Especially considering that Sanders campaigned for her in 2016.
Yes, finally!
No one had anything bad to say about Bernie before now. But FINALLY! Someone TELLING IT LIKE IT IS!
I don’t know why the media and all the pundits and the voters and everyone has just lined up unquestionably behind Bernie for the last 5 years. FINALLY someone’s calling this shitstain out for the loser that he really is! Finally!
I guess I get it. I mean, I’ll be voting “anyone but Trump 2020” as well . . . but that’s also because it’s pretty clear that while Trump is a lying vile shitstain, none of the people running for the Democratic nomination fall under that category.
If Bernie is really just slightly less a monster than Trump, maybe Dems should stay home if he gets nominated, because the country wouldn’t be meaningfully different under a Sanders presidency?
Maybe this is just mincing words, but I don’t see how a person can believe what you wrote and then turn around and vote for the lying vile shitstain.
Tulsi Gabbard is being required to prove she will support the nominee. Bloomberg is being required to prove he will support the nominee. But Hillary doesn’t have to support the nominee if he’s the guy who campaigned for her more times than she campaigned for Obama.
I missed this, but wow what an awful, harmful sentiment for the party. I like the big tent – folks like Bernie and AOC are welcome, especially with all the fundraising and youthful energy/support they bring. Moderates are also welcome, especially in moderate districts. If you want either category of those folks out of the party, then you want a party that will lose forever. We need young people in the party. It’s nuts to me that a Democrat could be filled with so much hate about energetic progressives supporting progressive policies and bringing in youthful supporters. Especially a potential talent like AOC. She’s not perfect, but I’ve literally NEVER seen a politician in their 20s with as much charisma and natural political talent that she’s displayed. If she grows as much as Obama grew from his 20s to his 40s, then she could be another once-in-a-generation Democratic political talent.
Huh. As a Sanders supporter who enthusiastically voted for Clinton (well, fervently might be a better word, or desperately), I’m concerned about exactly the opposite:
You think these sound like folks who plan to cast their vote for Sanders as fervently as I cast mine for Clinton?
You think Clinton, who just badmouthed one of the leading Democratic candidates in an incredibly personal way (“nobody likes him,” are you in eighth grade, Hillary?), is planning on campaigning for Sanders if he wins as much as he campaigned for her?
The Democratic left is 100% expected to fall in line behind moderates when the moderates win primaries. The Democratic moderates have no such expectation for their own members.
Moderates, come get your people.
Hillary isn’t running in 2020. The reason the candidates are being asked if they’ll back the nominee is exactly because of the actions of Shitbag Sanders in 2016.
Oh, I wouldn’t know anyone who didn’t unconditionally support the 2016 nominee. Don’t know of anyone who got their ass kicked in 2016 primaries, whined about them being rigged and then stayed in the race for over a month after the last primary. I’m sure the same person will happily accept defeat in the 2020 primary season.
Why do I feel like waggling my finger?
His action=fully endorsing the winning candidate.
Your obsession with Sanders cannot possibly be good for you.
Exactly, which I think is one of the major flaws in how we do politics in America. The more leftist you are, the less your vote or opinions are deemed to be important, while the more right wing you are the more valuable they are.
Leftist democrats are supposed to submit to moderate democrats. Democrats are supposed to appeal to conservative whites in rural areas. The further right wing you are, people assume your voice and vote matters more and it doesn’t.
Nevermind the fact that leftist democrats make up a huge % of not just democratic voters, but probably the majority of volulnteers and donors. Without liberals and labor unions, the democrats would have far, far less money and volunteers. But we’re told to just submit to a party that will try desperately to win the votes of rural whites who maybe, once in a blue moon, maybe will vote democratic.
Leftist democrats are expected to do much of the heavy lifting (voting, volunteering and donating) so that the democratic party can ignore them to appeal to conservative democrats and conservative ‘independents’ and people are tired of it.
For the life of me, I can’t make sense of the type of support that Bernie and Trump both gather.
There’s this commonality that calling either candidate racist is GOOD for the candidate. And, that the only fair election is the one that their guy wins.
I missed the edit window, but black voters are also a very reliable base of the democratic party who get ignored too. Which is kind of ironic regarding my post.
Point being, groups like blacks, labor unions and liberals are used to be hit up for money, volunteers and votes by the democratic party, and then being ignored in favor of the democratic party serving the interests of and being scared of corporations and conservative rural whites, and people want things to change. Democrats need to appeal to and fear their own voters, not rural whites and corporations.
Since you quoted me, I assume I’m “folks” and I’ll vote for whoever wins the Democratic nomination. Even if I think Sanders is worthless from a “getting policy enacted” standpoint and have a strong dislike for his 2016 campaign, at least I know he won’t be plundering the budget for a stupid wall or nominating Heritage Foundation-approved justices. Or a bunch of other Trump shit you already know about.
See, as a “pragmatic” or “moderate” or whatever Democrat, I understand that half a loaf is better than a poke in the eye. I’m not going to be the one playing coy about how “I’ll need to evaluate my options” if my preferred candidate doesn’t win.
Yes, I do. Because of history.
Clinton campaigned a lot more for Obama after he defeated her in 2008 than Sanders campaigned for Clinton after she defeated him in 2016. Clinton was able to suck up her defeat and back the party’s nominee.
And Hillary will campaign strategically in areas where Bernie isn’t strong. Just like Bill, and Barack and Michelle Obama. They all have their areas of strength. In the awful event of a Sanders nomination, let’s hope he picks a decent VP. That VP is one heart attack from the Presidency.
If leftist democrats made up a majority of the party, then Sanders would have won the nomination. Clinton won because the majority are moderates.
Most people live in communities of like-minded people. This can give you a false view of what the country is like. Just because everyone you knows thinks a candidate is great doesn’t mean they’re a sure winner.
We saw it on this board back in 2004. We took informal polls here and John Kerry got something like ninety percent of the votes - and then he lost the actual election.
I will say that I think Sanders has handled this situation well. When reporters questioned him about Clinton’s claim that “Nobody likes him” he said “On a good day, my wife likes me.”
Clinton should publicly commit to supporting the Democratic candidate, whoever it ends up being. And I think she will do so within the next day or two. But she would look hypocritical if she was speaking out against Sanders and then said she’d vote for him anyway at the same event. She needs to have some distance between the two statements.
Sanders did come out of nowhere and win 43% of the vote. Granted not a majority and him not winning a majority of delegates is why he lost. But there is a trendline of the democratic party becoming more progressive and grassroots.
Had Sanders run in 2004 he would’ve gotten nowhere. Howard Dean won 5% of the primary vote in 2004. Kucinich was a joke in 2004.
I know the democratic party is a coalition and not everyone in the democratic party is a liberal. But a little more than half of democrats are liberals now, up from 25% just a few decades ago and that trend doesn’t seem to be changing. Also the age of the internet is empowering liberals who seem to be more likely to donate time or money than moderates.
Solid liberals are 16% of the country, 19% of registered voters and 25% of people who actually vote (which makes them about half of democratic voters). Because they’re involved. Because of this they probably make up over 25% of primary voters since primary turnout is lower than general election turnout.
For other groups in the democratic coalition, the % who are the share of adult population, share of registered voters and share of actual voters is about the same. For opportunity democrats for example it is 12%, 13% and 13% respectively.
I think you’re more of what people consider to be “trollish” than anyone here on Bernie’s side.
Go back to the original OP and read the article where they discuss how Hillary agreed to do this and one stipulation was Hillary would only work if the director was a female.
Hmmm… Imagine if a man said he would only work with a male director.
Bullsh*t. People just want a fair election. What are you talking about in regards to racism??