Clinton supporters are frothing at the mouth.

Indeed. Thanks. I remember some of that stuff, though obviously not all of it.

I guess part of it is that I also remember Clinton’s (eventual) willingness to support Obama enthusiastically and unify the party.

From http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=76913, April 16 debate (she was closer then to Obama than Sanders is now to her, looking at pledged delegates only, and I was itching for her to throw in the goddamn towel already):

"Obviously we are still contesting to determine who will be the nominee. But once that is resolved, I think it is absolutely imperative that our entire party close ranks, that we become unified. I will do everything to make sure that the people who supported me support our nominee.

“I will go anywhere in the country to make the case. And I know that Barack feels the same way, because both of us have spent 15 months traveling our country. I have seen the damage of the Bush years. I’ve seen the extraordinary pain that people have suffered from because of the failed policies; you know, those who have held my hands who have lost sons or daughters in Iraq, and those who have lost sons or daughters because they didn’t have health insurance. And so, regardless of the differences there may be between us, and they are differences, they pale in comparison to the differences between us and Senator McCain.”

Then, on June 7, shortly after the race had been mathematically decided in favor of Obama, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/07/us/politics/07text-clinton.html?_r=0:

“The way to continue our fight now, to accomplish the goals for which we stand is to take our energy, our passion, our strength, and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama the next president of the United States. Today, as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him.”

She said something similar at the convention, too: “Let’s declare all together with one voice right here and right now that Barack Obama is our candidate, and that he will be our President!”

When we got to the general election, I spent a number of days canvassing in Allentown, PA. I met several people who said they had been ardent Hillary Clinton supporters. (I’m sure there were others, but these ones all took pains to point it out to me.) All of them expressed disappointment that Obama had beaten her (“she really was the better candidate,” said one), but NEARLY all were very happy to vote for Obama.* As someone else put it, “She’s working to elect him, so I guess he must be okay.”

So, a worthwhile reminder of what actually went down, and a useful reminder of how fence mending can be successful in changing the way the narrative is recalled. If Clinton does win the nomination (and the presidency) as Obama did eight years ago, and if Sanders supports her as unequivocally as Clinton supported Obama back then, it’s quite possible I’ll remember this primary season very differently from the way I’m viewing it now.
*There was one notable exception, a feisty older woman who spoke darkly of “people who didn’t want a woman to be President.” She had heard a rumor that Obama might put HRC on the Supreme Court, though, and as she explained, “no way am I voting for that John McCain”…I bet she eventually did pull the lever for Obama, but I wouldn’t put much money on it!

Shrug, both are better than any of the alternatives from the GOP. Whichever Dem gets the nod is the one I will vote for, Sanders or Clinton.

Well, look at it this way, when this raging pinhead loses to whatever demented troll the Republicans throw up, and loses because most people won’t trust her *, the slimy establishment Clintonistas have a ready-made scapegoat:
We woulda got away with it if it hadn’t been for those pesky Bernie-kids !

  • And no, not because of the half-wit fabrications the right-wing has been spreading about her for decades; nor because of those non-events such as Benghazi or her email server, which was merely otiose stupidity rather than wrong-doing; but because even among politicians there is no-one to touch her for needing to bleat out: “Lies, Lies, it’s all Lies !” as a mantra.

Not since Tricky Dicky at any rate.

Would she do that for Sanders?

Nixon won the office of President two out of three tries, despite consistently being voted in polls, “The Used Car Salesman I’d Least Like to Buy A Car From.” So go figure.

Do you have evidence she wouldn’t? 2008 was evidence she would.

Your summaries are delusions. Your reaction extremely thin-skinned.

You do not agree with what role I think Elizabeth Warren hopes to play and how I think she intends to use power that I believe she has to further her agenda? Debate it in thread. Or don’t. Not sure why that subject comes off as “frothing” to you though.

The supers thread?

