Nina Turner on BERNIE SANDERS at the Women's Convention

[Purveyor]

TheRealNews
Published on Oct 13, 2017

Nina Turner says that instead of fighting with women of color for inviting Bernie Sanders to the Women's Convention, critics should focus on Medicare for All, a living minimum wage, clean water, and justice in Puerto Rico

[JHan]

1. So all women of color agree with Nina Turner?

Don't make me laugh eh.

LOL.

[sheshe2]

4. ...

[JHan]

6. I gotta laugh though.

[sheshe2]

7. I gotta love ya though.

[Quixote1818]

69. Sanders does better among black women than any other group

Washington Post: It’s time to end the myth that black voters don’t like Bernie Sanders

By Symone D. Sanders

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/09/12/its-time-to-end-the-myth-that-black-voters-dont-like-bernie-sanders/?utm_term=.dadd1a323d8c

See also 5:06 mark of the video:

[JHan]

71. Look that harvis Harris poll has been debunked

I also looked at it and dealt with it on this forum. The raw data doesn't match what many claimed. And the poll does not say " black women agree with Nina Turner" .

So just stop.

The underlying point which you and others want to ignore is that a lot of women are fed up with the organizers of this event, we didn't like the stunt they pulled in January and we let it slide, this time we're letting our voices be heard.

[Quixote1818]

72. Sorry, no it hasn't

And there are plenty of other polls to back it up:

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/apr/27/mike-crute/despite-losing-nomination-hillary-clinton-bernie-s/

Care to show me the link to where 538 debunked that poll? Because I just spent 10 minutes looking for your claim and found zero!

https://www.google.com/search?q=harvard+harris+poll+sanders+fivethirtyeight&oq=harvard+harris+poll+sanders+five&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.35i39k1.5624.6573.0.8356.5.5.0.0.0.0.171.463.0j3.3.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..2.3.461....0.y8CPpxHtHE8

[JHan]

73. I edited my comment for that reason.

I had a vague memory of 538 discussing it ( or the harris poll in general) but couldn't find the link, hence the reason I edited my comment. And anyone could see that I edited my comment before you replied ( if they're interested in checking)

The editorial piece you link me to does not discuss or examine African american support for Bernie, it simply looks at how Bernie stands up with other politicians included in that poll. The List does not include Biden or Harris. Curiously, Elizabeth Warren rates less favorably than Mike Pence in that poll. But hey, it has Bernie as most popular in the list so that's all that matters.

My issue with the poll though, is that the raw data doesn't provide a proper breakdown: either by race or gender. Bernie's overall popularity in that poll was spun and editorialized by blogs.

That particular poll was also used to debunk this piece by Roots: http://www.theroot.com/bernie-sanders-black-women-problem-1796995081 I guess the author just hates Bernie.

Further, here's a question for you: If Sanders is so immensely popular, why is there pushback to him opening the convention?

[Ninsianna]

81. Sorry, but your little graphic doesn't make your case that anyone elected

Nina or Symone to speak for them, regardless of what that Joy Reid hating white dude is telling you or what Nomiki is whispering into Hannity's ear on Fox.

Care to show me where you can back up your assertion that Nina Turner speaks for women, black woman or anyone other than her own damn donut triggered self?

Because I read your little post, and I didn't see any indication of anything other than the assertion of some clueless men, that she "speaks for most black women".

I will await the frantic googling that should hopefully help you back up your claims that Nina is the official spokesperson for women of color, then we can all tell those silly ladies lambasting her and the Bernie Convention that they should just shut up because Nina is there to speak for them, some white dude has appointed her to be the only voice that counts.

I mean I just spent time looking for your claim and found zero!

Also, where did you get that handy graphic from, I'd love to see the raw data and find out how many black women were asked about Bernie and who you base your claim that Nina gets to speak for MOST black women.

[Quixote1818]

111. "Joy Reid hating "white" dude" ???

You mean the guy who also loves Nina Turner?

Just curious why you would use a term like that?

[Ninsianna]

132. Why use a descriptive term for the video you posted?

I'm sorry, why do you keep insisting that Nina Turner is ALL black women?

Yes, the guy who hates Joy Reid who everyone else loves, given her high ratings.

Just curious, where is your link? Why are you deflecting the question, is there some sort of problem with your source?

Might want to view your links and check your sources before pasting them, might avoid the awkwardness when choosing to doubledown on things that don't match the claims made.

Were you under the impression that the Bernie supporter in the video you posted had some sort of tan, if so you might want to invest in a better monitor or seek an ophthalmologist because something is very wrong with your eyesight.

[Quixote1818]

137. Nope, never said Nina Turner is all black women???

Please stop putting words in my mouth. For the 15th time I said most blacks like Bernie Sanders and the polling says so. Why is that so hard to believe especially for black men and women? After all he chained himself to a black woman in a civil rights protest as a college student and was arrested:

Why do you think he hates Joy Reid? He just says he likes how she takes down Republican's but feels she defends corporate Democrats too much. That is the main disagreement in the party right now. Are we not allowed to have that debate? It's a legitimate issue to have a discussion about.

I also keep giving you a link. Her they are again: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/329404-poll-bernie-sanders-countrys-most-popular-active-politician

More here:

While Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump register as the most unpopular presidential nominees ever, there remains a real fondness for the guy Clinton beat in the primary. A Fox News poll last month showed Sanders's 60 percent favorable rating was nearly twice as high as his 34 percent unfavorable rating. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll around the same time showed 51 percent liked Sanders and just 29 percent disliked him. CNN a few weeks prior pegged the split at 59/35.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/19/the-most-popular-politician-in-america-might-just-be-a-socialist/?utm_term=.5a999a6ecd92

[betsuni]

153. Oh, I see you edited out calling Hillary Clinton a Goldwater Girl in your post.

"At the same time Hillary Clinton was a Goldwater Girl. Goldwater was a candidate who was hostile to civil rights." This is Democratic Underground, a forum for those who do not hate Democrats and equate them with Republicans.

[Quixote1818]

161. I edited it out because I felt it was going to be divisive

and be counter productive to what I was trying to accomplish by pointing out Sanders simply does have a good record on Civil Rights. However, it is a fact and she admits it. I took it out because it was years ago and irrelevant to what I think she stands for today.

[betsuni]

163. I've never seen any other politician held responsible for what they did at sixteen years old.

Sure, you edited it out because you felt it was going to be divisive, that's the reason.

[Quixote1818]

209. So you don't think it would have been divisive then?

[Ninsianna]

173. Do these guys have a list of things they paste from?

Handy little memes, the same arguments that make no logical sense, the same links they've never read pasted indiscriminately?

[emulatorloo]

155. Clinton's favorables were in the high 60's when she left the Dept of State

That's higher than Bernie's if that poll is accurate. Popularity ratings are fragile and can be destroyed easily once the mighty Republican Wurlitzer warms up.

I think it is a mistake to hang all your hopes on popularity and live and die on it. Could vanish in an instant.

Goldwater girl is bullshit btw. She knocked doors for Gene McCarthy as a teen.

[Ninsianna]

171. Did I say 'all'? Nope, you said most black women based on things you can't back up.

Your links don't show data that support your point. Why can't you find something other than these 3 things to paste repeatedly. It's odd how these talking points keep appearing, but which don't amount to anything in context of the discussion.

Please stop putting words into my mouth, and please stop insisting that Nina gets to speak for anyone other than herself. Still waiting to see where anyone elected her to speak for black women, even "most" of them as you claim, I never said all, you were careful to couch your absurd statement as "most" which I called you out on, I guess that's why the need for this lame strawman, and pasting more of the same which does not back up your false claims and which don't address my points.

Yea you keep saying 15 times over that "Most blacks like Bernie" without backing that up with any actual data, why is that?

Black people are not stupid and they're telling you that they don't know him, haven't seen him and no matter how many times you post that one picture, they aren't buying it.

The fact that there is only one picture should tell you something, it sure told black people something, as did all the other attacks.

I really don't know why it's so hard to believe men and women of color who keep telling you that the token few who are referenced are not speaking for any of us, and that we're tried of being told to shut up while these people whom we don't like, don't trust represent us. Nina is a embarssment, these racist attacks on Joy Reid, and other women (especially those of color are emblematic of why your claims are not based in fact.


I don't know why you feel the need to tell me, a woman of color, that Nina's speaks for me. You keep doing that and denying that's what you're saying as you 16x down on your central claim.

I don't care what pictures Bernie took long before I was born, I do care what he's saying and doing now, and no matter how Nina slavers all over her boss, it doesn't make me, or anyone else who is paying attention to his words and actions any more willing to drink the Berniade.

Why do I think the pale white dude who attacks Joy Reid hates her? Hmmm, that's super hard to figure out. And the racist attacks across the Berniverse really are confusing!

You keep giving me a link that doesn't answer what I asked or support your point, do you think that just posting links makes your point? That's now how this works.

Either back up your point and stop spamming with the same nonsense, the same gaslighting the same strawman arguments that double down on the point I made and fails to refute it, or don't.

Either you can back it up or you cannot, it seems that you cannot but are having trouble admitting it. This is typical of how men who lose arguments to women they've tried to silence but failed, react.

