[Uponthegears]

160. It's not the only minority I am in, now is it?

Let's get the garbage out of the way first.

You're "amused?" Did you read my post or did your Bernie hate just go into high gear before you got that far? I said right off the bat that I had no more use for white Bernie supporters telling black people what they are supposed to think than I have for YOU telling ME what I am supposed to think.

Next, how pathetic is it that you have to resort to JPR to come up with a caricature of a Bernie supporter? JPR started with a miniscule fraction of banned DU members, a large swath of whom were right wing posers and the remainder of which were people so stupid that they fell for that fraud Stein and worshipped at the feet of clowns like Greenwald and Assange. It was NEVER majority Bernie supporters and now it is overwhelmingly pure freepers spreading divisive bullshit that gets regurgitated here on DU as a way of attacking liberals. Of course, that's where you go because, here on DU, you can't find spit to back you up.

Next, Bernie made comments about primary-ing Obama because he disagreed with POLICIES and wanted to move him back to the left. This might come as a shock to you, but black people didn't line up behind Obama because he looked like us. We supported him on policies we liked and we opposed him on policies we didn't and at the end of the day we voted for him because the goods outweighed the bads (which - combined with the fact that I'm not a two-year old - is why I worked on Hillary's behalf on my own dime after the primary) AND we came out for him in record numbers because of the quality, character, and courage of the man.

Next, I abhorred the treatment of Lewis. On one hand, his "didn't see" comment was bogus (and he apologized for making it) but there are people in this world who paid a price that only a handful of living people have paid and they can damn well say anything they want as far as I am concerned and John Lewis is one of those people. Of course, while Hillary's team was busy playing politics with what happened there were people like Harold Middlebrooks (btw, if you don't know who he is, you don't know anything about the civil rights movement or about Dr. King) out campaigning for Bernie. We don't all look alike. We don't all think alike.

Is there anything else that you want to lecture me about?

Is there anything else that amuses you?

[Gothmog]

191. So you do approve of Bernie wanting to primary President Obama

Sanders was a horribly weak candidate who was rejected by Jewish, African American and Latino voters.

As for JPR types, I was a delegate to the national convention and so I got to interact with a good number of Sanders delegates. I hate to break it to you but the JPR types do represent the Sanders delegates who represented Sanders at the National Convention. Maybe Sanders did not vet his delegates because he was not in the race to win but the Sanders delegates at the National Convention mirror many of the JPR types.

In the real world you have to work a long time and put in a ton of work to be be a delegate to the National Convention. All of the Clinton delegates were vetted (I know because I helped in the vetting process). The Sanders delegates were selected on the basis if they were BOB types and these delegates really did not reflect well on Sanders values. Each candidate had approval rights over their delegates and the Sanders people used this right to remove and replace a delegate who was duly elected in his senate district caucus because this delegate was not a BOB type and the replacement was a BOB. I saw first hand the results of the so-called careful vetting of the Sanders delegates to the national convention.

Sanders may not have vetted his delegates but then again he was not really running for the nomination or to build a movement but to sell books.

As for John Lewis, the Sanders delegates at the national convention were very proud of their treatment of Lewis. Again, either the Sanders delegates represent the Sanders movement or Sanders did a poor job of vetting. I have met Congressman Lewis a couple of times and have several signed copies of two of his March books. I have a great picture of Lewis standing next to Karem Abdul Jabbar and Keith Ellison at an event. I am proud of the way that Lewis is effectively standing up to Trump right now. Has Sanders made any comments about Congressman Lewis yet? I have not seen any support and fear that Sanders will not take this action because it would hurt his book sales.

If you want to support Sanders go ahead. Have you bought his book yet? That is what Sanders is really concerned about.

[yardwork]

195. Thank you for all your work on behalf of all people, Gothmog.

You are a class act.

[Uponthegears]

197. Thank you for the explanation from the point of view of YOUR demographic

I will call on you the next time I need to hear that perspective.

Btw, you are rightly proud that you were able to get autographs from great people, some of whom sacrificed in ways you will never know.

As for John Lewis, he was, is, and always will be, a great man and an icon to those who believe in civil rights and, most importantly to me personally, a friend and ally to those of us who have spent our lives in the civil rights movement. One cheap comment withdrawn within days doesn't detract from that fact any more than a grain of sand AND it shouldn't have made a difference to Bernie supporters (they get no slack from me for their bullshit reaction).

[Gothmog]

220. I got to meet Congressman Lewis iniatially because of my work in voter protection

I spoke at a couple of town halls on voter id back in 2011 for another local congressman and got to meet Congressman Lewis the first time through that connection. I have been volunteering on voter protection efforts for a long time and that helped get me elected to be a national delegate. In past cycles I worked with the DNC Voter Expansion project to try to get voters "free" ids to vote and this cycle I trained 200+ poll watchers and helped set up and run a statewide hot line for voter protection. Again it normally takes years of hard work to be a national delegate and I am still amazed at how the Sanders delegates acted at the national convention.

Congressman Lewis' work on voting rights is just one reason why I admire him. I have several signed copies of his March books which are some of my prized possessions. I am so glad that I have now heard Congressman Lewis' story about preaching to chickens on numerous occasions. Today at the scholarship speech in Miami, Congressman Lewis once again told his preaching to chicken story and I was smiling all through this story. It gets better every time I hear it.

BTW, I read up on the Civil rights leader that you cited in your prior post. I note that no Clinton supporter attacked that leader for supporting or endorsing Sanders. The same can not be said for Sanders supporters. I wish that Sanders used that leader as his surrogate instead of Prof. West. Endorsements of leaders have little effect on most voters and I had decided to support Hillary Clinton long before Congressman Lewis endorsed her.

