Bernie did not support getting rid of the ACA BEFORE Medicare for All was passed.

[Ken Burch]

If elected, Bernie would always have left the ACA in place until an inclusive alternative without the ACA's flaws was passed by Congress and put into effect.

He never ONCE called for repealing the ACA FIRST and depriving people of existing coverage.

And it goes without saying that he would have signed any legislation correcting the ACA's flaws.

The man is not going to run for president again...so there is no good reason for anyone in this party to STILL be using discredited primary "talking points" again. And we will never get those of his supporters who didn't vote for us in the fall(most did) to vote for us in the future so long as the lies about his views on the ACA and on race continue to be spread.

[PatsFan87]

1. THANK YOU

[Duppers]

30. +1000

The fact that lies have continued is very upsetting.

[PoliticAverse]

2. Of course he didn't. After all he voted for the ACA (and if he hadn't it wouldn't have passed...

as it passed without a vote to spare).

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

8. Thanks for reminding people of this. Bernie will ALWAYS be looking out for those less fortunate... as sure as the day is long!

Why Bernie will be our leader - dare I say "savior"? - in combating the Fuhrer-Elect and in the next election.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!

[jfern]

101. Not to mention that he got community health clinics to serve 10 million people as part of the ACA.

[Justice]

3. Yes but harping on getting rid of ACA supported GOP position that it didn't work.

[portlander23]

4. Medicare for all is not a GOP position

Unless I missed something.

[Justice]

7. you did. GOP is negative on ACA; so was Bernie. Bernie reasons might be different but both negative.

[portlander23]

9. "Medicare for all" is the same as "no health care for anyone who can't pay"

Got it. I had the math wrong.

[ProfessorPlum]

105. ? This is the stupidest post of the year

[Orsino]

106. Most of us are also "negative" on the ACA...

...as the worst things about it are connected to propping up the private insurers who were in our way.

We are stuck with this bag of poop until we're ready to phase out the insurance companies and replace the income of their employees. Nuance is a thing that exists.

[R B Garr]

5. The point is that he dishonestly made her out to be a corporate hack/sell-out

because he dishonestly stated that she was against single payer. That was dishonest. The reality is that after literally decades of watching GOP obstruction on healthcare issues, she realized it was not viable. But Bernie knowingly advanced the notion that she was against single payer so he could position himself as the only voice for "the people". It was especially dishonest considering he could not even get single payer passed in his own teeny state of Vermont.

[yallerdawg]

11. Got it!

[R B Garr]

16. Wrong, and this kind of dishonesty is what causes the divisiveness. Hillary did not say

what you claim. What she said was in the context of the reality of the political environment.

And that is just an excuse about Bernie. If he wants to spend a year traveling around the United States to promote his ideas, surely he could have done so in Vermont to a much better conclusion. No excuses.

[R B Garr]

19. Yet he stumped for it all over the United States knowing full well that he

couldn't even get it passed in Vermont. There's a word for that kind of campaigning.....

And I love how everything he does has to be in exact context, but Hillary saying 20 years ago that she couldn't see getting single payer past the GOP is some kind of evil sellout. Luckily, most people don't buy that phoniness, which is why he lost the primary by millions of votes.

[R B Garr]

34. Wrong. Remember when her husband was President and she fought for

healthcare?? It was the context of that fight 20 years ago when she first said it. Again, it's funny how people pick and chose the reality that only benefits Bernie.

It's just an excuse to blame his failure getting single payer passed in Vermont on the Governor. But that reality didn't stop him from continuing to misrepresent the viability of single payer to the entire United States as if he's an expert on it and our savior when he could not get it done in his own state. And Vermont has less then a million people.

[R B Garr]

82. She has explained how single payer wasn't viable,

and you obviously missed her explanations throughout her entire career. Whereas Bernie leads people to believe they have been wronged by politicians who havent pushed single payer when he couldnt deliver it himself.

You are the one who needs to explain how Bernie can campaign for a national election on an issue he couldnt deliver on in his own small state. The governor had a phone. Bernie should have made it happen or at the very least been honest about how difficult it is to get passed. Which is what Hillary's positon was. Its not a viable option because of political opposition so focus on what is viable.