[George II]

182. Why did you post a video calling Joy Reid a "sellout"?

[BainsBane]

192. to suggest her views don't mater

along with the rest of the 85% of African American women. http://www.higherheightsforamerica.org/black_women_voters_by_the_numbers
Because anti-progressive is defined exclusively by support for Bernie, whereas "progressives" like Gabi Tulsard with records of homophobia, Islamophobia, and demands to bomb Syrian rebels are perfectly acceptable--even superior--because they supported Bernie. Remember it's not about issues. It's about promoting Bernie, and the opinion of anyone who fails to do so is meaningless. (Note that the calls for understanding of white male Trump voters never extends to Democrats).

We aren't exactly dealing with anything complicated. Polls with minuscule voting samples matter more than election results and what AA women themselves have to say. Because what women, including women of color, feel about their own rights and who should represent those rights at a convention is utterly inconsequential--even wrong. All that matters is Bernie. And if the organizers collected money under false pretenses, all the better. That the women asking for a refund fail to support Bernie means they deserved to be conned out of money. Their audacity in even asking for a refund is racist and misogynist, we are told.

That so many men feel entitled to tell women what they are allowed to think, which rights matter and that they have no right to their own views proves the very point the critics of the invitation have made.

[George II]

194. Joy Reid is probably one of the most respected and revered AA woman progressive "pundit"....

....around today.

To post a video saying she is a "sellout" is offensive to me, and I'm not even AA or a woman.

[Quixote1818]

211. Nope, because the video shows most black women have a high favor-ability of Sanders.

Sorry, it's just a fact. Sure they like Clinton a lot more but the attacks in this thread on Sanders are misleading. Generally black folks are going to have a positive feelings for someone who marched and got arrested in the civil rights movement.

[BainsBane]

216. it is not a fact. It's false

As I already enumerated in a previous post. You know the poll was a commercial rather than scientific one.You know the sample size on race was statistically invalid, but you don't care. Because propaganda that validates the priority of a few true "progressvies," defined as a priority on Bernie's career, and invalidates the views, and with them the lives, of the majority is all that matters.
That you feel entitled to determine who is allowed to speak for us to decide what rights we are allowed to have PROVES the very claims the critics of the invitation have made. Women should be able to speak to their own rights, particularly at an event billed as a women's convention.

Black women went 85% for Clinton in the primary and 97% in the general election. I already provided links that demonstrate as much, which you have ignored, and now claim that your TV clip and statistically invalid poll constitute "facts," thereby discrediting the votes and views of the overwhelming majority of women. Only Bernie is fit to determine which rights we are allowed to have. We must accept his determination that our reproductive rights are too "divisive" to be a priority for the Democratic Party--OUR party. That lack of access to abortion greatly increases poverty for women and children--who constitute 75% of the population--and the highest pregnancy mortality rates in the developed world, as in Texas, spokesman for our rights are of no consequencce. A propaganda poll proves that the views of women who dare to object to Bernie as the spokesman for our rights just don't matter. (Even though all the poll measured was general favorability ratings and not that he should be the ONE person whose voice on women's rights should be heeded. Even though the poll over-represented independents under thirty and contained a very small, and thereby statistically invalid, sample size for race by gender.)

Bernie's supporters and the "women's" conference organizers could create a conference around Bernie 2020 and raise money for it based on that goal rather than taking it under false circumstances and now refusing to refund it. But then that wouldn't enforce the politics of domination, in which women are forced to sublimate their voices and rights to Bernie and his political ambitions.

The message is that the rights, lives, and economic survival of women like me are simply not important enough for our opinions to count. That says a great deal about what the results of Bernie's elevation to power would mean. Even with limited power, he is used to invalidate our concerns and interests. And that you as a man insists that I must accept a man's--who has never prioritized or shown an interest in women's rights (though to his credit has a strong voting record)--determination about what should matter to me proves that placing Bernie as the headline speaker at the conference sends a message that validates patriarchy and enforces a social hierarchy with Bernie supporters at the top. Even with limited power, Bernie is being used to enforce the silence and submission of women and as a pretext for invalidating our voices. I shudder to imagine what would happen if that power was centered in the White House.

The 2020 primary, should Bernie seek the Dem nomination (though I suspect he will not) or GE (more likely) will show what his popularity truly is among women and women of color, just as 2016 did. Those results will be, and were, more demonstrative than your favorite commercial poll.

And of course that clip is intended to invalidate Joy Reid's views by determining her "anti-progressive" and thereby inferior, just as you use a deliberately misleading and statistically invalid commercial poll to invalidate the voices of the thousands of women (far more than in the poll purchased by the Hill) objecting to his placement at the top of the women's conference. As long as submission to Bernie is enforced, that is all that matters. It's about power and subjugation, and women like me are on the losing end of it.

[Ninsianna]

220. Except for the fact that it doesn't say that at all, nor does any poll show that.

What reality shows is the fact that they soundly rejected Sanders when given the option to. When he came around again this past week, the deafening roar that you heard and tried to drown out by claiming that only Nina, an anointed black woman, had the power to speak for women of black women.

Nope.

So you're going to generalize now? If we're going to do that, then we should also accept that black folks are generally going to have negative feelings about a guy who sits there silently as his people attack civil rights legends, attack voters in the south as not knowing much, and repeating right wing talking points about plantations and how they celebrate a "confederate" culture. It's because black folks are not stupid that they find Nina Turner and her antics to be embarrassing, and why they're not pleased when Bernie inserts himself into places where he doesn't belong (like headlining a women's convention) and then hiding behind 3 women of color when the natural and voluble backlash comes.

Black people are not stupid, black women do not need Nina Turner to speak for them, and the votes and the quotes should tell you that you don't get to erase black people or silence their voices when its convenient for you.


That's a hard no on that, and it's why you can't back up your fond beliefs with anything like data, the facts and the numbers just tell you otherwise.

[Quixote1818]

210. Because it was the first place I had seen the stats on Sanders polling with black folks. nt

[George II]

202. Sorry, you should re-read the heading of the video. According to that...

...the POLICE chained the demonstrators together prior to arresting them, he didn't chain himself to the woman.

[BainsBane]

196. The polls asked about 9 and 12 public figures

Not all of whom were even politicians or currently holding office. There are more than a half dozen politicians in America. They are even more than 12. To claim that constitutes the "most popular politician in America is deliberately misleading. The sample size skewed heavily toward independents and people under 30, far more so that their rates of voting participation. The sample sizes for race and gender by race were small, so small as to be statistically invalid. It was also a poll commissioned by the Hill, not a standard or comprehensive survey. It was intended to generate a headline.

Did you ever look at the poll? I did. The second one didn't even include any information on the racial composition of those surveyed. I wonder if that was because the first one was so statistically invalid.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

78. Not surprising... Bernie is popular with ALL groups, across the board... and for good reason!

[Ninsianna]

167. Except all the groups across the board who are not allowed to speak, right?

I guess silencing us is for good reason, we raise these inconvenient questions, like how do you plan on doing that, and why'd you make that vote, why'd you say tha? Can you explain the details of your plan?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

187. I silenced people? I made a vote? I have a plan? Havent the slightest idea what you're talkin about.

I merely said Bernie enjoys popularity across a wide spectrum of different groups... you really don't need to read much else into that... so why would you do that?

Do YOU have a plan? Are you trying to silence people like me?

[George II]

184. "Popular with ALL groups"? On what is this based?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

188. How do you think he got to be the most popular politician in America right now?

Doesn't mean there aren't people in those groups who don't share the same opinion.

[George II]

189. He's not the most popular politician in America. If you're referring to the Harvard-Harris poll....

....that only included about a dozen politicians from which respondents could choose. If that's the basis of that "popularity", he's the most popular politician of those dozen or so politicians, certainly not necessarily ALL politicians.

To put it simpler, I'm a politician and I'm popular with my wife. So I guess I'm the most popular politician in America?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

190. "The [poll] ONLY included about a DOZEN politicians"... oookayyy.

So, which notable(s), if included on that list would knock Bernie off his lofty perch? (TODAY, not some hypothetical day in the future.)

In any case, indeed, Bernie's the ONLY politician polled who enjoys a rating that is above water. That makes him the most popular politician in America today. Why can't you just give Bernie his due? Is it really that hard?

That doesn't necessarily mean his #1 popularity status will last well into the future, or that you're endorsing him by merely recognizing his popularity... just recognize that there's a significant group of people who do view him positively... that's all.

[George II]

191. Well, I can only assume the poll to which you're referring, you weren't specific, but most likely..

....is the Harvard-Harris poll which has been used a dozen or more times on DU recently to advance the same premise. If so, the "about a dozen" was actually 16, listed below:

Sanders (D)
Pence
Trump
H. Clinton (D)
Warren (D)
Ryan
Gorsuch
Pelosi (D)
Schumer (D)
Tillerson
Conway
Kushner
McConnell
Macmaster
Comey
Bannon

Those highlighted aren't even "politicians". A Supreme Court justice is a "politician"?

Those that, as you put it, could "knock Bernie off his lofty perch" might be Barack Obama, Andrew Cuomo, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gilibrand, Jerry Brown, and others. None of them were included in the poll. In fact, there wasn't even an "other" option or an opportunity to write in someone else.

So yes, he's the "most popular", but only among those 13 politicians and 3 non-politicians.

Here was the footnote that I put in my previous explanation of yesterday, it really came in handy and saved me a lot of time tonight.

I'm going to bookmark this, it seems as though I have to explain this "poll" two or three times a day.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

195. Other than Obama, who's obviously not eligible to run for Prez again in 2020...

none of those politicians - again, TODAY - would register a "blip" in that poll. Kamala gets an honorable mention from me, as I like her very much, but, I doubt, these days, many have heard much about her... hope that will change in the months ahead.