Finally my son just reminded me that he wants one set of the signed March books. It seems that these books are sold out on Amazon which is a nice way of expressing support for Congressman Lewis. Have you purchased the latest Sanders book yet?

[yardwork]

194. I dispute your contention that only a "minuscule" number of DUers posted on JPR.

When Trump lies, it's easy to see the truth because the true facts are right there. Similarly with JPR, all the threads were right there, recced by hundreds of DUers. Lots and lots of DUer names, many of whom walked right back into DU pretending like nothing ever happened. Many of us were in fact paying attention though.

[Uponthegears]

198. Go for it

You claim you have seen them

Link to the posts attacking Lewis for ANYTHING other than the "didn't see him" comment (which he later withdrew), so I can see the HUNDREDS of ex-DUers who rec'd them.

I'll wait. I've never been to the site because I don't really care about what a bunch of white folks with hurt feelings have to say, but apparently some of you folks do and have.

"HUNDREDS" you say?

[yardwork]

224. I don't do screenshots. Go look for yourself.

[Uponthegears]

238. Thanks for the confirmation n/t

[bravenak]

245. Check back in my journal to july 2015 and beyond

Or I can send them to you

[Uponthegears]

267. TY Brave!

[Gothmog]

222. I look at the people who endorse the various threads attacking John Lewis

On the latest Congrssman Lewis hate thread, there were 80+ recommends from people who used to be or may still be DU posters

[Uponthegears]

161. Thank you for your cut and paste

[Gothmog]

189. You are welcome-you may want to consider using facts in these discussions

[seaglass]

13. I missed what he's had to say about Russian influence

in our election, Comey's impact, anything about what he thinks about Trump's despicable cabinet choices - hearings, how he's going to vote. Any comment about Booker's testimony in the Sessions hearing? Trumps attack on John Lewis?

Instead Bernie focuses on attacking Dems.

Yep, Bernie still dead to me.

[bravenak]

14. I have heard nothing from him on the Russian hacking

I suppose thats our fault too

[UCmeNdc]

31. Strange how so many have nothing to say about Russian hacking or Donald's Russian support

[bravenak]

38. I suppose they must think it's aokay

[George II]

72. Perhaps because his "operatives" hacked the DNC first?

[Quayblue]

112. hmmmm.... nt

[Chasstev365]

27. YAWN

[Buckeye_Democrat]

47. You're talented at creating huge threads here! n/t

[bravenak]

50. You should give it a shot

[Gothmog]

100. There is some great content on this thread

[Red Oak]

52. Bravenak - what would you have him do?

I get it, you don't like Bernie. Got that about a thousand posts ago.

Bernie seems like a guy that is truly interested in helping people. I am glad he's in the Senate.

What would you have him do? Just "shut up"?

Is that what you want?

What would you do that isn't being done right now? Just "shut up"? I doubt it.

Please enlighten us.

[bravenak]

53. Listen to somebody else

Stop campaigning against identity politics. Stop decrying political correctness. It upsets black people when he does this, even those who voted for him. Republicans do it all day every day so we want him to not repeat the memes from their lips.

[JHan]

55. He could start with stop smearing allies of the left who disagree with him on minor points.

getting tired of it.

He's not the font of all wisdom and understanding.

[bravenak]

56. He could

But he loves it. I am sick of it too.

[JCanete]

230. examples of smearing people who disagree with him on minor points, please, particularly as

the implication here is that his criticisms of a person are derived from a minor disagreement on policy.

[JHan]

231. I'm not going to rehash the primaries here.

Or the arguments over the min. wage or the attack on the 13 dems this past week J.

[JCanete]

232. your first post was rehashing. These 13 dems didn't have a minor disagreement. nt

[JHan]

233. It was relevant to the OP.

And no, There was no need to crap on the record of those 13 dems over a flawed amendment.
None.

[JCanete]

234. what was flawed about it. I'm here to learn. nt

[JHan]

239. this:

https://cenlamar.com/2017/01/14/if-bernie-sanders-cares-about-cheaper-drugs-he-should-stop-smearing-his-colleagues-for-rejecting-his-flawed-amendment/

Well, for starters, Sanders couldn’t figure out if he wanted to create a fund to import drugs from Canada or the entire world. In its initial iteration, his amendment sought to establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to allow for the importation of drugs from “Canada and other countries.” Amy Klobuchar subsequently cleaned up the language and eliminated “other countries” from its title.

But, aside from the confusion about the scope of this proposed reserve fund, the primary reason it failed is that Sanders misapprehended the mechanisms necessary to establish an importation process that conforms with FDA guidelines. It’s not enough to say “these drugs must be safe;” there needs to be funding for quality control and compliance, which was never addressed.

Sure, this was a non-binding budget amendment, and some will argue that things could have simply been cleaned up later on. But it was ostensibly designed to be a funding mechanism, and instead, it read like a milquetoast resolution. There were a number of other amendments introduced that very day that included provisions for the Food and Drug Administration; Sanders’s didn’t, and it needed to.

In making the case for this legislation, Sanders spoke almost exclusively about the re-importation of patented American pharmaceuticals, and to be fair, that is an enormous part of the equation; it’s also what most American consumers demand. However, it doesn’t capture the entirety of the market. In some cases, American consumers may turn to Canadian compounding pharmacies for cheaper specialized medications; in others, Americans may want to purchase generic medications that are no longer patented and can be manufactured independently at a lower cost. And that’s why we need FDA oversight and compliance.