[R B Garr]

89. That's laughable you even reference it had

to a "threatening" phone call. It could have just been a phone call. Lots of people do it. What's lame ass is to call for a Revolution of people calling their Representatives, yet he couldn't get it done himself. But it sure didn't take long for the hostility towards Hillary to come out. That looks like the real goal here.

[kcr]

35. Look, dead is dead. It's not doing the people of VT any good, is it?

He couldn't wave his magic wand anymore than anyone else can. Our government is set up for obstruction. It's unfair and dishonest for him to poke other politicians for the same problems he faces, and smear them for having the gall to be honest to voters. He couldn't make single payer work in his own state. That is reality. For him to then run a campaign promising to deliver the same thing to the country AND smear another candidate for not promising something he couldn't even do himself at the state level? Real shitty.

[R B Garr]

83. She fought for healthcare decades ago, and she

said it's not viable. It obviously not viable because Bernie couldnt get it passed either.

[TheKentuckian]

49. This is as silly and dishonest as Trump's 30 years and why haven't you done X argument but

slightly more civics challanged as at least he was speaking to Federal issues.

A US Senator can't pass state legislation and has no role in a State government not even a single vote. You may as well "blame" any random citizen for failing to get something passed.

Plus, she said way more recently than 20 years ago that she was against so all you got is a long track record of opposition.

[R B Garr]

66. No, what's silly and dishonest is saying that Bernie has some superpower influence over policy

when he obviously couldn't even get it to pass in his home state. So it works both ways. Either you can influence policy or you can't. There are many more national obstacles than one measly Vermont governor.

But the gist of what she said is that single payer is not viable because of political obstruction, and Bernie obviously knows that since it wasn't viable in his own state. So why waste time maligning a current Democratic President and the party by association just to position yourself as a savior when nothing you are saying is realistic. That's what is silly and dishonest. Luckily most people agreed and didn't vote for him in the primary.

[R B Garr]

85. Ha, how ironic that you bother to flesh out the

immposibilities of legislation when Bernie never bothered to do it. That is what is silly and dishonest. He spent a year on the stump leading people to believe that Democrats were cheating them and were ignoring them when that was not true. And one little Vermont governor should be easy to convince.

[Ken Burch]

80. A veto by the governor is NOT the same as "not getting it passed".

Bernie can't be held personally responsible for the act of a Republican governor.

[R B Garr]

84. Lol, this coming from those who hold the Clintons

responsible for not doing the same thing Bernie didn't do.

[Ken Burch]

87. Bernie got the bill through both houses of the Vermont legislature.

The Clintons couldn't get it through one house of Congress-and frankly, they barely even tried.

[R B Garr]

93. This is just gratuitous Clinton bashing. Speaking of which, why didn't Bernie run

for President when Bill ran? Bernie didn't even try. What's up with that?

Really, the bottom line is that Bernie wasn't forthcoming about the trials and realities of getting legislation passed. Blaming the Clintons from 25 years ago is quite a stretch

[R B Garr]

90. Yeah, the gratuitous and irrational Clinton hating shines

through at long last. Just pure hostility. They've done more for you than Bernie ever has. Now look what we have, thanks to this irrationality.

[sheshe2]

99. Forbes.

Six Reasons Why Vermont's Single-Payer Health Plan Was Doomed From The Start

Last week, Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin (D.) announced that he was pulling the plug on his four-year quest to impose single-payer, government-run health care on the residents of his state. “In my judgment,” said Shumlin at a press conference, “the potential economic disruption and risks would be too great to small businesses, working families, and the state’s economy.” The key reasons for Shumlin’s reversal are important to understand. They explain why the dream of single-payer health care in the U.S. is dead for the foreseeable future—but also why Obamacare will be difficult to repeal.

snip//

3. The Vermont plan would have required a 160 percent tax increase

The Shumlin administration, in its white-flag briefing last week, dropped a bombshell. In 2017, under pre-existing law, the state of Vermont expects to collect $1.7 billion in tax revenue. Green Mountain Care would have required an additional $2.6 billion in tax revenue: a 151 percent increase in state taxes. Fiscally, that’s a train wreck. Even a skeptical report from Avalere health had previously assumed that the plan would “only” cost $1.9 to $2.2 billion extra in 2017.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/12/21/6-reasons-why-vermonts-single-payer-health-plan-was-doomed-from-the-start/#30f90152277d

[Jopin Klobe]

46. Hillary Clinton: Single-payer health care will "never, ever" happen

Hillary Clinton: Single-payer health care will "never, ever" happen
LINK: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-single-payer-health-care-will-never-ever-happen/

... "never, ever" ... there is no 'context' for "never, ever" ...