That to you is my saying

Now of course most of the thread was posters claiming that he did not mean that at all. And of course you imply that I am deranged for hearing him as having meant that. Nevertheless

So uh yeah, what do you think? Was my interpretation that Team Sanders was stating that they would argue for the supers to give them the nomination if the end result is a loss in pledged delegates and a larger loss in the popular vote, “frothing”?*

I am very straightforward in my beliefs. The odds of a GOP victory in November are small but non-zero. I want them as small as possible. Yes, it is my personal opinion that Sanders would at best be an ineffectual president and as this campaign has gone on my opinion of him has lessened. I now see him as a dishonest and unethical person. I did not see him like that earlier. And yes I have complained about where he and his team have, to my read, crossed serious lines. Of course he’d be a helluva lot better for the country and the world than any of the GOP choices, but I do not believe he would be a good president at all. Some here disagree. Good. I am here to hear reasoned other perspectives; I do not require positive affirmation. Debate with facts, debate with logic. Or call me names in the Pit if such is your wont. Or put me on ignore.

I also think that it has been virtually impossible for him to prevail for a long time now, but very possible for him to cause harm. That he is causing harm. My big concern remains that the Left sided Hillary Hate that he is, intentionally or not, stoking, increases the risk of a GOP upset in the general. Oh I think she will still win, and likely win big, but the stakes are so high that I do not like even marginally making that GOP upset more likely.

Hearing that offends you? Sorry, but too fukkin’ bad. Personally I know what I think and I go into Elections hoping to hear reasoned other perspectives. Sometimes I do; sometimes I don’t. If you want to present reasoned counter-arguments I am up to discuss them. If you can’t stand hearing perspectives other than your own then maybe Elections is not your place to be. If you want to snark I will sometimes snark back. If you state things that are factually untrue I will call you on it. Yes, that has offended some as well. And so it goes.
*Yes the supporting argument has changed over time as the facts have changed. It started out with the argument of winning more swing states (Michigan!) rather than the Red states that Clinton was winning and more states and better in Trump head to heads, and now, with OH, VA, FL, and even AZ in her victory list, has morphed to that the the actual pledged delegate count and popular vote does not really matter because he didn’t try in all the states, and only the states he tried in should count.

But sure, I am out of line for calling that chutzpah.

In terms of what the threads were about.

Feel the #extortion Bernie has planned - SlackerInc

Summary: Yeah, an over-the-top op with some responses in kind, with flames fanned early on by some who should know better.

Elizabeth Warren’s role - DSeid

Summary: Elizabeth Warren is positioning herself to yield power at the right moment to further her agenda. Yes horrible Bernie bashing that.

Barney Frank throws shade at voters, and Bernie Sanders - SlackerInc

Summary: Here is something said that I thought was worth sharing. Discussion mainly focused on that someone’s beliefs about those who do not vote in mid-terms and posters thoughts about those beliefs. A reasonable discussion with the only nastiness being some incoherent babbling from claverhouse

Bernie “we’ll see” if he fundraises for other Democrats - dalej42

Summary: Another over-the-top op, yes, but most of the discussion was actually reasoned with little name calling by anyone. Some debate over a claim that Sanders has “always” raised money for Democrats, when in fact he did not for most of his career, and only has to any significant degree in the last few cycles, per the claimant’s own cite, in order to get his Chair. (And nothing wrong with that. It’s politics.) Some discussion and disagreement over how much he is doing (or not doing) to help downticket progressives. Claims made that he is doing something but no cites offered and others looking could not find on their own.

Bernie’s Soviet “honeymoon” and trips to Nicaragua and Cuba are disqualifying. - SlackerInc

Summary: There are some vulnerabilities for a general that are not issues in this primary.

Sanders saved by supers? - DSeid

Summary: Already discussed and my frothing interpretation confirmed by Devine as per my citation. If you think that is “overturning democracy” you are free to. I just think it’s chutzpah. And unrealistic.

Bambi versus Godzilla: the illusions of Sanders-supporters - Sherrerd

Summary: A funny old video short used to argue that head to heads now are meaningless … Sanders has never been Swiftboat tested and would be destroyed in a general contest. Most of the name calling in the thread was directed at Clinton.

Your portrayal of these threads? It is to laugh.

Since I managed to kill the thread I’ll add in one more.

Clinton supporters are frothing at the mouth. - Eonwe

Summary: Posters in Elections are raising negative issues about Bernie! They want to debate things he’s said. That’s frothing at the mouth! How dare they! In Elections of all places? Questioning his sainthood? Worrying that he might risk harming the Democratic party’s chances for as good of an outcome as possible in the Fall and pointing out statements that make some worry about that? Pointing out hypocrisy? Burn the blasphemers! Bernie should be able to say anything without his statements being questioned because all that matters are “the issues” by which we mean his being able to say his stump speech yet again. The forum tweakers.