And it's not just this disability activist who's raised concerns...We already buy imported drugs from Canada. Even border officials exercise "discretion" when allowing imported medicines, with shipments amounting to less than three months' supply allowed. These drugs are not subjected to FDA standards but Canadian standards - some have argued this is a dodge but it isn't.

Fake drugs are a problem ( google Amir Attaran, a human-rights lawyer and American-Canadian health policy researcher and read his articles about this) If we aren't clear about import restrictions and guidelines, peddlers of fake drugs - who utilize online pharmacies - can put us more at risk. Is it too much to ask for an amendment to be more fleshed out considering all these factors?

This isn't a black and white issue, and I wish - instead of so many on the left excoriating the Democrats who voted the way they did- they'd take the time to look at why our system is so broken, what lessons we can learn from Canada, what our own FDA can do to make more affordable drugs available and what needs to change in the system to prevent pharma monopolies price gouging consumers.

[George II]

62. In the interest of "transparency", the bombastic title is "Shut Up Bernie Sanders" (not my title)

[baldguy]

70. Some of the anti-Democratic delecate flowers were offended.

[baldguy]

69. K&R

[JHan]

77. "considering the source" - Interesting turn of phrase.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

78. ...

[Talk Is Cheap]

75. It wasn't Bernie's fault that Clinton lost the election....

[liquid diamond]

87. BS. He dragged out the primaries even though it was

plain as day that he wasn't going to win after his Super Tuesday ass kicking. He kept soliciting tens of millions of dollars from his supporters which went down the toilet although it was clear he had no chance of overcoming Hillary's lead. He took the primaries all the way to the final state, giving his supporters false hope which lead to their devastation and hurt feelings. So much to the point that enough of them sat out the general election or voted third party out of spite.

Bernie wasn't the only reason why we lost, but he was definitely one cause.

[Talk Is Cheap]

89. So, you are saying that because Sanders ran a campaign to win the election...

...it's his fault that Clinton lost?

Quite the stretch there liquid....

[liquid diamond]

146. It's no stretch at all.

His pride wouldn't let him graciously bow out of the race even though it was mathematically unlikely that he would win. Shit, he took the race all the way to California where he would have needed to win 90% of the vote there to have a chance. That shows how delusional he and his supporters were. I won't even bother discussing his attempt to try to win over the super delegates. He didn't know when to quit and it cost us.

[Gothmog]

99. No, The Systems Not Totally Rigged. But That Idea Sure Helped Donald Trump.

I agree that Sanders hurt the party. Here is a good example Sanders really hurting Clinton. I am still mad at the number of times that trump used Sanders' claims against Clinton. Sanders' baseless charges that the system was fixed and rigged were used by trump to great effect and hurt Clinton http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rigged-system-donald-trump_us_5855cb44e4b08debb7898607?section=us_politics

And if Sanders’ rhetoric during the primaries started that stew simmering with his talk about the system only working for the rich, Trump brought it to a full boil with his remarks blaming undocumented immigrants and trade agreements that he claimed were forged as the result of open corruption.

I think he was able to thread a certain toxic needle. But he did win, and we’re all going to pay the price.
John Weaver, aide to Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s presidential campaign

The underlying irony for those who sought to end what they perceived as corruption is that they may well have elected a president whose record through the years and whose actions since the election signal it could be the most openly corrupt administration in generations.....

And if Sanders’ rhetoric during the primaries started that stew simmering with his talk about the system only working for the rich, Trump brought it to a full boil with his remarks blaming undocumented immigrants and trade agreements that he claimed were forged as the result of open corruption.

Sanders' bogus rigged process claim hurt a great deal.

[immoderate]

107. Does the system work for the poor and working class?

Bernie would say it doesn't. What would you say? (If necessary, I can reference the study that shows that government only responds to the needs of the plutocracy.)

--imm

[Gothmog]

134. Sanders claimed that the system was rigged and Trump quoted Sanders on numerous occassions

Trump quoted Sanders directly and these quotes hurt. Are you happy that Sanders helped trump win?

[Talk Is Cheap]

110. But the system IS rigged for the rich...

Sanders is absolutely rigged for the rich. The Princeton study and report (2014) indicates that American is no longer a Democracy and that our government only caters to the rich.

Did you not read that report? Can't you simply see it in everyday life?

Sanders had nothing to do with Clinton's lost election. As a matter of fact, it's possible that the reason Clinton did so well IS because Sanders promoted her after the General.

[JHan]

115. sigh

by attacking the establishment who do you think ended up in the cross hairs ?

The incumbent Democratic establishment is who, so all the progress we made was lost because said establishment was the worst ever right?

That's the problem with attacking everyone who disagrees with you as "establishment" and "Part of the problem" and "corrupt" - because that's what Bernie did- by framing Clinton and the Democratic "establishment" and D.C. as "those people who do not care" the entire party was painted with the same brush. This had the effect of dampening enthusiasm for the nominee. Unless you're arguing that Democrats and Republicans are the same?

[Talk Is Cheap]

119. How are things supposed to change if we don't point out the problems...

I *want* my Democratic candidates to speak out on the problems and fix them.

Sorry, I don't accept staying silent on the problems.

And not so nice attempt at your straw man argument...

[JHan]

121. My argument wasn't staying silent on anything..

In fact Obama, Clinton and many other Democrats acknowledged failings.

The point is the establishment arguments were smears.