... except, "never, ever" ...

... "never, ever" ...

[R B Garr]

65. lol, saying it will never happen is far different from Sanders' dishonestly implying

she was against it.

Obviously Sanders couldn't get it to happen in Vermont. But that doesn't mean he was against it.

It's dishonest to say that someone was against something when they are really saying it is not a viable option in any particular political climate. Luckily most voters understood that and rejected his divisive and false claims in the primary.

[JCanete]

22. she wasn't fighting for single payer any more, and certainly it wasn't part of her platform. how is

that dishonest?

[R B Garr]

24. He could not even get single payer passed in his tiny state of Vermont. It's not hard to

remember why single payer was not a viable option. The word games are just silly at this point. He knowingly contributed to painting her into being against single payer when there was a more honest reason why it wasn't pursued, as he obviously saw happen in his own state of Vermont.

[JCanete]

26. nothing is a viable option if we take it off the table, and even luke-warm legislation gets blocked

by republican obstruction, so what is the point again of pushing for wishy-washy legislation that doesn't energize the people to demand it?

[R B Garr]

31. Ha, wouldn't it be nice if he explained the reality of getting things passed instead of blaming

Hillary. Instead, he took the path to adulation and led people to believe untruths like you are parroting that Hillary was against "the people" and Bernie was going to save us from all that.

[JCanete]

33. what reality? that we can do something if we all come together to do it? Is that a lie? nt

[R B Garr]

36. Single payer failed in Vermont. That reality. He was unable to get it passed in

his own state.

It was dishonest to lead people to believe that Hillary was against single payer when that is not the context of her position. Now he's promoting the ACA in the same way she did. Hmmm.

[JCanete]

39. this is dumb. So he was unable to get it passed. What does that mean to you? If something

fails it should never be tried again, especially as times change and more support starts to be garnered for it? I just don't understand what you're trying to say with that.

Sanders is defending the ACA and why shouldn't he? He never said it should be thrown out. He wanted to transition it into single-payer which is entirely different. Who's being dishonest here?

[Gore1FL]

51. He has no power in VT's state government.

How was he supposed to get it passed? Quit his Senate job and lobby his State's government instead?

There are legitimate reasons to criticize Sanders. You don't have to make things up.

[R B Garr]

63. Yet that didn't stop him from maligning Hillary for being up against

the same opposition that he faced in getting single payer passed. That's really the point. He couldn't do it; she couldn't do it, but only she is held accountable to unrealistic and impossible standards.

So you should take your own advice. Making things up about Hillary when he also had impediments is just dishonest, and luckily most people dismissed that in the primaries and did not vote for him.

[Gore1FL]

70. When diid Sanders suggest it was Clinton's fault for not having it in VT?

Or anywhere else for that matter?

What did I make up about Hillary? Please provide a quote and link.

[R B Garr]

71. Sanders suggested that Hillary was against single payer and he said

the ACA needed to be replaced. But that wasn't an honest assessment, since the context of what she said about single payer had to do with the obstruction from the GOP. Sanders just wanted to make himself out to be a voice for "the people" by harping on single payer, which is an extreme measure benefit that even his teeny tiny state of 600,000 people rejected. To malign Obama's ACA achievements by saying it needed to be replaced and promoting an unrealistic version such as single payer shows even more dishonesty.

So the part about Vermont is that Bernie is a senator from Vermont and he couldn't even get single payer passed there.

I don't see how you could have taken it any other way, so I'm not seeing how your other questions make sense given that my point wasn't a difficult one to begin with.

[Gore1FL]

92. Clinton said she was against single payer. She's wong. the ACA needs to be replaced with it.

"Harping on Single Payer" is a good thing--It's not extreme. Saying that it is not possible is simply a cave to the right.
The part about being from VT and not being about to get single payer there betrays your lack of understanding of the differences between State and federal government.