[George II]

199. The premise behind the poll wasn't prospective presidential candidates. It was simply...

..."politician". Gorsuch, Pelosi, Tillerson, Conway, Kushner, McConnell, Macmaster, Comey, and Bannon can't be considered presidential candidates, don't you think?

There are 100 Senators, 435 Representatives, and 50 Governors in America, 585 politicians in all. That poll whittled that entire list of 585 down to a mere 16, including some who are obviously not politicians.

It's a non-representative poll, and I'm surprised that politics-savvy people keep referring to is as a definitive poll.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

200. You make some good points and I, for one, certainly don't consider the poll "definitive"

... but I'd bet you a beer Bernie would top a poll of perspective candidates today that IS definitive. I could be wrong, but, that's just my sense.

[George II]

201. Thanks. I doubt we'll see a poll of prospective candidates, an all-inclusive one, at least....

...until 2019. But if you're ever in Connecticut I'll buy you a beer anyway.

I like to think that we're the bluest state of all - our Governor, all state-wide officers, both Senators, and all five Representatives are Democrats.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

203. I certainly HOPE not until 2019... we need to focus on the 2018 congressional races, in a BIG way!!

Here's a virtual toast to that... something I think everyone here can agree with... cheers <clink>

[George II]

96. You do realize that the Harvard-Harris poll gave respondents only a limited list of "policitians"...

...don't you? It certainly wasn't an all inclusive list of ALL active politicians (and they don't define what an "active politician" means to them), and it only included five Democrats. Are there only five active Democrats in this country of more than 320 million people?

Here is the list of choices in the poll referenced in your link (which is six months old, by the way):

Sanders (D)
Pence
Trump
H. Clinton (D)
Warren (D)
Ryan
Gorsuch
Pelosi (D)
Schumer (D)
Tillerson
Conway
Kushner
McConnell
Macmaster
Comey
Bannon

Those highlighted aren't even "politicians". A Supreme Court justice is a "politician"????? Where are Barack Obama, Andrew Cuomo, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gilibrand, Jerry Brown, etc.? Why weren't they included in the poll? In fact, there wasn't even an "other" option or an opportunity to write in someone else.

So yes, he's the "most popular", but only among those 13 politicians and 3 non-politicians.

I'm going to bookmark this, it seems as though I have to explain this "poll" two or three times a day.

[lapucelle]

98. Joy Reid is a sellout?

Not only is the Canadian guy who originally posted the linked video (he calls himself "the RatNat" ) angry at Joy Reid, he's also angry at Youtube for "demonitizing" the weekly tripe he shills on his channel. (I won't link to him, but his diatribe is a hoot.)

According to the RatNat, Joy Reid is a "sellout" who is "losing her mind". What a remarkable thing for a "progressive ally of feminists" to say.

[Ninsianna]

169. Did you see his FB page? Lots of money to be made promoting division.

Just look at Nomiki, Mallory, Sansour etc. who are raking in the appearance fees and speaking gigs.

[sheshe2]

181. Say it ain't so.

Hillary was pillared for taking speaking fees and yet they are applauded. Pot kettle.

[lapucelle]

185. Yes, but The RatNat's activism has been de-monitized by Youtube!

He's working very hard to monetize his message, and Youtube won't cooperate.

[Ninsianna]

221. Poor dear. Even if theyd didn't, isn't the Bernie market rather saturated?

What with the constant inane CNN "specials", the appearances on the MSM, right wing backed TYT, Russia Today and the cheerleading from their agents (the timelines are something else), seems like the youtube shouters are a dime a dozen, whose got time for all the pale shouty self important white men on youtube trying to make name for themselves attacking women and POC who dare to not worship at the altar of purity?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

197. Joy is a joy to watch!!

[brush]

104. We like him well enough (except the Dem bashing), most of us went for Hillary though.

[George II]

164. Black women aren't even shown on that graph, so how do you come to the conclusion that...

..."Sanders does better among black women than any other group"?

It shows women. It shows African Americans. It does not show black women.

And how many times are you going to post that video bashing one of the most respected progressive women on television today?

[BainsBane]

186. That was based on a very small sample

and is not an accurate reading. But then those who flaunt that poll don't care if it's accurate.

If you look at voting results, you'll see that is far from the case. Also, talking to some black women helps.

[whathehell]

90. Did someone say that?

Um, no..So what was that about laughing?

[JHan]

92. the exchange speaks for itself..

Last edited Sun Oct 15, 2017, 04:01 PM - Edit history (1)

what's being implied here speaks for itself. it's not only me saying it.EDIT: you should give Ninisianna's posts and other posts in this thread a read.

And it's right there a few posts above you, I was told that Nina Turner somehow speaks for black women. A poll which doesn't say what the poster claims it does was used to refute my point that Nina does not speak for all black women.

If you fail to grasp that, that's not my problem.

[whathehell]

129. To you perhaps..

not necessarily to me or anyone else. No one said Nina spoke for all black women -- just more, it seems, than you would like.

You see, if you fail to grasp the difference between objectivity and subjective and undocumented impressions, e.g. "some woman told me", that would be your problem, not mine.

[JHan]

130. No , not "to me perhaps"

several other posters have explained this....it's obvious where Quixote was coming from and the purpose of his links, and the purpose and intent of the OP.

[whathehell]

133. "Several other poster have explained this"

not to everyone's satisfaction, it seems as "several other posters" have disagreed.

[JHan]

134. yes, if only I had the time or inclination I would use flow charts.

[whathehell]

138. but of course..

[elleng]

2. Maxine Waters is the headlining speaker.

HRC and Eliz Warren were invited.

People should really get a grip.

Thanks for posting, Purveyor.

[Ninsianna]

9. But Tamika said that Bernie was the headliner, and that Maxine was giving the keynotee.

It seems that she's not telling the truth, and can we have some proof that the people she says they invited were actually invited, like before yesterday afternoon?

People should really get a grip, and figure out that when they pull stunts like this the women they claim to be organizing for, don't like it. We told them so in no uncertain terms in January. It seems they're choosing to be deaf on purpose.

Turner, Konst, Wong, Sansour and Mallory know better, but they chose to be as dishonest as possible, and think women are just going to lay back and take it. They should have figured out after their antics this week that we will not, even if they were too dumb to have learned anything when they did this crap before.

[George II]

97. Mallory did a quick about face when she saw all the pushback from Democrats.

[Ninsianna]

99. Yes. Um, do they not realize that their public tweets, likes and retweets

are visible? She's apparently not on board with that lame apology and isn't shy about exposing that.

I don't know what qualified these women to take over this march, but they're really not very good at doing their jobs.

Even with the DC march in January, it seemed that the local groups that formed in the immediate aftermath did more to get themselves organized and out in the streets than the people who are out front taking credit and building their own careers. I mean it's nice, good for you and all, but you just kinda demonstrated that you know diddly squat about how to organize events that are supposed to be inclusive of all women and not something blatantly and offensively partisan, while poking a sharp stick into a wound that people are keeping open and festering still.

They failed at deflecting with the Esquire interview, got found out and then set up other interviews to sympathetic reporters who apparently forgot how to do journalism and just transcribed their personal views, which took potshots at women who were rightly outraged.

This is truly a stupid way to handle anything, and if this how they're going to disrupt and irritate people, 2018 is going to be great for the GOP, and it increasingly seems like that's the goal.

[Hortensis]

159. A simple reality is that half of all women are conservative and that perhaps

10-15% of the rest lean radical left. Of course, many prone to passionate extremism from both sides are going to be drawn to movements like this.

And, scarily, both the hugely funded right and hostile left are increasingly finding it beneficial to act together against the Democratic Party. And in the process corrupting the the noble cause of advancing women's rights into a poorly disguised partisan weapon.

I only hope this become obvious soon enough to alert those who don't yet realize what's happening. If enough do, this movement will right itself with the naturally gifted degree of good sense and balance characteristic of most women.

[Ninsianna]

168. You'd think that the fact that they're doing this perched on their stools on Fox would clue them in

but you can't stop willful ignorance with any amount of facts.

I think it's important to note that this movement is not controlled by the Women's March organizers.

It's a loose network of the PSN people who connected on FB and who met in person and who are working together locally and with their indivisible groups etc. Many of us are in multiple groups and cross link as much as possible.

While I marched, I literally have nothing to do with the Sansour and Mallory et al. I had to look up who the other two were.

I get their emails, but they literally have no power.

[Hortensis]

179. Lol. So true. The eyebrow-raiser of claiming to want "unity" but insisting on division.

Aggressive division.

I marched once, in St. Pete, Florida, and I and the people I chatted with certainly had nothing to do with these people of very dubious purpose, but here they are poisoning wherever they can intersect with a truly important national movement.

[Ninsianna]

222. I ran into a few people who were repeating the crap I see proliferating online.

Not so much after being asked where they heard that or if they thought the sources were valid.

It's hard for a handful of people spreading all the agitprop online to actually do anything IRL.

As much as the credit for the march was being given to a handful of women, I couldn't help noticing that the women who actually got themselves there, made the arrangements, got together, made the signs, knitted the hats, and who were pretty loud about their displeasure that the slogan they used was not attributed and that someone had been left off maliciously from the list of honored women, did not need to rely on anyone to get shit done. That's why so many marches all over the world caused such a sensation. These were women making their voices heard, only to be co-opted by this group that seems to have trouble understanding what they women they're trying to lead are actually doing and saying.