[Gothmog]

125. So you are happy that Trump used Sanders' bogus claims to win?

[Talk Is Cheap]

128. Is that a type of trolling?

[Gothmog]

132. Trump used Sanders claim that the process was rigged to great effect

Trump was able to repeatedly quote sanders directly and use Sanders claim that the system was rigged to great effect. Sanders helped Trump win according to the polling. Do you approve of Sanders helping Trump win?

[Talk Is Cheap]

138. As I stated before - the system is rigged against 99% of the people...

Stating the truth is not a bad thing.

And, please, stop trolling...Sanders supported Clinton in the General.

[R B Garr]

192. Yes, stating the truth about Sanders' is not a bad thing, either.

Much more of that needed to be done so that he didn't damage our nominee. It's not trolling to tell the truth about him. Gothmog is a great contributor here. Welcome to DU.

[Talk Is Cheap]

201. Would you like everyone to 'tell the truth' about...

...Clinton, too? Or is Sanders the Scapegoat?

[R B Garr]

203. So back to reality. Clinton was Sanders' scapegoat.

He smeared her nonstop for over a year in the primary.

[R B Garr]

193. Yes, he did help Trump win, and thank you for your factual links and contributions

here. Trump knew a good game when he saw one, and he went right in for Sanders' propaganda to divide Democrats. Sanders' is very divisive. I'm tired of him maligning Democrats to promote his limited world view and talking points.

[guillaumeb]

79. So is any criticism of Democratic Party policy permitted?

This site is filled with people criticizing or supporting every aspect of the Democratic Party and its platform in the 2016 election. Is such criticism restricted to certified Democrats? Whatever that might be? And who decides what qualifies one to criticize?

Bernie Sanders, the Independent, votes with the Democrats probably as much or more often than does Joe Manchin of W. Virginia. So the idea that only certain Democrats are allowed to voice criticism seems to me to be counterproductive and illogical.

As to the phrase "working class", the last time I looked most people are working class. That term needs to be understood as a factual statement rather than seen as a purely political term. Class analysis does not in itself deny the obvious power of appealing to race as a means of division.

In my view Sanders should have constantly pointed out that race is one of the means used to divide the working class.

[SidDithers]

82. DU rec...nt

Sid

[NobodyHere]

83. How dare Bernie continue to promote liberal ideals!

The audacity!

[Gothmog]

95. Have you bought his latest book yet?

[Gothmog]

90. I read this article last night

It is great and very on point

[HassleCat]

103. I won't alert this time

As I did when it was posted by two others. You edited out the gratuitous insults and pointless personal attacks. The linked article, however, is exactly the kind of sour grapes, finger pointing, divisive nonsense we don't need.

[baldguy]

120. Oh, you poor thing!

It's precisely because of the fact that * * * S A N D E R S * * * is continuing his "I'm The Other Guy You Should Have Voted For" Tour of sour grapes, finger pointing, divisive nonsense attacking the Democratic Party, using RW talking points that is the point of the article in the OP that you didn't bother to read.

[HassleCat]

149. Sorry I alerted when you posted it

But you left all the insults and name calling in there. I don't mind hating on Sanders, but there are limits.

[HassleCat]

159. No, we can't, As a matter of fact.

We can't engage in bad behavior toward anyone who helps us. I understand you feel Sanders hurt us, but we could find a similar opinion regarding any other Democrat, real or not, so we agree to refrain from trash talking because we know it will spread and take over the site.

And yes, I will alert on any post that throws personal insults etc at any Democrat, even those I consider DINO.

[baldguy]

162. "I will alert on any post that throws personal insults etc at any Democrat"

Such as calling Clinton a DINO?

[HassleCat]

164. Yes.

Clinton is clearly not a DINO, not even close. We want to reserve such labels for people who would regard it as a compliment.

[baldguy]

165. You don't get to decide that. You should apologize & delete your post.

[HassleCat]

166. Of course I get to decide.

So do you. So does everyone else.

[m-lekktor]

127. Posts critical of Bernie never get removed, OTH,posts critical of Corey Booker do.

and if i comment any further than that I am sure THIS post will get removed as well!

[HassleCat]

150. Two very similar posts were removed.

They linked to the same article, but included some of the nasty name calling and personal insults from the article itself. I'm okay with attacking Sanders' activities, but not as okay with the name calling, etc.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

104. Keep speaking up, Bernie!

[JHan]

111. ??????

[hollowdweller]

113. Should he withdraw from speaking at the ACA rallies we are having?

Should Schumer remove him from the leadership?

[Garrett78]

116. Many upset with the article may ignore the following excerpt:

Should she have campaigned more in black neighborhoods? According to the results of Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan, sure. Could she have made greater attempts at reaching out to rural voters, even though they’re not exactly Democratic strongholds? It’s fair to say yes.

And Democrats such as Clinton need to speak out more against plutocracy.

It's not a matter of suggesting Clinton's campaign was flawless or that Sanders is a bad person. It's a matter of Sanders and some of his supporters not grasping that the economic conditions we all decry are enabled by bigotry, particular racism. And it's Republicans who engage in so-called identity politics.

In the GD forum, someone posted an article from Salon containing this excerpt:

The point Sanders has attempted to make over the past two years, it seems, is that class can help transcend other social and cultural divisions and promote an economic solidarity that would go a long way toward overcoming deeply entrenched parochial beliefs and attitudes.

That's backward, and perhaps it's a product of living in the whitest state in the US. Again, the economic conditions we decry are enabled by those entrenched beliefs and attitudes. As forjusticethunders wrote in another thread, "Racism crippled the power of the working class movement as white workers found that the psychological wage was better than the material wage."