Sorry, but your arguments don't stand on any merit. Speaking of which, I am still looking for the quote and link that demonstrates what you think I made up about Hillary.

[R B Garr]

96. Sorry, but the "arguments" are reality. Bernie didn't get it passed in Vermont and he

misrepresented Democrats in the process. What is a cave to the right is to attack Democrats for something that he was unable to get through himself.

He could have built coalitions like any other politician, but he failed to do that even do that even in his tiny state, yet he calls for a Revolution consisting of people calling their representatives. Lol, what a disconnect.

And you went on your own tangent about something where you think I owe you a link. Sorry about your tangent, but it makes no sense.

[Gore1FL]

97. There is nothing real about the argument presented,

When was Bernie in a position to get single payer through the State of VT. Be specific concerning the official powers he failed at exercising. As far as coalitions. He was not in state government. Building coalitions in the U.S. Senate would have done VT little good. There are real criticism one can level at Senator Sanders, you don't have to blame him for things that weren't implemented in a legislative body to which he doesn't belong. It's a laughable argument.

As far as the link you owe me, yes you do. You called me out for making things up about Hillary. Either rescind the accusation or provide proof. It's your credibility at stake, not mine.

[R B Garr]

98. He was asked about this very real failure in a debate question.

You should look up the debates online and listen carefully.

And sorry about your tangent, but it looks like you are trying too hard to make things personal and it's not making sense.

[mcar]

23. This!

[Ken Burch]

74. Wrong.

There is little difference between saying "single-payer will never happen" and being opposed to single-payer.

And things can change...in 1960, NOBODY thought anything like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was possible.

Bernie NEVER deserved to be accused of wanting to just repeal the ACA and leave nothing in its place. If Hillary needed to "defend herself&quot she was never unfairly attacked on the issue), she never needed to accuse Bernie of supporting something we all know he DIDN'T support in order to do that.

[R B Garr]

75. Bernie said the ACA needed to be replaced, but he knew that single payer was not

even viable in Vermont, so it was not honest of him to champion a non-viable option just to get people to cheer him. What he was proposing was not even viable in his own tiny state. That's just a fact, but it's a fact that he knowingly and conveniently omitted from all of his rallies. Luckily people saw through that dishonesty and refused to vote for him in the primaries.

[jfern]

102. "Single payer will never ever happen" - Hillary

Busted

[R B Garr]

103. Bernie couldn't make it happen, so noting it will never happen

doesn't mean you are against it. Bernie never mentioned in his stump speech that it failed in Vermont.

Busted.

[jfern]

108. It didn't fail, the Hillary supporting governor never tried to get it passed.

[R B Garr]

109. LMFAO! Lol, the lengths of the Clinton bashing are truly spectacular.

Now Hillary is responsible for Sanders' failure to get single payer passed in Vermont! How absolutely bizarre can you get.



omg, that is truly funny. Unfortunately, all the divisiveness of the primary has stuck us with Donald, so it's not really so funny after all.

[jfern]

111. Look, Hillary made it quite clear she opposes single payer

Her campaign attacked Bernie's single payer nonstop, just like a Republican would attack a Democratic healthcare plan.

[R B Garr]

112. Because it's not viable. Same reason it didn't pass in Vermont.

Bernie Sanders Single Payer Health Care Plan Fails in Vermont.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/25/bernie-sanders-s-single-payer-health-care-plan-failed-in-vermont.html

"But the single-payer system that Sanders is evangelizing isn’t just a figment of progressive utopian fantasies. Single-payer health care has already been tried—and failed—in Sanders’s home state of Vermont, where the proposal collapsed under its own weight last year before it was ever implemented.


Deciding why it failed in Vermont is key to whether you buy into the candidate’s promise to extend the program nationwide."


Just because it didn't pass in Vermont doesn't mean Bernie is against it. Just because Hillary sees it's not viable nationwide does not mean she's against it. It means it's a waste of time to pursue, so spend time pursuing something realistic.

This is not a difficult concept. It's amazing how just plain common sense and reality is distorted and rejected if it doesn't favor Sanders.

And so much for Bernie's "revolution". He calls on hordes of people to call their representatives to get policy passed, and he couldn't even get a governor of a teeny tiny state to pass it.