[lapucelle]

31. Is it verified that EW and HRC were invited?

I wonder if they asked Michelle Obama. Odd how so many important women leaders are too busy washing their hair that night to attend.

[Hortensis]

215. Michelle Obama: "When they go low..."

Following them down is not the proper response. And googling Michelle and this event brings up absolutely nothing, so there's our answer.

Of course our top women leaders are not honoring this thing with their presence. Its focus isn't organizing women of America but organizing some women against the Democratic Party.

Btw, Michelle did just speak at the Pennsylvania Conference for Women -- organized by an entirely different group of women for honorable purposes.

[sheshe2]

47. Maxine sounds more like an after thought here,

When Women's March Co-founder Tamika Mallory was asked: "People are going to say, wait a minute, there’s a man as the headliner at the Women’s Convention, the first women’s convention in 40 years?" she replied:

"I would say that (U.S. Rep.) Maxine Waters is also coming to the conference, and we know she has been a very, very powerful voice in terms of all we’ve seen happening in terms of this administration, particularly, and she’ll be at the conference as well. And a lot of other people have been invited to the conference and we’re hoping to hear back from these folks. Thankfully, Sen. Sanders has agreed to attend."

http://www.freep.com/story/news/2017/10/12/bernie-sanders-speech-womens-convention/756532001/

Nowhere in the article does it say she is headlining speaker. This is from the Detroit Free Press and

Editor's Note: This article has been updated to clarify Tamika Mallory's statements regarding Bernie Sanders.

[lapucelle]

95. They couldn't very well appropriate Maxine's words as their theme

Last edited Sun Oct 15, 2017, 05:16 PM - Edit history (1)

without inviting her to speak, could they? That would be self-serving, publicity-seeking, unmitigated hypocrisy.

[sheshe2]

136. The link I posted..

First article posted at 6AM...updated at approximately 6PM. Twelve hours and it had to be updated to qualify what Mallory said. Interesting.

[lapucelle]

149. I was being ironic, sheshe.

The "Unity Principle" of the Woman's March was "Women’s Rights are Human Rights and Human Rights are Women’s Rights", but due to the bitterly truculent insistence of one of the 49 organizers, any mention from the podium of the name of the woman who defiantly spoke those words was blacklisted.

What kind of person appropriates someone's words and then ignores her contributions?

[sheshe2]

154. Oh.

I clearly understood your post.

[lapucelle]

158. I Know. Let's just say that I wanted everyone

to think about the subtext of my message and the organizer's message as well.

[emulatorloo]

56. I suggest you read this post to get the full timeline of the contradictory statements

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017461610#post12

[emulatorloo]

80. Revisionist history based on constantly shifting/contradictory statements by organizers

Do you endorse Nina's insinuation that women who think having a man open a women's conference is a dumb idea are >racists attacking women of color?< It's a pretty dishonest rhetorical move.

I'm serious I have a lot of respect for you and your legal mind. You ok with that?

[elleng]

86. I am not OK with ANY of this divisiveness,

and will say nothing more on the subject.

[emulatorloo]

88. Fair enough

At this point I'm excited to hear Bernie give a comprehensive speech on women's rights. This is an excellent chance/challenge for him to fully articulate his positions and dispel some confusion.

However I don't like dishonest attempts to smear women as "racists" who find it weird for a man to open a women's conference. I'm seeing DU'ers picking up this despicable and dishonest talking point. I think that kind of intellectual dishonesty has no place at DU.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

198. Me neither... it's time for unity, as 2018 and 2020 will be upon us before you know it!

[lapucelle]

117. Elsewhere on this thread

someone posted a video captioned that "Joy Reid is a sellout who is losing her mind" due to her objections to those who were invited to speak versus those who were invited to attend.

[emulatorloo]

119. Yeah I just saw that.

Ugh.

A great reply from Ninsianna to that disgusting piece of propaganda.

[sheshe2]

183. That conference is now hurting for money.

The committee made a huge error with the last minute bait and switch. They waited until after the refund cut off date to announce their first speaker. They have only raised 500K for the 2Mil they need. They have nine days left to raise the money. Last 24 hours funds have died. Check out their twitter feed after the lame apology and continued attacks.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/WomensConvention?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fpoliticaloasis.freeforums.net%2Fthread%2F12039%2Fwomens-march-tweeted-apology%3Fpage%3D2

It was supposed to be a Women's Conference and they made it a campaign event. Once again, women lose and that breaks my heart. This was suppose to be about us.

[BainsBane]

3. It's not anti-man

I expect it has something to do with reproductive rights as a baseline for equal rights for women.
I'm glad Maxine Waters is the headline speaker. She's awesome. If this is true, there has been some misreporting on the issue.

Now, Nina Turner can go back to focusing on what really matters to her, like giving speeches proclaiming Democrats worse than the GOP on Wall Street immediately after the GOP passed a banking deregulation bill. It's important to keep anger focused on the Democrats so that the GOP can forge ahead with their giveaways to bankers and the super rich.

But then I'm just a Bolshevik, right Purveyor?

[JHan]

5. and the organizers themselves are responsible for the "misreporting.."

but it's women who raise objections that are the problem.

[LisaM]

14. They did EXACTLY what they did at the march.

They withheld their anti-Hillary crap till the last minute. We are being rick-rolled...

[Ninsianna]

12. She's the keynote. Bernie has the primetime slot, and is the actual headliner

which is why people are so upset.

After saying some truly stupid things, like how the opening act is not Bernie at all, but Indigenous dancers, and how Maxine was announced but no one reacted (no gushing interviews pushing Maxine's participation.)

AFTER being called out, they then started whining about how questioning WOC was pure evil, apparently choosing to ignore that women lambasting them were also of color and also not buying their BS.

Emily's List had to put their foot down for Gretchen Whitmer to be included, they had only included Abdul al Sayyed of the gubernatorial candidates from Michigan, handily leaving out the woman with the most experience (with the usual and expected attacks about who she resembled), and the other frontrunner in a field of 6, Srhi Thanedar, who's little known, but a far more familiar name than the person they chose.

They're literally lying to cover their rears and accusing women of racism, as if they speak for all women or any women of color other than themselves. Their responses and their attitude speaks to this being a con job, not even remotely professional and really whiny.

The comments on the facebook page speaks volumes, especially the ones posting on behalf of the group. I guess the People's Summit was a bust so they thought they could con the women, forgetting that we're not dumb, and that Women of Color have just about had it with being silenced, lectured, lied to and gaslighted. Especially after this week. You'd think after January, they'd have learned they can't pull this crap, but that didn't seem to stop them or their bad behavior when caught.

Note that they unveiled their "headliner" in gushing articles with local media AFTER the refund date. Women are not happy. And we will not be silent or silenced.

[deurbano]

20. The "identity politics" card is played when convenient and disparaged when not.

My daughter was really looking forward to going to this, but we had both forgotten how they tried to keep Clinton from being honored or mentioned at the march.

[Ninsianna]

67. is she still going? Auntie Maxine will still be there

as well as Gretchen Whitmer and a bunch of others. Emily's List will be there, if she can just navigate around the people who've been toxic all week and are creating more drama as we speak, it should be interesting and educational.

[BainsBane]

40. I see

That's very informative. Thank you. I haven't followed it myself. I appreciate your filling me in.

[emulatorloo]

55. Thanks for the summary

[sheshe2]

48. My post above has a link to an article with quotes from Mallory.

Detroit Free Press

http://www.freep.com/story/news/2017/10/12/bernie-sanders-speech-womens-convention/756532001/

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

79. Maxine will rock the town!!

[Ninsianna]

8. Women (of color and otherwise) don't really care what Nina Turner

has to say, and these tone deaf, dishonest women don't represent all of us, and when they fuck up, we're going to raise our voices and speak out.

Nina and her little friends can focus on which of the Republicans she's going to decide to let "seduce her with handout trinkets" since she apparently does not give a flying fig about women, our voices and our damned concerns.

None of these people that she's willing to support (some of whom think women's basic human rights are negotiable) give a crap about a living wage, clean water or anything about Puerto Rico.

Someone tell her that neither she nor the fraudulent liars who made a damned stupid mistake and then decided to attack women of color for not shutting up, lying back and taking whatever it is they decided to do at this convention they're charging money for, including announcing a candidate we soundly rejected numerous times over this year AFTER the refund period, and then lying their rears off about it.

Perhaps Nina can stop lecturing us all and figure out how to get some "handout trinkets" to the starving and thirsty people of Puerto Rico, unless that's too much of an insult from her delicate, pointless self.

What has the great leader done to focus on any of those issues she reels off? Or is she too busy staging stunts and yelling at WOC who dare to question these inept, dishonest fraudsters, to bother focusing on doing anything of value or that requires actual work?

[JHan]

10. Endorsed +++++++++

[sheshe2]

13. Woah.

+ Infinity.

[BlueMTexpat]

16. + a million or so! eom

[pandr32]

32. Yep!

[mcar]

33. +1000!

[NurseJackie]

36. Thank you! She's a disaster (and a perfect fit for that org she now heads.)

[lunamagica]

44. + a million!

[brer cat]

64. +++

Nina is handy for throwing out the sound bites, but she isn't going to accomplish anything. It's a waste of time to listen to her scold.