The Salon article points out that a majority of Americans agree with Bernie's stance on various economic issues. But that doesn't matter as long as the psychological wage (feeling superior to and more deserving than 'the other') remains paramount. Strategically diminishing racism is key to sustainable progress. A massive multiracial alliance will threaten the ruling class more than anything else I can think of.

Yes, the primary is long over, but there are lessons still to be learned. Far too many "progressives" have lost sight of just how crucial anti-racism is. It isn't enough to be a non-racist. The "working class whites/economic messaging" narrative is not only false (when you consider which candidate won among the working class overall), but it's also a dog whistle narrative that needs to be replaced, not propped up.

Lastly, consider the following 3 articles on the importance of anti-racism to the labor movement then and now:

http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/19038/unions-labor-black-lives-matter-anti-racist-racial-justice

http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Other-News/Unions-Must-Address-Racism

http://www.workers.org/2016/02/11/how-black-workers-were-decimated-by-racism/#.WHiHrUQS88o

[mcar]

117. K&R

[BlueMTexpat]

123. This ...

Who in the hell is this Democrat-come-lately to scold Democrats on all they’ve done wrong?

So long as he continues bashing Dems both generically and specifically (e.g., Cory Booker) - with no mention of Russian hacking or of Trump's conflicts of interests, etc. - he is dead to me.

[LenaBaby61]

148. Friends who are ...

Bernie supporters first and foremost (They ALL voted for Hillary in the GE by the way), and some of them are now telling me that they weren't happy with him saying he'd work with tRumputin on some things (Because they want him to obstruct when he can because Pres. Obama was obstructed 8 years), and they also wish he'd start aiming sharper and more pointed remarks/attacks @ tRumputin, and speak out more on GOP voter suppression etc. They've also told me that it's making them feel as if he may not be that torn up that Hillary lost. Heck, one of my Bernie friends just flat out said to me last week that she's beginning to think that Bernie wasn't all that sorry that Hillary lost, and she's been one of Bernie biggest supporters for over 10 plus years, and has been on his mailing and email list for years as well. Granted, MY Bernie supporter friends aren't what you'd call "Bernie Bots," but very supportive of Bernie, but even some of them want him to focus more on tRumputin, GOP, voter suppression etc.

[BlueMTexpat]

181. To be fair,

the Bernie supporters I know personally are like your friends.

They all pitched in enthusiastically and voted for Hillary after the primaries. We also got along famously even during the primaries. They are not now and never were Bernie Bros.

As with your friends, some have been disillusioned by some of his most recent tactics. Scales seem to be dropping from their eyes in some respects.

[alittlelark]

124. A thread you should look at....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028478197

Then look hard into a mirror.

[treestar]

129. Yes, enough of him criticizing the Democrats

the backbone of the Democratic party is voters of color - he needs to get that rather than be mad he lose all those primaries.

[bravenak]

172. Just like he will lose next time if he doesnt come correct

[democratisphere]

130. Bernie is a BIG part of the problem with his free this and free that.

Certainly NOT the solution.

[Gothmog]

135. Sanders made promises that he could never deliver on

In the real world, Sanders was rejected in the primary by Jewish, African American and Latino voters. Rejecting the votes of these groups would have doomed Sanders in a run against Trump. The fact that Hillary Clinton had more than four times the lead in pledged delegates over Sanders compared to the lead that President Obama had over Hillary Clinton in 2008 is a fact that shows how bad a candidate Sanders was.

Sanders lost the nomination because he was a weak candidate who made promises that he could never delivered on. Sanders so-called revolution was a flop. Sanders' plans for adopting his proposals depend on these new voters. Here is how Sanders thinks that he will be able to force the GOP to be reasonable http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/21/1483791/-Imagine-Bernie-Sanders-wins-the-White-House-Then-what

Bernie Sanders has made some very big promises when it comes to his legislative priorities: He says he’ll make college free, pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, and institute a generous single-payer national health insurance program. And when he’s asked how he’ll turn these promises into reality, he says that he and his supporters will help bring about a “political revolution.”

That’s a phrase Sanders uses often, but what does he mean by it? Sanders has said that if he wins the presidency, his victory will be accompanied by a “huge increase in voter turnout”—one that he thinks might end Republican control of Congress. But Sanders acknowledges that the House and Senate could, in spite of his best efforts, remain in GOP hands come next January.

Given that likelihood, Sanders offers an alternate means for achieving his political revolution. He says he knows that a Democratic president can’t simply “sit down and negotiate” with Republican leaders and forge a series of compromises. Anyone who's observed the GOP’s behavior over the course of Barack Obama’s presidency would not dispute that, and in any event, no compromise with Republicans would ever lead to single-payer anyway.

So what then? How would a President Sanders get Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan to pass any of his big-ticket items? This is the model he proposes:

What we do is you put an issue before Congress, let’s just use free tuition at public colleges and universities, and that vote is going to take place on November 8 ... whatever it may be. We tell millions and millions of people, young people and their parents, there is going to be a vote ... half the people don’t know what’s going on ... but we tell them when the vote is, maybe we welcome a million young people to Washington, D.C. to say hello to their members of Congress. Maybe we have the telephones and the e-mails flying all over the place so that everybody in America will know how their representative is voting. [...]

And then Republicans are going to have to make a decision. Then they’re going to have to make a decision. You know, when thousands of young people in their district are saying, “You vote against this, you’re out of your job, because we know what’s going on.” So this gets back to what a political revolution is about, is bringing people in touch with the Congress, not having that huge wall. That’s how you bring about change.