[jfern]

113. A lot of countries have single payer. I don't support "Democrats" who oppose single payer and say

we're stuck with our current shitty healthcare system. ObamaCare premiums just went up an average of 22%.

Taiwan even modeled their single payer system off the US Medicare system. So there's already a precedent for Medicare for all single payer.

[R B Garr]

114. LOL, that's funny, too. How completely self-serving and unrealistic. It doesn't

even sound like you are familiar with our government.

But this is the danger of politicians making dishonest claims such this. It was dishonest to say that Hillary was against single payer without him being forthcoming about his complete failure to get it passed in Vermont. Gullible people start believing that Democrats aren't working for them when that is not reality.

[jfern]

115. Great job parroting Hillary's "No we can't!"

[R B Garr]

116. More hilarity! Bernie should have been honest during his rallies about his failure

to get it passed in Vermont.

It doesn't bode well for a "revolution" when the main leader can't even get a policy passed in his home state with his own methods. It just shows empty and unrealistic rhetoric without being held accountable for anything you say. Many gullible people like hearing grandiose things, but not so much the reality of things.

[jfern]

117. Give it up, Shumlin was a Hillary supporter, Bernie doesn't magically control

a governor who supports Hillary.

[R B Garr]

118. Bernie promoted single payer but couldn't even get it passed in his home state.

That is reality. It didn't suit his purposes during his rallies to divulge that, though, where applause seemed to be the goal.

It doesn't bode well for a so-called "revolution" that he cannot even get one measly governor from his home state to go along with it. And he campaigned on this nationwide without ever acknowledging that it failed in his own state.

[DanTex]

6. True, obviously. But what he did do is bash Hillary for not supporting single payer, and for

wanting to raise the minimum wage but not quite as high as Bernie did, and so on. His primary campaign insisted that pragmatism was the enemy and yet here he is talking pragmatism.

And, I'm glad he is. Just wish that he hadn't bashed Hillary for her pragmatism for all those months.

[JCanete]

25. pragmatism is what you go for when compromising with the other side. We shouldn't be compromising

Last edited Wed Dec 28, 2016, 07:18 PM - Edit history (1)

with ourselves, before we even get to the table. Campaigning on ideals kind of makes fucking sense.

And what the hell does it matter if our plan is incremental or drastic if neither can get through congress? That's why we need the drastic, to get the will and power of the people behind the message to force government's hand.

[DanTex]

27. Governing means compromising. The ACA actually did get through congress.

Single payer wouldn't have. Bernie conceded at the time that it wouldn't even have gotten 10 votes in the senate.

Both Hillary and Bernie had "drastic" plans in the primaries. For Bernie to bash Hillary for not having drastic enough plans was counterproductive, and combined with his refusal to concede after he was eliminated, helped Trump become president.

[JCanete]

29. No she didn't. Name something that was drastic about her plans. nt

[DanTex]

32. $12 minimum wage. Debt-free college. Huge clean energy investments. Etc.

[JCanete]

38. 12 dollar minimum wage is basic. Its really the bare minimum, and the point is it isn't livable.

Is it good that she wanted that? YES! Is raising the minimum wage to some degree something Democrats aren't expected to do? No.

I'm also glad she had some plan for college tuition. Since it has been a real hot-button issue that isn't a surprise. I think it was okay and better than nothing. Why not instead, go for what the DNC and Clinton ultimately adopted anyway. You have two options here. Either they decided they'd pander to make Sanders supporters happy, or it was never an unrealistic plan to offer free college.

[DanTex]

41. Compared to 7.25 it is drastic. Arguing about 15 vs 12 was one of Bernie's low moments.

Why not 18? 25? As long as we're throwing around numbers that are never going to happen, have at it!

And now, thanks in part to Bernie's bashing of Hillary and refusal to concede when he lost, we're stuck at 7.25.

[JCanete]

43. If livable has any bearing, then yes there is a difference, and being hyperbolic all republican

style..."why not 50, why not 100" isn't helpful.


Edited due to being unnecessarily pugnacious. Sorry if you read the original.

[DanTex]

44. They are all "livable", the question is the quality of life.

To somehow define "livable" as a magic threshold between 12 and 15 is just plain dumb.