[Quixote1818]

70. Actually they do since Sanders does best with women of color than any other group

Last edited Sun Oct 15, 2017, 11:45 AM - Edit history (1)

Washington Post: It’s time to end the myth that black voters don’t like Bernie Sanders

By Symone D. Sanders

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/09/12/its-time-to-end-the-myth-that-black-voters-dont-like-bernie-sanders/?utm_term=.dadd1a323d8c



So Nina Turner pretty much does speak for most black women at least as far as her support for Bernie Sanders. 5:06 mark of the video:

[Ninsianna]

74. Actually, we don't. This is why it's a mistake to mansplain to us what we women

Last edited Sun Oct 15, 2017, 04:25 PM - Edit history (1)

of color actually think.

So when we tell you that no, Nina Turner doesn't speak for us, and you decide to respond that, well, actually this black woman who leads no one, speaks for no one, and takes positions that most of us find ridiculous, stupid and really embarrassing, that's problematic.

This sort of bro-splaining where white men and white women tell women, including women of color that their tokens, like the two black women who agree with them, the one Asian woman who agrees with them (who's best buddies with a white nationalist who also agrees with them), speak for you, it's a fail on all fronts.

These people speak for themselves, so when thyey attack Joy Reid, Neera Tanden, Kamala Harris, Maxine Waters, Nancy Pelosi, Diane Feinstein and all the other women in the public eye they're doing so to advance their own agenda.

When we women tell you the opposite, when our votes tell you the opposite, when we speak out against the vicious attacks like the one you posted, which employ racist and misogynistic tropes by calling black women "sellouts" and impugning their mental health, in the way that white men have been doing to undermine and silence women's voices, you can see why it's problematic.

So, no Nina doesn't speak for black women, Joy doesn't claim to, nor does anyone claim that she is, and it's telling that some feel the need to insist that women themselves, their votes (which were not cast in a way that supports your assertion, and which caused a lot of upset and racial animus when they were not favoring Bernie), must be ignored because two employees of Bernie, say things.

Black women actually expressed their opinion of Bernie, and they've expressed their opinion of Nina and of Joy. Guess who they like and who they think is an embarassment every time she opens her mouth or tweets something.

Other women of color, and oh yeah, we exist to and no Nina freaking Turner doesn't speak for us, and we're busy rolling our eyes at her antics, since she's so ridiculous and transparent. We don't need white males, not Chapo frathouse, not this dude who thinks he's an "independent journalist" but isn't so much because his patent bias is what colors his attacks on women who dare disagree with him, telling us to sit down and shut up because Nina has been elected to speak for us and who the hell cares what we're saying.

This post is so offensive, but it's par for the course about this particular group of "progressives" who think, act and treat us exactly the same way the Right does, with the same terminology, the same attacks and the same derision.

So, no actually Nina doesn't speak for us, that debunked study that doesn't even say what many desperate people insist it says, nor does Symone, or any of the other tokens, not this white dude, not the Chapped Frat boys insisting on "forcing us to submit" and "bend the knee" to their Weinsteinesque entitlement.

This is why we overwhelmingly rejected Bernie every time he's been foisted upon us, it's why we mock fox favorites like Nomiki, the hapless right wing funded tools like Halper, the frothingly misogynistic Dore, Cenk with his own history of attacking women. It's why we're so upset over this fraudulent stunt by more 4 women who've been told numerous times their message is offensive, and is not representative of the women they claim to speak for.



So nope, Nina doesn't "pretty much speak" for anyone other than herself, and if you can't see why claiming otherwise, and pasting a link of a clueless white bro who attacks women is offensive, then you're deluding yourself about what women really think of Bernie and the pretend left that's monetizing attacking us, silencing us, and abusing us at every opportunity. These are Fox/Republican/Right Wing behaviors, and they're being foisted upon us by people who earn their money by attacking Democrats, women and particularly women of color at every chance they get.

Nina doesn't speak for us, Bernie doesn't either and his failure, and that of his supporters to grasp that when we've been EXTREMELY vocal about it in every poll that actually asks us what we're thinking, we're telling you with our dollars, our voices, in every way possible that NO, we do not want this man to be shove at us, please stop, our objections are ignored and we're told to lie back and take it because some woman enamored of him told you it's okay for him to do whatever he wants.

NO.

NO.

NO.

In case that was too subtle, NO FUCKING WAY that Nina speaks for us, and she doesn't get to consent for us, when we're telling you that we're not interested.

That's not how this works, and the failure to grasp that is why Bernie will never win and his brigade of supporters will continue to alienate women, liberals, progressives and Democrats. This is what we do when we have the power to get away from abusive men who won't accept rejection and the women who enable this predation. If that sounds harsh, it's because it is, this is what this feels like to women who are constantly being silenced and told to sit down and shut up while people like your video guy and others tell us what's best for us and use people like their tokens to hide behind.

Nina speaks for herself, as does Symone and the rest of the merry band of Bernie cheerleaders, no one else, not "most of us".

This is deeply misogynistic and racist, and it's also wrong headed.

[JHan]

75. well said

[sheshe2]

77. ++++

[JHan]

91. it was perfect. Truly perfect. No more needs be said.

The next time I am told Nina speaks for me I will just whip out Ninisianna's post.

[sheshe2]

121. That was a 'Drop the Mic' moment!

[NurseJackie]

100. You know what??

I totally adore you!

Thank you for that wonderful post.

This is deeply misogynistic and racist, and it's also wrong headed.

? ? ? And thanks for not being afraid to tell it like it is. ? ? ?

[Ninsianna]

126. On a Democratic board, someone with a huge post count literally just said

that one token person they agree with speaks for everyone and that the rest of us should be quiet? In 2017?

WTAF?

I cannot believe the condescending racist misogyny that has been festering here. And then the doubling down. I know we have cavedwellers and other trolls posting here who brag about their well aged accounts, but the blatant manner in which this is displayed is shocking.

I'm not black, but I am brown and I've fortunately either avoided or was simply unaware of this sort of racism in my personal experience, but the past two years I've dealt with so much from people who keep pretending to be liberal/progressive and so pure!

Utterly insane, this Bernie Convention sure is putting out all the racism and misogyny on display, so I guess it's a good thing these people fucked up so badly, they are showing us who they are and we're taking note. They apparently forget that we're not like them and we remember these things. Even if they're hiding behind women of color to attack and silence women of all colors, we see them.

And thank you Jackie.

[ehrnst]

102. Standing ovation.

[Quixote1818]

113. Way to completely twist what I said

Here is exactly what I said:

So Nina Turner pretty much does speak for most black women at least as far as her support for Bernie Sanders.

The statement is ONLY that in general a high number of black's like Bernie Sanders. That is the ONLY thing my statement points out period! So unless you can prove the majority of blacks don't like Sanders I am not sure what on earth you are arguing with?

I will wait for your polling link with bated breath.

[Ninsianna]

123. Way to deny what you actually wrote.

The statement you helpfully presented again, once again asserts that Her Royal Highness, Nina Turner gets to speak for black women. Because she was annointed and thus is empowered to speak for all women due to her support of Bernie?

In general ascribing things to blacks and then appointing an annointed spokesperson for them, or any other group is something that the right wing, the nazis et al. do.

I pointed out that you were incorrect, and that it's a deeply offensive, racist misogynistic thing to claim that one person, a person who is not well thought of by the people who you claim she represents gets to speak for everyone or anyone for that matter.

A "high number of blacks" don't like Bernie Sanders, that's what the actual whining and complaining has been for quite some time, in fact, he's the primary reason many cite for lower approval numbers of the Democratic Party. Your statement is not only offensive and ignorant it doesn't fit the facts not even your little graphic backs that up.

Might I suggest reading my actual words to understand what on earth I was arguing with, unless of course my words only materialize if they're funnelled to her royal highness, Nina Turner who is the only one who may speak for me, since I have pigment in my skin, even if I'm not one of the "blacks" you claim she is the voice for?


Unless you can prove that Nina actually speaks for anyone, I'm afraid your offensive post silencing women, black people and pretty much EVERYONE who has been shouting themselves hoarse for the past two years about their feelings for this man you keep trying to force us to worship, I'd suggest either strategic retreat or apology.

Produce your link or admit you were wrong, doubled down on the wrong and emerged even more offensively, obnoxiously wrong.

Also, you produced no source for your claims who are these "high number of blacks who worship Bernie" that Nina speaks for? Do tell.

[Quixote1818]

131. Deny what I wrote? I posted it front and center a second time

I would agree that no one speaks for anyone else but just as I said, in my comment most blacks and most Americans are in line with Nina Turner on their approval of Sanders. That is all my comment says and don't pretend it doesn't.

Still waiting on that poll that shows how blacks don't care for him.

Here is the link to the polling that I refer to: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/329404-poll-bernie-sanders-countrys-most-popular-active-politician

More here:

While Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump register as the most unpopular presidential nominees ever, there remains a real fondness for the guy Clinton beat in the primary. A Fox News poll last month showed Sanders's 60 percent favorable rating was nearly twice as high as his 34 percent unfavorable rating. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll around the same time showed 51 percent liked Sanders and just 29 percent disliked him. CNN a few weeks prior pegged the split at 59/35.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/19/the-most-popular-politician-in-america-might-just-be-a-socialist/?utm_term=.5a999a6ecd92

[Ninsianna]

166. Indeed you did, that Nina is the only one entitled to speak for black men and women

tripling down. Interesting.

