Indeed they had pretty much banned guns in DC & Chicago, and in many states abortions are pretty much banned.
Democrats who don't support Bernie Sanders as the frontrunner are the people who put Trump in office
On the whole, Americans are too stupid to elect someone on policy alone. Rather, they want someone who is “inspiring,” or at least a dog-and-pony show like Trump. They want a fucking TV show–because they’re too stupid to understand how their own government works. They’re too lazy to figure it out. They just want to sit on their asses and watch a show. That’s how Trump got elected, and that’s why we have threads like this where people talk about “good candidates” or “bad candidates.”
I’m a little surprised. This was the concern of a lot of the ‘we’d rather have Hillary’ crowd - especially women. That Bernie’s record on women - not necessarily his voting record, but his behavior and opinions, were more than a little misogynistic. It isn’t new information.
Its one of the many things that pissed me off about some of my male Bernie supporting friends - that they were so willing to overlook this sort of thing - that article in particular. It isn’t like this was behavior in high school when he was drunk, these were published opinions that a grown 32 year old man held.
Lets hold liberal men to at least the same standards we hold conservative men to regarding their treatment of women.
Oh, and I get a little pissed with the theory in the OP.
If I have a single issue that I vote on, its that women should be treated with respect and not as objects for a man’s sexual needs. I thought having Franken resign was the right thing to do. I thought Bill Clinton was an ass who should have resigned. This isn’t a partisan thing for me. Given a choice in voting between Mr. Grab em by the Pussy and Mr. The Problem with Society is that Sixteen Year Old Girls don’t Put Out, I might have not voted for either. And I doubt I’m alone - or would be alone when Sander’s articles had gotten more attention.
I didn’t really follow sanders, as he turned me off with his pie in the sky economic theories before I really got to know him better, so I hadn’t really encountered his writings from his 30’s. I do have to admit, I still laugh every time he says “do do”, but that does not a president make.
I do have a question about that though. He wrote that in his thirties, did he continue to push those ideas into his 40’s, 50’s or 60’s?
If there are no examples of this attitude past 32, would you hold that position against him 40 years later? I’m of mixed minds on that myself.
However, if in his 40’s or 50’s, he specifically repudiated the views of his younger self, and called on others to do the same, would you still be holding those views against him?
The quoted comment is peculiarly confused. As Procrustus implies, all but the stupidest Trumpists knew that “Mexico will pay for it” was hyperbole. Trumpists liked the sentiment behind Trump’s lies, while still knowing they were lies.
Similarly, intelligent Democrats understand that the program of the extreme left-wing is a visionary target that will not be enacted in its entirety as legislation in the near future. This agenda should be viewed as tugging on a large inertial mass which has swung much too far to the right.
There were (and are) several good reasons to think Sanders would make a poor President. But fear that his socialist agenda would be enacted into law is not one of them.
As Procrustus implies, if stupid blather were a disqualification it is Trump who is thousands of times more disqualified than all the other candidates put together. And, unlike the futile blatherings of others, the Republicans have fallen into line and are enacting and confirming some of Trump’s stupidest ideas.
Has Kavanaugh attempted to rape any women since college…? Maybe he’s changed. No. WE as a nation can do better than to elect or appoint anyone who ever held views such as this or showed this sort of behavior. We don’t need to settle for someone who might have changed.
I take that back…if you really strongly repudiated your past, and spent time and effort making amends, then perhaps I would accept the change. That isn’t what Sanders has done. Nor Franken, nor Clinton. I don’t think Robert Byrd was successful regarding his Klan past. We don’t have to accept this.
I actually might have gave him a pass on something that long ago, except for his horrible politcal stance and the GOPs attack on Dr Ford.
If he had just said something like "You know , I used to party too hard and drink too much back then, there are likely several incidents I don’t remember that were shameful. Dr Ford, I don’t remember anything at all like that but if when I was drinking too much as a kid, I did something to be ashamed of, I apologize now. But I don’t remember you or any such incident."
I wasn’t going for a gotcha there, I really don’t know that much about Bernie’s involvement and writings in misogyny. I don’t know if he has written misogynistic pieces as recently as last week, or if he only had one poorly thought out article 40 years ago. I see there being a difference, we all grow and change.
I also don’t know whether he has specifically repudiated his views. If he had, then I see that as an even bigger difference. To admit that you did something wrong does take a bit of self awareness that many, especially in politics, lack. I can respect that.
Someone likeDerek Black, even though I would have vehemently disagreed with him and felt he was unfit for anything, private or public, just a few years ago, I would now take as an example and role model for many who are struggling with racist tendancies and beliefs that they were raised with.
By completely repudiating his beliefs and explaining how he got from where he was to where he is, he has completely redeemed himself, IMHO, and I would not hold any of the extremely hateful things that he said in the past against him.
Of course, he was much younger when he came to the realization that the way he was raised was wrong, but it does take people some amount of life experience before they are able to truly examine their flaws and work to address and fix them.
If Sanders had had that level of repentance, then I would not hold his old views against him. That I am aware of, he has not had really any repentance, much less that level, so I’d have difficulty supporting him, had I heard (which I’m sure I would have) of his views if he were in the general election.
I’d probably go ahead and vote for him over Trump(lessor of evils), but I’d have far more misgivings about it than when I voted for Clinton.
Derek Black was in my mind when I talked about repudiation. Sanders hasn’t had nearly that amount of public remonstrance over his past - and he wasn’t a young kid - he was in his 30s when he was writing that shit - and writing it for public consumption to persuade people to his thinking.
I wouldn’t. But then I’m a sexual abuse survivor. I know how long those scars can last, how they can hold a person back. There isn’t any reason why we only have options from people with misogynistic or racist past for high office. Of course, if your starting requirement is white man, your risk of getting someone with a misogynistic or racist past goes way up.
Sanders does not give the impression of being a man willing to admit to mistakes.
Well, I have to say this, OP. You have certainly convinced me- to never support Sanders.
Unless of course- that was your goal all along…
He certainly doesn’t.
I wonder if the OP is?