The rest of the DK article debunks that concept that Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell could be influenced by these new voters but we never get to this issue and Sanders himself admits that he will not bet elected without this revolution. So far we are not seeing any evidence of this revolution. Again, Sanders's whole campaign is based on this revolution and so it is appropriate to ask where these new voters are?

Again, where are these millions and millions of new voters?

[JCanete]

137. Wow...that's one way to talk about things that should be human rights. nt

[democratisphere]

140. And WHO do you think is going to pay for these human rights?

The Treasury is already running HUGE insane deficits.

[JCanete]

144. if you haven't been paying attention, there has been a great consolidation of wealth in the pockets

of the richest people in this nation and the world. It's there. We shouldn't be shy about taking back what they have drained from the commons. And I don't give a shit about running deficits in the interest of actual investments in our people and future. That is money well spent. So much potential misused and wasted in this country.

[JCanete]

136. Unnuanced articles that simply want to make one of the voices of the left/center-left bad or wrong,

do nothing but divide us, and then we're supposed to believe all that divisiveness is coming from one side. There are ways to discuss this stuff from a place of generosity that people aren't fond of leading with here. No olive leaves are ever extended in praise of something good about a person as an act of good will before we start criticizing.

But if you just want to regurgitate the same material that we've fought about over and over and to achieve the same results that they always have...getting a hallelujah from the choir and a fuck no from everyone else...I guess do what you love.

As to wanting Sanders to shut up, give me an alternative to actually winning back this nation that doesn't involve loudly and consistently calling out the influence of big money on our policies? It does not make it easier for our elected democrats to effect change in a vacuum of public outcry. It should disturb you that as a party we don't want that outcry.

[Vermijelli]

167. "majorly melanin-deficient crowds"

We usually frown upon bashing people for their appearance, especially facets of their appearance that are inherited. They could've described the crowds as homogeneously white, for example but no; the author chose to go down that prejudiced rabbit hole.

[bravenak]

171. Well, when you open your campaign at a monochromatic Regatta

That's what you get

[Vermijelli]

185. Monochromatic is an acceptable way of describing the crowds

At opposed to implying genetic inferiority/superiority based on melanin levels.

[bravenak]

186. No one implied superiority, simply sameness

A crowd without minorities being a representative portion of the population of the Democratic party as a whole.

[R B Garr]

168. K&R! I think the original title was just fine, and it needs

to be said. He savaged Clinton over her realistic views about single payer, and now he wants to pretend he's the ACA champion because that's where the limelight is now. Phony.

[bravenak]

170. Well, you know we have to be nicey to him at all times or else

I think this article was deleted twice before I posted it. I wanted it to stay up so I did what I had to do to keep it alive, lol.

[R B Garr]

188. Yes, I know exactly what you mean about....everything.

Good thinking, and it's worth hearing how people are assessing the Sanders' damage, so it's a shame it was silenced before.

[melman]

190. There it is

You were just trying avoid a hide. The stuff about 'deciding it was too rude' was complete bullshit.

As anyone with half a brain already knew.

[ismnotwasm]

169. K&R

[bravenak]

179. You bored?

[Arazi]

180. Yup. Boring

Off to other fun elsewheres

Good luck peddling same old

[bravenak]

184. No gracias por la suerte!

No es necessario. Sabes que du siempre responde por mi. Cada vez yo hablo... Siempre me escuchan! Ha ha ha

[HRC2020]

196. HRC 2020

She was the best , is the Best and will be the PRESIDENT. A TRUMP presidency will guarantee that even IF Bernie runs again

[Chitown Kev]

200. Interesting reactions here

[LexVegas]

205. Remember his campaign surrogates attacking civil rights icons....

kinda like what Trump is doing now?

[bravenak]

240. Yep!

[yardwork]

241. I sure do remember, including the attacks on John Lewis!

[hueymahl]

214. Such a needlessly divisive post

I get it, you want to blame anyone and everyone for the loss except the person who ran as the Democratic nominee.

The thing is, there are dozens of people on this thread that point out real problems with this analysis. I'm not going to repeat it, because I don't think you really want to hear it.

My suggestion - HRC defenders, consider taking your own advice. She won but got screwed out of the job - that is self-evident. Pipe Down and move on. As a party, we have a lot of work to do to stop the Orange Menace. It is not terribly helpful to continue the infighting.

[SMC22307]

221. Meanwhile, as Democrats are down to fully controlling a measly six states...

Sanders is working with Democratic leadership to rebuild the party, save Obamacare, improve race relations, push for free college tuition, etc. So much noise coming from the anti-Sanders crowd... too bad they're not putting the time and energy to actually, I dunno, solving problems?





http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-bernie-sanders-michigan-healthcare-rally-20170115-story.html

Bernie Sanders arrives at King celebration
http://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt--politics/bernie-sanders-arrives-king-celebration/v57CnOIWNawRIkzRtTX05O/

"Good optics" and still grappling with Hillary's loss is proving to be too much for some. So much nastiness. People better get over it, because Republicans are coming after SS, Medicaid and Medicare... HARD.

[R B Garr]

256. Your neener-neener posts don't change the fact that Bernie lost the primary. Sorry,

but his message failed, and he obviously sees his errors because now he's into incrementalism, compromising, and identity politics. That's quite an about-face. Some would even call that Third Way. Oh my.

[SMC22307]

259. Such a failed message that he was invited to participate in yesterday's tribute to MLK, Jr...

at THE Ebenezer Baptist Church? Uh-huh. For good measure...



Bernie "Expand Social Security" Sanders is just like the "Social Security is a populist political and economic fantasy" Third Way?

Keep flailing.