You agree that what you said and tripled down on is wrong? Most blacks and most Americans did not elect Nina Turner to speak for them, since you've made this claim three times I'm still waiting to see how you prove that anyone said Nina gets to speak for people's opinions on Bernie Sanders.

Your comment says exactly what I said, please don't insult me further by pretending that it was not exactly what you typed and what I stated it was. That's dishonest and on the heels of some deeply offensive, racist and misogynistic statements, it's just making your stance worse.

Still waiting to see where I offered such a poll, but you've made claims, and still haven't backed it up, so stop waiting, figuring out more offensive things to say and more ad hominems and get cracking backing up what you said about how Nina is our savior and is anointed to speak for all of us. This is the crux of your claim, if you can't back it up, you've just said a lot of deeply offensive things and are rather deep in a ditch you've dug for yourself.

So that's an article from the Hill about this study, but I asked you for raw data, and you failed to provide it. Can you back that up?

Raw data is important so that we can see who the population is, what questions they were asked, and if they were asked to pick people out of a group of a selected number of people, who the choices were etc. If you say, give people limited choices of what's "favorable" for instance, or limited choices of politicians like in this study, your results don't make your point.


Looking forward to actual data.

[sheshe2]

207. Harvard Harris INTERNET POST AGAIN?

as I said, in my comment most blacks and most Americans are in line with Nina Turner on their approval of Sanders. That is all my comment says and don't pretend it doesn't.

Wrong. Woefully wrong. The Women's Conference that Nina is promoting is dying on the vine right now with thousands of women lashing out at the bait and switch, the switch she and the other committee members planned. THIS WAS A CONFERENCE FOR WOMEN. ALL WOMEN OF ALL COLORS! FULL STOP. WOMEN! They collected huge fees from attendees. Then announced Bernie as first speaker after the cut off date for refunds. Most women would never be able to attend, so it was really only for rich peeps anyway.

Push back is huge, funding died last night as it should. Nine days to go and they have only collected 500K out of 2 MIL. They really blew it.

[Quixote1818]

135. And exactly what is your issue with Sanders?

As far as civil rights he chained himself to a black woman and was arrested in a Civil Rights protest:

[Ninsianna]

170. My issue is voting record, the candidate he endorses, his behavior,

his failure to address the nasty things his followers do *in front of him*.

And this weird insistence that his devotees have to claiming that a single thing he did 50 years ago means that he's owed something.

Not how that works. What's he done in the mean time, and how does something he did in college address his brady bill votes?

He's done a lot this year to prove that he's not a good ally at all, not to minorities, not for women, not for people desperately trying to gain and preserve access to healthcare.

Has he even acknowledged CHIP's expiration? What's he done about it? Or is he too busy with his CNN "debates" where he performs poorly and allows his opponents to distract him with his favorite canned speeches?

My issue with this man who's being heralded as some sort of glorious leader who'll get things done is that he's not leading and he's not getting much done. And anyone who dares question him is attacked, swarmed and abused in the most vile of ways on every platform, and he seems to revel in the chaos and divisiveness that follows him.

If only he was what his devotees believed him to be, but noting in the past 10 months has he stepped up. Even now, he could step up and try to smooth over the mess his people made with the convention, but he won't. That's not leadership, it's not showing any care for women, for minorities or anything other than his own ego.

My "issues" with this man is that he's enabling Trump and the GOP at every step and seems to show no signs of stopping.

[Quixote1818]

212. Turn off the corporate media

Of course they are going to try to turn people against Sanders because he he a threat to them not to mention Obama was a lot harder on Hillary than Sanders ever was.

[Ninsianna]

219. My goodness. The "corporate media" that loves Sander so much they have Bernie's

ass prints on chairs where DEMOCRATS are supposed to be given equal time? Oh, bless your heart!

I don't even know what one must be drinking or smoking to believe something to patently ridiculous. OMG, Sanders is *such* a threat that they're giving him airtime constantly, with specials catering to his ego.

And then the constant haranguing about 2008, character assassination using right wing rhetoric and Russian sourced propaganda was not something that was a thing in 2008, it is what we've seen repeatedly in 2016 and 2017. One wonders why it keeps continuing in 2017, if not for the deliberate divisions that are handy to the guy who wants to avoid sanctions and who is still very much into screwing over Democrats and is still frothing with hate for that inconveniently qualified woman who terrified him into putting everything he had behind anyone she was running against, and still failing to convince the majority of Americans to buy his BS.

Please stop refighting the primaries, both 2008 and 2016, all to deflect from a racist, misogynistic statement that cannot be backed up with any semblance of honesty.

This is sad.

[Ninsianna]

175. Since you can't seem to find the study you keep pretending backs your point

another member did that for you, you can thank her for doing your homework for you up thread.

http://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Harvard-CAPS-Harris-Poll-April-Wave-Topline-Favorability-04.18.2017.pdf


So now that you have the raw data, please show us all where it supports your assertion that:

1) "Most" black women love Bernie

and

2) Nina Turner gets to speak for "most" black women

and while you're at it

3) How people were asked the question about their liking of Bernie.

4) Who the other people in their list were, liking Bernie better than an list of progressive active politicians is one thing, but Bernie in a list that's just him and his good buddies Ted Cruz, and Dave Brat? Kinda different thing.

Have fun reading and hopefully you can back up your points through your own work and words without needing to apply to the talking points of the day that don't help you at all.

Yes, I'm asking you to show your work.

[Quixote1818]

213. You still have not shown me your poll suggesting Sanders is not popular with blacks

You continue to take my words out of context which is extremely dishonest on your part. You can try to suggest that ALL the polls I have linked to are wrong but unless you can show one that shows he is not popular your just making stuff up. It's really getting old.

[Ninsianna]

217. Way to deflect, where was your data to back up your claims again?

I mean I GAVE you the link you couldn't find yourself and you STILL can't back up your claims, odd that.

You still seem to forget that your demands are rather silly for someone who made assertions and then seemed to forget that the only polls that matter are vote totals.

Do you required me to furnish the breakdown of that, so that you might ignore all those too, or is this just more transparent refighting of the primary?

I continue to take your words both in context and per their definitions while the gaslighting and attempts to deceive, deflect and deny continue to rage on.

The dishonesty is not mine, as has been proven. You can continue to make up things regarding polls that you clearly have not read and which do not support your assertions but this projection is not working at all. The strawmen are rather lame, and the votes speak volumes even if one must silence facts and the voices of black voters to press the lie that your favorite candidate is somehow supported by people who rejected him, who were vocal about their displeasure about what he said and your problematic insistence that his employee speaks for anyone other than herself.

So was it a bold faced lie that anyone appointed Nina Turner to speak for anyone, or can you back up this ludicrous claim with something other than gaslighting, more lies and personal attacks?

Yeah, this is getting old, a fail from the first and at every step, yet the dishonesty and denigration continues, women will not be silenced not women of color nor anyone else,

You failed repeatedly to put up, but the gaslighting continues, this is what women are fighting against and why every attempt to do what you've done MUST be resisted, the time where these tactics were successful have passed, POC and Women call out the bull shit and reject it.

We're not stupid and we see what's going on here and be it Trump, Weinstein or those who pretend to be something else, we see you, and we call you out.

[Ninsianna]

218. You seem to have forgotten to back up your points with valid data.

I mean I GAVE you the link you couldn't find yourself and you STILL can't back up your claims, odd that.

You still seem to forget that your demands are rather silly for someone who made assertions and then seemed to forget that the only polls that matter are vote totals.

Do you require me to furnish the breakdown of that, so that you might ignore all those too, or is this just more transparent refighting of the primary?

I continue to take your words both in context and per their definitions while the gaslighting and attempts to deceive, deflect and deny continue to rage on.

The dishonesty is not mine, as has been proven. You can continue to make up things regarding polls that you clearly have not read and which do not support your assertions but this projection is not working at all. The strawmen are rather lame, and the votes speak volumes even if one must silence facts and the voices of black voters to press the lie that your favorite candidate is somehow supported by people who rejected him, who were vocal about their displeasure about what he said and your problematic insistence that his employee speaks for anyone other than herself.

So was it a bold faced lie that anyone appointed Nina Turner to speak for anyone, or can you back up this ludicrous claim with something other than gaslighting, more lies and personal attacks?

Yeah, this is getting old, a fail from the first and at every step, yet the dishonesty and denigration continues, women will not be silenced not women of color nor anyone else,

You failed repeatedly to put up, but the gaslighting continues, this is what women are fighting against and why every attempt to do what you've done MUST be resisted, the time where these tactics were successful have passed, POC and Women call out the bull shit and reject it.

We're not as stupid as you imagine, that's why we keep calling out this shit and pointing out the lies and the deliberate innumeracy and apparent contempt for facts.

[emulatorloo]

120. ...

[mcar]

122. Brilliantly said!

[brer cat]

139. ++++++

[sheshe2]

141. I think this what you are looking for.

Scroll to the second page, Ninsianna.

http://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Harvard-CAPS-Harris-Poll-April-Wave-Topline-Favorability-04.18.2017.pdf

BTW, awesome post.

[Ninsianna]

172. Thank you! Sad that women have to all the work for these mansplainers

who "well actually" themselves into circles.

[sheshe2]

174. I know the demographic listed is incomplete.

However it was better than nothing.

Lol~ You are welcome, ninsianna.

[Ninsianna]

176. I just presented it to him, since he's having ever so much trouble finding it

or even understanding what's being asked for, and gave him an assignment.