[JCanete]

45. or between 7 and 12 then for that matter?

[DanTex]

47. Or between 15 and 20. It's a sliding scale.

[JCanete]

48. well we know how people survive on 7. They get 2 or 3 jobs. A livable wage implies

that you can work 40 hour work weeks.

[DanTex]

50. Yes, that's why it needs to be raised.

Minimum wage at 7.25 means 15K per year based on 40 hours.
12 means 25K.
15 means 31K.
20 means 41.5K.

The greater the wage, the more livable. There's not one point where it magically transitions from "non-living" to "living".

[JCanete]

53. Again, a livable wage implies being able to house and feed yourself, and maybe a child

working no more than 40 hours. If 12$ doesn't do that in most of the country, then it isn't a livable wage. Even if it does--and I doubt it does--while I applaud it for not being 7 an hour, I'm of the opinion that a higher minimum wage is good for all wage earners, since it's a baseline that companies have to compete with.

6000 dollar a year difference is a big deal. Besides, campaigning on a better more progressive plan is not bashing Clinton. I may be wrong on this one, and am happy to be proven so, but I feel like this wasn't really the area where the criticisms(or bashing) was occurring. It was an area where he was saying we need to demand more....similar to Clinton saying that Obama's advocacy for a 10$ minimum wage was insufficient.

[DanTex]

56. Depends on the size of the home, and the quality of the food.

The difference between 12 and 15 is smaller than the difference between 15 and 20. Somehow the far left settled arbitrarily on 15, and decided to bash anyone who was slightly lower than that. It was so dumb, and part of me wanted Hillary to go for 20 and bash Bernie for "only" going to 15 just to show how silly the whole game was.

[Gore1FL]

52. If you make $96 vs $120 a 8 hour work day that's $120 a week.

A lot of people wouldn't consider him fighting to put a $6000 annual wage difference into their pocket a low moment.

[DanTex]

54. Not as big as the difference between 15 and 20.

Where is all the outrage that Bernie didn't go for 20 instead of 15?

[Gore1FL]

57. $15 was established as a livable wage.

Those making the minimum would have certainly embraced $15. Who was being pleased by the $3 reduction?

[DanTex]

58. By who?

Those making the minimum would also certainly have embraced 20. These are all just numbers. What makes 15 so special?

[Gore1FL]

60. Apparently Seattle and San Francisco who set the $15 mark.

Why fight for less?

[DanTex]

62. Why fight for less than 20?

Seattle and San Fran are cities with high cost of living. I'm glad they got 15. But I don't see why that makes 15 some kind of sacred number.

[Gore1FL]

69. $15 was the top standard set that I am aware of when the discussion was taking place.

Who mentioned $20?

[DanTex]

72. I mentioned 20. Who set 15 as the top standard?

Did some committee get together that I wasn't aware of? I must have missed that. As far as I'm concerned, they are all numbers, and I have yet to come across a single logical argument as to why 15 is better than 12 but 20 is not better than 15.

Maybe you could explain.

[Gore1FL]

94. San Francisco and Seattle came up with those numbers. We already went over that.

Those numbers were real and tested. The experiment was successful and can be referenced. Pulling random numbers greater than that is all well and good, but it serves no real purpose in this discussion other than to be obtuse.

[OrwellwasRight]

37. He was campaigning not bashing.

Campaigning sometimes requires you to point out where your policies and ideals are superior to your opponent's.

[JHan]

64. Apparently doing it Bernie's way is the only way you really care about health, or wage stagnation..

or anything else.

There are many versions of single payer healthcare and many private/public hybrids that function more optimally ( I really like the set up in France)

But again, it's either Bernie's way or else:-

you're corrupt
a corporate shill
Not really progressive
A sell out

[kcr]

10. I don't think that's the point.

The point was his bashing Hillary for supporting ACA. It was dishonest of him to ascribe negative motives to her for doing so. It's especially bad considering now he's in a position to have to defend it himself. He should have stuck to pushing for his own plan. That would have been the honest thing to do.

[padfun]

12. If Bernie was the Democratic Candidate

then the Dems would have the Presidency and the Senate right now.