[R B Garr]

264. EVERYONE was invited to commemorate MLK day. It's a national holiday set aside

to honor him. Banks are closed; mail is not delivered. It's a national holiday. So making time to honor MLK does not set him aside as being something special. It is expected.

That picture is from over 40 years ago. Since then, he has lived in a white, rural state with little diversity. For something more recent, here he is just a few months ago telling a Latina to quit playing identity politics and that her ethnicity was unimportant:

"Sanders made his remarks following a speech he gave on Sunday at the Berklee Performance Center in Boston when a supporter asked him what advice he might give to help her become the second Latina U.S. senator.

Acknowledging that he was responding to his questioner “in a way that you may not be happy with,” Sanders said that he cared less about a candidate’s outward appearance than he did about his or her ideas.

“It is not good enough for someone to say, ‘I’m a woman, vote for me.’ No, that’s not good enough."

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/22/bernie-sanders-it-is-not-good-enough-for-someone-to-say-im-a-woman-vote-for-me/


And Third Way as in compromising with Republicans. Bernie told us in the primary that he was against incrementalism and he demonized Clinton for her realistic plans. Now he wants to compromise with the mega-billionaire, Trump. He sure has changed his tune.

And you keep flailing on brave's threads, so it must really strike a nerve with you that she dares to point out Sanders' many flaws that caused him to lose so badly with the base.

[SMC22307]

270. LOL! Were you invited to speak at the historic Ebenezer Baptist Church?

The OP? Anyone on this board? No? I thought not. Bernie's civil rights activism is deeply rooted in him, whether in his 20s or his 70s. Poo-pooing it looks idiotic, especially as MLK's own church embraced Bernie... on MLK Day.

Look, I understand some on this site are working their little fingers to the bone in an attempt to *diminish* one Bernard Sanders, but out in the real world, he and his ideas are being embraced by influential Democrats at all levels of government, from Atlanta's Mayor Reed, to Michigan's Debbie Stabenow, to New York's Andrew Cuomo and Chuck Schumer. Maybe some are waking up to the fact that Democrats fully controlling only six states -- an historic low -- blows beyond belief. You may be happy with that number, but I'm not.

I, too, care less about a candidate's outward appearance than I do about ideas. Sarah Palin and Carly Fiorina look like me in that we're white women, but I would never vote for them. Hillary's Methodist, right? So am I. Was I supposed to bond with her over religion? I ran to the polls to vote for Obama, twice. What the fuck was that all about?

Sanders has flaws. Hillary has flaws. We all have flaws. I knew his candidacy was a long shot, but Bernie did tremendously well against the Clinton Machine. So many I spoke to said they preferred Bernie's ideas but thought Hillary had the better chance of beating Trump. How'd that work out, folks?

Seriously, I'm in these threads to see if we'll *ever* find out who sent "the letters." The new money is on Russian trolls, the ones who tinkered with voting machines in Michigan and Wisconsin.

[R B Garr]

272. Well, none of us are SENATORS on this board, so it's a silly analogy to ask why

we aren't speaking in place of an elected official. The whole nation celebrates MLK as a national holiday. There were parades and speakers all over this country. They were on TV the whole day -- everywhere, so it would be politically stupid for an Establishment politician such as Bernie to shun the holiday. His stated agenda for running as a Democrat was for the media attention that he couldn't generate, so that seems to be his priority. That duplicity is on display with him almost constantly. He shows up for a MLK rally for the media attention, but tells a young Latina woman that her ethnicity is unimportant. That's not a lot of progress after decades in public life no matter how many times that 40 year old picture is posted.

And some on this site still have to read already-rejected tripe leftover from the primaries such as yours that pretend that Bernie was superior when he lost the primary by millions of votes. Millions. He lost because his message didn't match his record and his rhetoric was consistently nasty and sour about Democrats. Sure young people will like to hear about free tuition and legal marijuana, but he couldn't even get his national agenda passed in his teeny, tiny, rural, mostly white state of Vermont. He got away with that duplicity because he was never vetted. Not being vetted means he was never attacked. Luckily people recognized that and rejected nonsense polls about a Trump matchup. So that didn't work out for you, either, since Bernie lost the primary.

I have to laugh at your comments about Russia. Sounds truly Trumpian right there to suggest that Democrats are just imagining that Russia meddled in our politics, especially after your hero Assange trumpeted his leaks all over the globe. Bernie tried to have Democrats fired because of his paranoia and conspiracy theories that the Democrats were out to get him, so your condescension is really laughable. If you are trying to take a potshot about other posters here (your "letters" comment), your analogy is still just downright bizarre. But it does prove that you are in these threads to make things personal, which is a hallmark of the treatment anyone who didn't worship Sanders' was subjected to. Enough is enough.

[SMC22307]

279. 100 SENATORS, 435 representatives...

and one Bernard Sanders invited to commemorate MLK at MLK's church on MLK day. No one on this board can diminish that. Not you. Not the OP. Not The Root. No one.

"Your hero Assange..." Flail away, but don't make it personal, now.

Knock yourself out... have the last word. I'll be busy at work and welcoming out-of-town guests for the march before Friday's big Postmortem shutdown.

[R B Garr]

280. The Church is described as a "favorite" of politicians. Seriously, it fits the pattern that you

would make MLK day about Sanders' rather than MLK himself. That is another hallmark of his "movement", where he becomes the most important politician to ever exist. Years, decades of politicians speak at Ebenezer Baptist Church, but Sanders is the most important ever ever ever! Kind of reminds me of the phony business with the Pope. Sanders' flies himself to Italy, and the story is that the Pope invited him, which was not at all true. Such phoniness! MLK is a national holiday. There are celebrations everywhere. It's not about Bernie Sanders, lol. It's about Martin Luther King.