He keeps responding with links he hasn't read and youtube videos made by pale randos who are upset that they're not able to "monetize" their propaganda, about how black people don't like black women who disagree with them, because one black lady something.

[sheshe2]

180. Lol

I guess I need to read the thread once again.

[lunamagica]

150. Oh, wow

[betsuni]

157. I love you.

[Ninsianna]

177. Aww thanks!

[JNelson6563]

178. Well said.

[delisen]

112. You have to know that poll is discredited

This is Mark Penn's Harris poll. It's choices was severely limited. It omitted the names of almost every active politician.

Posting it as proving that Bernie is the most popular active politician among any sub group is not being honest.

The use of these type of misleading data by those marketing Sanders seems unethical.

[Quixote1818]

128. Nope, not discredited and there are plenty more that say the same thing

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/apr/27/mike-crute/despite-losing-nomination-hillary-clinton-bernie-s/

While Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump register as the most unpopular presidential nominees ever, there remains a real fondness for the guy Clinton beat in the primary. A Fox News poll last month showed Sanders's 60 percent favorable rating was nearly twice as high as his 34 percent unfavorable rating. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll around the same time showed 51 percent liked Sanders and just 29 percent disliked him. CNN a few weeks prior pegged the split at 59/35.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/19/the-most-popular-politician-in-america-might-just-be-a-socialist/?utm_term=.5a999a6ecd92


Just because you hate Sanders doesn't mean most of the rest of the country does.

[lunamagica]

151. Exactly. Proof is that he received more votes than anybody...oh, wait...

[Quixote1818]

162. What is your point, Hillary lost to Obama before eventually getting the nomination

Guess Hillary should have just given up after losing the first time? No she didn't and good for her for keeping up her fight. The fact is the country was being introduced to Sanders throughout the campaign and now they know him much better than they did then. He gets invited on the news frequently now and people are more familiar with him and the seem to like him. Ronald Reagan lost the first time he ran too, so did Bush, so did Dole etc. etc. etc. etc. The lesson is it can take time for people to get to know a candidate.

[lunamagica]

214. What are you talking about? Where did I even mention giving up after losing the first time. huh?

I was obviously replying to your post quoting polls which according to you prove he is the most popular politician in the country.

My point is that the only real poll, the only polls that count are measured in votes. And in that, Sanders came up way, way short to be considered the most popular politician. THAT was my point.

[delisen]

140. Majority of Voters choose Bernie For Pres! LOL

When you find a valid poll that say that, send it to me!

[Quixote1818]

142. Who said that?

Last edited Mon Oct 16, 2017, 01:56 AM - Edit history (1)

[betsuni]

156. +1

[sheshe2]

11. Maybe

The organizers of the Women’s March were smart and they collected hundreds of thousands of emails by having people register for the march. Since that time I have received countless missives from them asking me to do one thing or another in support of the resistance to Trump.

Then I received an email about their organizing a women’s conference in Detroit at the end of October. It was an exciting email to get as it reminded me of when I first got involved in the women’s movement working for Bella S. Abzug (D-NY). Bella along with Congresswoman Patsy Mink (D-HI) fought for Congressional funding for what was to become the National Woman’s Conference held November 18–21, 1977 in Houston, Texas. “Between 17,000 and 22,000 people took part. Some 2,000 delegates and 15-20,000 observers. The goal was to hammer out a “Plan of Action“ to be presented to the Carter Administration and Congress for consideration and/or adoption. Each of the twenty-six Resolutions on Women’s Rights in the Plan was proposed to the attendees and voted upon collectively. The Conference was chaired by Bella Abzug.” I was lucky enough to join Bella at the White House when she presented the final plan to the President.


What I would have hoped was the planners of this conference in Detroit would have looked at what was the opening ceremony list of speakers at that conference to understand what helped to make the conference so great. Now that list wouldn’t be as diverse as we would want it to be today, but it was women and it isn’t difficult to think of brilliant and dynamic women today representing the diversity you want. “The opening ceremony speakers included: First Ladies Rosalyn Carter, Betty Ford and Lady Bird Johnson, activists Coretta Scott King, Bella Abzug, Betty Friedan, Barbara Jordan, Liz Carpenter, and Jean Stapleton. Maya Angelou read Declaration of American Women 1977.”


I have been an activist fighting for many causes for many years including women’s rights, civil rights, disability rights, children’s rights, and the rights of the LGBT community among others. I was on the committee that helped plan the recent Equality March for the LGBTQ+ community. So when I see something like this self-inflicted wound on what should be a conference supported and hailed by all women I feel sad. So much work goes into these things. People are committed and volunteer their time and effort to make a difference. Clearly the invitation to Sanders has shown the conference, or at least the planning committee responsible for inviting speakers, has been hijacked by some who aren’t there for the purpose of galvanizing all women to come together around an agenda to fight for their future, the future of the country, and future generations. Rather they have their own political agenda and are inserting it to the detriment of this conference.

Maybe it will take Senator Sanders himself to understand his presence on that stage in Detroit is more divisive than helpful and he will withdraw as a speaker. Doing that may be doing more for women’s rights than he has ever done before. As men we must recognize the time for women to gather, to speak out, and to lead; is NOW!

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029708026

...............................................

The vid in the Op is calling women neoliberals. Are you serious?

A woman's conference is for women. As the video shows men speak for us, they do not stand in front of us.

We are one woman, we shall always be sisters.

[JHan]

15. Yep. The neoliberal insult is used against anyone who disagrees with them...

It has zilch to do with anything concrete or substantive.

I think they're channeling chapo house because "neoliberal feminists" became a thing on Twitter yesterday.

It's all so unifying isn't it?

[sheshe2]

19. Umhmm. nt

[emulatorloo]

61. The echoing of Crapo White Rich-Boy House is very interesting

Thanks.

[delisen]

144. It's the Faux Revolutionary Labeling War

Last edited Sun Oct 15, 2017, 07:54 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't think the Republicans, Trump, or Putin have much to fear from them.

They are armed with labels and insults and have such poor aim, their labels and insults land on their allies instead of their opponents. Is this what is known as "friendly fire".?

Oh well, guess the rest of us will have to take up the slack in the war being waged on our democracy.

[NBachers]

24. Bella and Shirley - that's all I need to say

[sheshe2]

49. I love that picture.

Thanks, NBachers.

[NBachers]

62. Giants of Our Time - for some reason this picture brings tears to my eyes.

[sheshe2]

63. They were far ahead of our time.

An inspiration to us all, NBachers.

[pnwmom]

17. So now disagreeing with Nina Turner means you're fighting with women of color?

I didn't know she represented all women of color.



When did Nina Turner get involved with the Women's March, anyway? I don't remember her at the beginning. Interesting that she's managed to make this a Bernie thing.

[Lil Missy]

18. Ugh! Can't stand her.

[samnsara]

148. i cant either... i never have liked her or that man she defends..

...way before the election. not just because of how they acted during....

[Lazy Daisy]

21. Thank you Nina

Keep fighting the good fight. Some will listen, some won't. Don't let the noise drown out your voice.

[lunamagica]

45. Yes, keep saying how Democrats are worse than the GOP. Keep helping Republicans to get

elected!

[Tarheel_Dem]

22. As a POC, Nina Turner sure as hell doesn't speak for me. Besides, she works for Sanders.

[TeamPooka]

23. Nothing like a dose of Whataboutism to deflect answering a question. nt

[stonecutter357]

25. lol!

[left-of-center2012]

26. Can people stop bashing Bernie, PLEASE!

Let's focus on beating the GOP in 2018 and 2020.

[Smitty63nnn]

27. I thought beating the GOP was the primary focus.

But there are still many here that still cannot let go. It's time to move on people. I certainly have.

[lapucelle]

30. Tell that to Nina. She refused to endorse Democrats in the 2016 GE.

Thanks Nina!

[Smitty63nnn]

34. And again,,,,,

I thought beating the GOP in 2018/2020 was the primary focus?

Crying over spilled milk and pointing fingers accomplishes nothing. And where this post has gone in totally non related to the original subject. Look, we lost big time in the last several elections. I could go on for hours as to why. I have decided to put it all behind me, as there is absolutely nothing I can do to change it. I have focused on what can be done to move this country forward so we can make it a better place to live in the future. Its really not about us. It's about our kids and grand kids and what kind of environment we want for them. And winning elections with winning strategies and policies is top on my list right now. 2018 is just around the corner. What are YOU going to do to help this country move forward?

[JHan]

35. so divisiveness is now being projected onto those who find Nina's divisiveness offensive?

this is just about "crying over spilt milk"?

The way to win election is not to diss allies by calling them "neo-liberals" , claiming you won't support Dems, or constantly dissing the Democratic Party Brand. Your post contradicts itself.

[Smitty63nnn]

37. I surrender

No matter what I post, it will not change what really has to be done. I know what my goals are for 2018, and looking backwards is not an option for me, other than learning from mistakes.

[JHan]

38. I share those goals.

those who object to the divisiveness share those goals as well- we see the harm being done , from last year, and we know how it will affect the dynamics come mid terms.

[emulatorloo]

57. We share those goals. Nina has stated publicly she wants to endorse Libertarians and Republicans

in upcoming elections using your donations to the Our Revolution PAC. That is not the past nor "spilt milk"

[lapucelle]

43. Right now Im working with a local Democratic candidate

running for family court judge in our purple/leaning red township by knocking on doors on weekends. I’m also phone banking for the Democratic county supervisor candidate in our effort to flip that office. I’m a member of our local DNC woman’s caucus, and we spent lots of time this year reaching out to new and inactive voters.