[Skittles]

21. complete bullshit

he was unable to even convince the majority of Dems to vote for him

NOT EVERYONE FELT THE BERN

[Gore1FL]

55. He didn't have the Clinton baggage to deal with in a year where political dynasties were rejected.

The general election is a different animal from the nomination phase. It's unknowable what party unity would have been like with Sanders as the nominee.

[Skittles]

61. the "Clinton baggage" was bullshit too

and PLENTY of bullshit would have been thrown at Bernie

the fix was in for Donald

STOP DEMONIZING HILLARY ALREADY

[Gore1FL]

95. It apparently wasn't bullshit to the Obama voters who decided to stay home or vote Trump.

Ask Jeb Bush how the whole political dynasty thing went for him.

I'm not demonizing Hillary Clinton. To say she was without negatives, however, does no one any good and flies in the face of the election's outcome.

[kcr]

100. That baggage didn't just appear out of thin air, did it?

Yeah, it wasn't bullshit to those voters. Guess who helped create that bullshit? That's the point. It's like bullies who grab their victim's hands and smack them in their face with it, and taunt them, "Why are you hitting yourself?"

[Gore1FL]

107. There were self-inflicted hits that didn't involved bullies

And they rang a similar tone to the self-inflicted things that happened during the Bill Clinton years that hampered his presidency.

Add to that the fact that George W. Bush ruined the climate for political dynasties, and it's pretty easy to see why there were so many problems.

Complete mismanagement at the DNC didn't help either.

[truebluegreen]

59. complete disingenuous bullshit

Last edited Wed Dec 28, 2016, 07:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Do only registered democrats (and republicans) vote in general elections? Even more, do only primary voters vote in general elections?

[TheCowsCameHome]

40. We couldn't have been any worse off,

That is a fact.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

14. Are you sure? That's not what Chelsea said.

"Sen. Sanders wants to dismantle Obamacare, dismantle the CHIP program, dismantle Medicare, and dismantle private insurance," Clinton said in New Hampshire Jan. 12.


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jan/14/chelsea-clinton/chelsea-clinton-mischaracterizes-bernie-sanders-he/

[PatrickforO]

15. Well, yes, we knew this.

But, yes, lots of nasty things were said during the primary. Now, though, we must try and educate people about the right wing lies, and somehow try and reverse the corporate propaganda machine that has brainwashed a huge number of Americans - I'm talking about Fox 'news' and hate-talk radio. This is manufactured consent, folks, and it has nothing to do with truth, but everything to do with profits.

The mantra is 'privatize, deregulate and get rid of social programs.'

Unfortunately, the brainwashed populace who voted for Trump because they thought he was an outsider, different, an anti-establishment person who could go in and 'drain the swamp,' does not realize that the 'swamp' is the government services everyone depends on so much. For Republicans the swamp is programs that help Americans. So that is what they will drain. And what will we get?

MORE WAR SPENDING!!!

That's right, America! Because we are truly EXCEPTIONAL (at killing lots of people really fast).

[tosh]

67. Great post!

I wish more of us would HEAR this message.

[zentrum]

17. Thank you. K&R nt

[Mustellus]

20. In order to win again....

.. we are going to have to make converts, and maybe even convert a few .. (holds my nose) racists.

So, I'm not looking for people who shared all my beliefs.... since birth.

I'll make common cause with anyone sane enough to believe there is strength in numbers, and yes, we are stronger together.

[elmac]

42. The campaign is over

the fascists are in 100% control. If there is anything left of this country worth fighting for in 4 years, which I doubt, then we can rehash the past to see what may have gone wrong other then fascist voter suppression, FBI, Putin campaigning for sniffles, big money buying off politicians, dumb ass voters.

[Ken Burch]

110. Agreed. The only reason I started this thread

is that the claim I refuted in the OP is STILL being made ON THIS SITE.

The guy will never run for president again. What's the POINT of still using primary attack lines against him?

It's not as though the party would gain anything by anathemizing Bernie and those of his supporters who won't renounce their support for him.

[jalan48]

68. Thank you Bernie for having our backs once again.

[CentralMass]

73. Thank you Ken.

[guillaumeb]

76. The agenda is clear to many.

But people are still understandably angry about the theft of an election and that anger makes people say things.

[riderinthestorm]

104. Thanks Ken. K&R nt