Flail away, yourself. At least you admitted your reason for being in these threads, as if it wasn't obvious.

[bravenak]

246. This author was a Bernie supporter and donor

[Gothmog]

248. So he saw the light or was asked to buy bernie's latest book

[bravenak]

249. It was the whole anti-PC/identity politics diatribe that

The Senator went on that changed his mind about Sanders. Obviously some of his darker skinned supporters took umbrage. I guess that just means it will be that much more difficult for him to mount a successful 2020 campaign. My fellow black folks who were supportive of him over Hillary are having regrets.

[Gothmog]

251. Sanders attacks on identity politics are really upsetting to me

This article was like finger nails on a blackboard to me http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sanders-boston-speech-identity-class-politics

[bravenak]

253. That was a strange thing for any liberal to say

I guess thats the difference between a progressive and a liberal. Liberals know we are all in this together.
I hope he doesn't think that will help him with us next time. I hear cons say the same damn thing all the time up here.

[R B Garr]

257. Yes, he's done quite an about-face on identity politics now that he can get media attention

about the MLK holiday. He's done an about-face on incrementalism and compromising, as well. Now it's okay to see incremental change and compromising with the GOP is okay. He's changed his tune quite a bit, amazingly so.

It seems media attention is what motivates him the most.

[Gothmog]

258. The only thing that Sanders cares about is book sales

[hueymahl]

265. One man's opinion

Most all of my Dem friends and colleagues of all races, but especially AA, are regretting having to back HRC. Not in the general, mind you. They universally wish they had a better alternative in the primaries. Some wish they had backed Sanders. Most wish she simply had not run.

[bravenak]

266. Most of my friends voted for Hillary

And so did most of the voters.

[hueymahl]

269. Almost all of my friends did too

I've managed to stay friends with the ones that did not, but it is still touch and go with a few.

[SMC22307]

217. Preach it...

Bernie Sanders!

Leading a Save Obamacare rally with other Democrats in Michigan freezing temps over the weekend... today honoring Martin Luther King, Jr.

Bernie Sanders arrives at King celebration [View all]

Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Sen. Bernie Sanders arrived early at Ebenezer Baptist Church, where he will give a tribute during today’s Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebration.

Sanders was ushered through a side door without speaking with the press.

...

The line to get into Ebenezer snaked down Jackson Street as hundreds waited patiently and the church quickly filled up. Those in attendance included Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, Georgia U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson, and U.S. Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Lithonia).

Boris Stallworth, a West Midtown resident, said he was hoping to here Sanders bridge the gap between both parties. “I think there’s a lot of hurt and pain,” said Stallworth, who shares a birthday with King. “I’m hoping to hear how he can motivate other people, rally us together to be able to combat that negative energy and encourage everybody to get out and do something great.

http://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt--politics/bernie-sanders-arrives-king-celebration/v57CnOIWNawRIkzRtTX05O/

Too bad at least some The Root's hostility couldn't be put to better use. You know, like coming out from behind the screens and hitting the streets to solve problems in St. Louis or something.

Grasping for change on America's most violent streets: 'We must stop killing'

A four-mile stretch on Natural Bridge Avenue in St Louis – not in Chicago or Baltimore – is the place in America most plagued by gun violence

A Guardian special report: the inequality of gun violence in America



https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2017/jan/10/st-louis-gun-crime-missouri-natural-bridge-avenue

Bernie Sanders is a good man. More Boris, less noise.

[Gothmog]

283. Why did sanders call for the end of identity politics?

This article was like finger nails on a blackboard to me http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sanders-boston-speech-identity-class-politics

[bettyellen]

284. This

[sheshe2]

227. Kicking!

[Larkspur]

254. Did the Root cheer for Joe Lieberman when he consistantly stabbed Dems in the back?

Bernie Sanders is closer to the core Democratic principles than some who call themselves Democrats.
He's closer to FDR's 2nd Bill of Rights philosophy than pro-corporate Dems in the Third Way are.

[bravenak]

255. Why dont you look it up yourself

If you want to know how they observed Lieberman. Most dems hated him for that.
And sorry that us blackfolks are not super in love and nostalgic over FDR. I mean, he did sell out out to get the dixiecrats to do what he wanted. Refused to work on anti lynching legislation. If he is closer to that, no thank you.

[Larkspur]

261. FDR was the first Democratic Presidential candidate to win the majority of black

voters. The trend of blacks voting mostly for Democrats started with FDR, whose economic policies were still better for blacks in his day than the Republicans'.

[bravenak]

263. And we got sold out

[Larkspur]

287. Were you alive back then?

Blacks were sold out by the Republicans who caused the Great Depression, which is why the majority went to the Democrats under FDR.

Considering blacks make up about 12-14% of the US population, what choices do blacks have?

[bravenak]

288. We were sold out. My Grandma was left out which fucked over her kids

Which meant we all had to work harder, for less, and be happy about it. It was dixiecrats, not republicans who did it,the selling out I'm talkiing bout anyhow, and fdr went for it to get what he wanted. Don't pull that, only twelve percent of the population bullshit. Lynchings are murder. He shoulda did somethin, period. Better hope your group never gets down to less than half the population if thats how you all think. Be Sad to see others treat you likewise. By 2040 y'all wont have a majority. You saying we got no choice but to do what you want. Massa said the same thing. Last time folks thought we had no choice, they were wrong then as now.

[Blue_Tires]

262. kick