I have wondered how much of the "Bernie bro’ phenomenon is attributable to the candidate himself and how much of it was going to happen no matter what when we had a female candidate.
I tend to think that Bernie needing to maintain street cred and his personal brand kept him from pulling some percentage of his followers into the fold to confront Trump, but I couldn’t say how much that would amount to.
And how much of it is amplified by people who, despite supposedly being “sick” of Bernie, find the need to bring him up over and over again, while the rest of us are content to move on.
The OP is a *response *to a Bernie Bro who still can’t find a way to admit voting for Clinton would have been the responsible thing for him to do.
Wrong. Read the OP. The OP is a response/support to an outrage editorial about a local interview Sanders gave in the state in which he is still a representative. Not a “Bernie bro” in sight.
The three most recent and active threads on the SDMB about Bernie were started by people who want him to “go away”.
If you want Bernie to go away, stop talking about him; very few other people are.
You will forever find somebody to passionately argue whatever stupid position you hate. Someone will always step in to be your “Bernie bro” if you open the door and put up a welcome mat. And it seems to me that there’s a sub-set of people who enjoy instigating hyperbolic and vitriolic conversation about Sanders, and then when a few people take the bait, it becomes “proof” that these Sanders people just won’t let it go.
Whatever floats your boat, but it’s pretty disingenuous.
Whack-A-Mole isn’t a Bro? Okay, whatever.
The OP has nothing to do with Whack-A-Mole.
That’s literally the second word in the OP.
It’s not really her heritage, is the point.
Be sure to read the last section, “Recipe for Embarrassment”. That’s really the most cringeworthy part of the whole thing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Here’s the OP. Are you looking at something else?
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20804469&postcount=1
I like her a LOT. But that does not change the fact, that she would not win.
You seem to be reading a different thread from everyone else.
As I noted before, unless she absorbed her NA heritage by osmosis, the fact that she was born in OK is irrelevant since none of her 4 grandparents was born there. She may have some NA ancestry, but not from OK.
Just to underline what a seriously weak candidate she is, even in her home state, here are the exact numbers I alluded to before, with the previous presidential cycle used for comparison:
Kerry won in 2008 by 34.8 points while Obama won by 25.8 points. Both won easily, but Kerry actually managed to get a significant number of McCain voters to cross over downballot.
By contrast, Warren won in 2012 by 7.5 points while Obama won by 23.2 points. We see here the reverse: Kerry’s crossover voters returned home to the GOP, while an even larger swath of voters rejected Romney but also Warren.
Put another way: Obama’s margin of victory only dropped by 2.6 points from 2008 to 2012, while Warren’s margin of victory was 27.3 points lower than Kerry’s. That’s catastrophic.
Kerry ran in 2004 and ran against George W Bush.
Well, yes, she might. Good point, John. I didn’t mean to imply that such heritage was unheard of outside the more culturally advanced parts of the country, like Texas and Oklahoma. Perhaps she just added it in to give a dash of the exotic to her otherwise bland and withdrawn personality.
Nonetheless, I am appropriately rebuked, somewhere between a blink and a shrug.
I guess it was at least as good a point as yours was.
Anyway, family lore is notoriously unreliable when it comes to genealogy. And claims of NA ancestry are particularly shaky. I recently did some genealogical research on my own family that dispelled a bit family lore. I was always told we were direct descendants of that damn Yankee Willian T. Sherman. Turns out he’s a 2nd cousin, several times removed. So we’re related, but not descended.
Move on from what?
I want to look forward to November and 2020, but I don’t want to just move on. Those who believed in the false equivalency of Hillary being almost as bad as Trump gave us Trump. Move on, my ass. Elections have consequences, and we’re living with them. And we’re going to be living with more and more of them with every day that we have this clown as our “president”
Bernie’s Bros still can’t get over Hillary. The idiots at Our Revolution were planning a Hillary protest at Rutgers because she was being paid to give a speech. I guess the Bros are now equating Rutgers with Goldman Sachs.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/storyline/democrats-vs-trump/amp/pro-bernie-sanders-group-cancels-anti-hillary-clinton-protest-n857926
I can see how that was confusing. I was referring to Kerry’s 2008 Senate campaign, when he was running at the same time as Obama was on the ballot in the presidential line. That makes it the best comparison for Warren’s one and only election, when (like Kerry in 2008) she was running for Senate in Massachusetts while Obama was on the same ballot on the presidential line.
Here’s what I wrote again—hopefully it will make sense with that in mind:
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah! There’s…like…dozens of them somewhere! :eek:
From the article you cited:
Tempest in a teapot but if that’s the best you’ve got…