Last year at this time, I spent weekends out of my solidly blue state traveling to a swing state to register Democrats, devise voting plans for marginalized voters who have difficulty getting to the polls, and canvas for Katie McGinty and Hillary Clinton.

I'm the reliable woman who does the grunt work so that people with more specialized skills can do the more specialized tasks. I’ve been that woman for many decades.

Does that answer your question?

[murielm99]

66. That sounds like the sort of thing

my husband and I have been doing for years. There is little thanks for it, especially if you live in a red area.

Thank you for all you do.

[lapucelle]

68. Thank you for what you do as well.

I'm always a bit bemused by keyboard warriors who seem unaware that there are elections every year, rather than every two or four.

Republicans ran a Republican candidate on the Democratic line in our county supervisor race necessitating a primary a few weeks ago. Thank goodness my state has strict primary voter rules that prevent non-party members and brand new (often temporary) members from voting in party primaries. Republicans have deep pockets here, and if not for that rule we might have had two Republicans running in November with no Democratic candidate. (The candidate on the Republican line was running unopposed.)

We also have a mandatory state constitutional convention referendum on the ballot in a few weeks. Anti-union lobbyists are strongly in favor of a convention because they see it as an opportunity to erode worker rights and protections via cleverly worded constitutional amendment proposals which must all be put before voters after any convention.

Every election is important. It's not too late to get involved for local elections that are coming up in a few weeks, rather than simply looking ahead to 2018 and 2020. Those who are not involved should refrain from lecturing and scolding those who are.

[Lil Missy]

41. No.

[left-of-center2012]

42. All these hateful posts will only hurt us in 2018 and 2020

Then Dems will look around and say "What happened?"



Oh well ...

[lunamagica]

46. Right. Posting on DU will hurt us. But having Turner bashing the Democratic Party all over the

place is fine and dandy. I just can't wrap my brain around that.

[Lil Missy]

50. I sincerely doubt it. More troublesome is someone trashing Democrats and the Democratic Party.

This is not a popularity contest. It's about electing a qualified Democratic nominee for POTUS.

[left-of-center2012]

54. Oh looky

An 'ignore' button

[emulatorloo]

60. Well, folks discuss things on a discussion board.

Sometimes people will disagree w each other.

We're just a little website, this minor disagreement won't effect the outcomes of 2018 2020

Additionally I doubt any DU'er will sit home or vote Republican over this. Cuz that would be very dumb, and we aren't dumb here.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

82. Maybe we should take a page out of Hillary's book?

[brer cat]

65. We are trying to,

so how about if you share your concerns with the people bashing the Democratic Party thereby giving aid and comfort to the republicans.

[sheshe2]

143. Good question, brer.

Oh wait, I see you did not get an answer.

[delisen]

147. The Bernie Bash-new dance craze of 2017

It's bigger than the Twist ever was.

The Twist: stand in one place, move that torso, but don't go anywhere.

The Bernie: take one step to the left, two to the right, then shimmy backwards toward the 1950s.

Don't be offended, a little singing and dancing can work wonders.

[still_one]

28. Isn't the women's convention to focus on issues affecting women?

[lapucelle]

29. Didn't Nina Turner refuse to endorse Democrats in the 2016 general election?

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-anchor-calls-out-nina-turner-as-a-hillary-supporter-she-denies-and-asks-to-roll-the-tape/

[ismnotwasm]

39. Nope sorry Nina.

Also;

[guillaumeb]

51. Oh no, another progressive who is not blinded by labels!!!

Recommended.

[emulatorloo]

53. Progressives don't propose endorsing/funding Republicans and Libertarians in elections afaik

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDm5O-RVwAAFerA?format=jpg

[emulatorloo]

52. Thanks for the latest bit of divisiveness and misdirection from Ms. Turner

[Purveyor]

58. Liked that pic, eh?

[emulatorloo]

59. ...

I always enjoy yr posts I knew you would get a kick out of it.

[Cary]

76. What exactly are you trying to say?

I dont do cults of personality. These people are employees. They have a job to do. That's how I evaluate them.

No one person is going to do anything. They have to act as a coalition.

[emulatorloo]

83. That people uncomfortable w a man opening a women's conference are really racists attacking POC

Which is a very dishonest spin from Ms. Turner. This boneheaded decision is a boneheaded decision, has nothing to do with race. I see some DU'ers picking this awful talking point up. It's gross.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

84. Maybe we should ALL band together and form a coalition.

[Cary]

87. I'm not sure how well we have effected that coalition

But the focus on one person, it seems to me, is detrimental.

[emulatorloo]

93. Insinuating women are racist because they think it's weird to have man open a women's conference

isn't very unifying or conducive to forming a coalition.

I can't endorse what Ms. Turner has said. Women aren't pushing back on the decision because they are racists who want to attack POC. It is an underhanded and dishonest thing to say

[left-of-center2012]

116. I don't think she meant racist

I think she meant it was sexist to have a hissy fit because a man was invited to speak.

[emulatorloo]

124. "Nina Turner says that instead of fighting with women of color for inviting Bernie Sanders"

Opening line of OP.

People pushing back against the idea of a guy opening a women's conference aren't doing so in order to disparage WOC or so to pick a fight w POC. Nina's attempt to frame it that way is not true.. They just have a different opinion and think it's odd and a tone-deaf decision.

[left-of-center2012]

125. Time to move on

Much ado about nothing (in my humble opinion)

[emulatorloo]

127. At this point yeah.

I personally am looking forward to hearing Bernie articulate his coherent vision of women's issues. This is a good challenge and opportunity for him.

But I am not a fan of intellectually dishonest rhetoric that's being deployed in real time by Ms. Turner. Doubt I'll post about it again but bothers me. I hope Bernie replaces her at Our Revolution, imho would be very good for that organization to have new leadership.

Take care and have a good night.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

160. I most certainly am NOT insinuating women are racist by my statement that

we should all band together in a common cause... NOTHING could be further from the truth.

I assume you were making some reference to the OP, but, I just wanted to clarify the point to be sure I won't be misinterpreted by others around here.

[KPN]

85. Good point Nina.

[emulatorloo]

89. No, dishonest rhetoric. Insinuates women who think it's dumb for a man to open a Women's Conference

think that because they are racists who hate POC. You know as well as I do this is not about race. It is about a tone deaf decision. I find this rhetorical trick from Turner pretty despicable. Of course ymmv

[KPN]

103. Went back and rewatched it. My sense is

you are putting words into her mouth or reading into what she said based on your preconceived notions at best. This is clearly a reaction to Bernie Sanders on the part of some feminists who hold a grudge against him for running for the Democratic nomination against Hillary.

Nina Turner may have been a bit strident in that interview, but she is otherwise right on and presents a rational, mature view and direct view. There was no such insinuation. To say there was is disingenuous and a character assassination imo.

[emulatorloo]

110. "Nina Turner says that instead of fighting with women of color for inviting Bernie"

That's the first line of the OP. Have a good rest of your weekend.

[KPN]

165. Oh, so you know that she thinks women who criticize the organizers

are racists by that sentence? What I said already. Weekends over -- but I'm retired so no loss.

[George II]

94. Which "critics" is she talking about? Is she implying that Democrats are not focusing....

...on those things?

[RandySF]

101. .

[left-of-center2012]

105. AMEN and HALLELUJAH !

Nina Turner spoke the truth!

She's talking about some people we all know,
who need to move on,
and quit fighting 2016.

Get over it!

[delisen]

107. Can't move on from total equality for woman

because that would be moving backwards.

[left-of-center2012]

108. As Nina said ...

The hate is irrational.
Bernie supports equality.

[delisen]

115. Pointing out the flaws in Sander's

political thinking not a statement of hate, it is an act of love.

[left-of-center2012]

109. Oh my gawd!

An ignore button.

[emulatorloo]

114. You're kinda supposed to quietly use the Ignore Button, not announce or boast about it.

If you want to engage and disagree w another DU'er do so. If you don't, just put her on ignore. That's the etiquette here, at one point it was a rule as well. May still be.

You seem new here so def understand how you might not be aware.

[delisen]

106. Gee Nina are we allowed to think for ourselves?

We will focus on what we need to in order to achieve total equality for women.

We welcome you to do the same.

[lapucelle]

118. Nina Turner refused to endorse Democrats in the 2016 general election.

[SunSeeker]

145. I've got an idea, Nina. Let's concentrate on WOMEN at the Women's Convention.

[samnsara]

146. hes a man.. i dont care what color or what name...

...HE should not have been given that keynote speakers position. If he hasn't got a vagina..its NOT his time-a ( I just made that up)

[LisaM]

152. And he has become a very divisive figure.

He is causing irreparable harm to the Democratic party and I can only conclude at times that it's on purpose.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

193. Bernie is a decent man, a caring man, a man who supports and fights for women's rights and issues

every day... indeed, a man who is extremely popular among many different groups of people and who, therefore, can bring significant attention to those causes.

I understand your disappointment in the choice of speaker, but, it's not the end of the world. We all need to unite under a common banner and move this country forward.

[Mediumsizedhand]

204. He votes for women issues and rights. He does not fight for them.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

208. Oh okay, got it... I must of misread all those media stories recognizing Bernie

Last edited Tue Oct 17, 2017, 06:52 AM - Edit history (2)

as a fighter for women's rights.