Bernie co-chair Ro Khanna just called Pete Buttigieg "intellectually dishonest"

[highplainsdem]

Tweet from Khanna, minutes ago:

Link to tweet

Article he was commenting on:

https://nypost.com/2019/04/21/pete-buttigieg-compares-bernie-supporters-and-trump-fans/

The 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana was speaking at a campaign stop in New Hampshire on Friday when he drew a parallel between followers of the diametrically opposed politicians, according to The Washington Examiner.

“I think the sense of anger and disaffection that comes from seeing that the numbers are fine, like unemployment’s low, like all that, like you said GDP is growing and yet a lot of neighborhoods and families are living like this recovery never even happened. They’re stuck,” Buttigieg told high school students in in Nashua, N.H.

“It just kind of turns you against the system in general and then you’re more likely to want to vote to blow up the system, which could lead you to somebody like Bernie and it could lead you to somebody like Trump. That’s how we got where we are.”

Buttigieg also tried to draw a distinction between himself and the 77-year-old Democratic socialist from Vermont.

“Part of running for president is you wind up competing with people that you like or appreciated or admired many years back,” he said about Sanders. “I don’t have the same views on everything that he does.”

_____


I'm editing this, after a lot of replies, to add links to video, since some people seem unsure of the news source Ro Khanna was tweeting about and wonder if Mayor Pete was quoted accurately.

This is the longer video, a 17-minute video showing Mayor Pete making a lot of good points at a meet and greet in Nashua NH. What he said about his admiration for Sanders, and the essay he wrote about him, starts with a question he's asked about 12:15:

Although that video is over 17 minutes long, it cuts off abruptly, and I couldn't find the other comments he was quoted as making about a sense of anger and disaffection leading voters to want to vote for someone who'll blow up the system.

But a shorter clip from the same meet and greet was on CNN this morning and was included in some tweets, including this one from a journalist who's a Bernie supporter:

Link to tweet

I'm posting these in case anyone else is wondering if the newspaper Ro Khanna is referencing, and the newspaper that article refers to, made up the comments.

Mayor Pete's comments about Bernie in the longer video seem quite affectionate.

If anyone has seen longer video than the brief video in that tweet showing Mayor Pete's comments about Trump/Sanders voters with more context, I'd appreciate your posting it.

[WeekiWater]

1. Why would he tweet about something he didn't read.

If he did read it this is a serious indictment on his own character.

[George II]

17. Either or, it's a bad look for one of our progressive Congressmen.

[EndGOPPropaganda]

104. NO. This is a SMEAR JOB by the NY Post and Wash Examiner.

Both are controlled by rightwing billionaires.
Both are media outlets DESIGNED to HURT DEMOCRATS.
And look what they did here: take Buttigieg's words out of context and MAKE UP a fight between him and Bernie.

Sigh. Ro Khanna is usually smart and shouldn't have risen to the NY Post bait.
And we shouldn't either.

[brooklynite]

119. Publishing something that was actually said is now a "smear"...

Good to know.

[EndGOPPropaganda]

239. It was taken out of context. Buttigieg was complimentary

Check this thread

Link to tweet

And if I'm playing Early Morning Bad Narrative Cop, this is an extremely weird Narrative coming from some Sanders surrogates. Buttigieg's comments were extremely boilerplate, basically that Trump and Sanders voters both suffer economic anxiety and are disaffected with the system.

In fact, Sanders supporters sometimes make arguments like these themselves to claim Bernie will appeal to Trump voters. It's an extremely weird thing to get upset about unless they're deliberately looking to pick a fight with Buttigieg.

Link to tweet

Also just to put this in context: This came in remarks to high school Democrats in which Buttigieg was effusively praising Sanders’ authenticity and telling kids why as a high schooler he wrote an essay about Sanders and courage

[Cha]

144. Not the first that I know

about for Khanna..

Ro Khanna called those "petty" who voted for Hakeem Jefferies over Barbara Lee for House Democratic Leader Chairmanship.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211825120#post20

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Couldn't find the tweet from Khanna but I remember what he said because I noted it in that thread.

Saw this bonus tweet there, tho..

Link to tweet

[Honeycombe8]

55. Oh, I'm sure he read it. It's a short, very clear sentence. nt

[tymorial]

153. Twitter fallout

People become used to taking small amounts of words as the complete story when context is required. To be blunt, (and I realize this may not win fans), in this case it's laziness, over enthusiasm, or simple mean spiritedness.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

2. Disappointed in Mayor Pete.. was starting to really like him.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[redstateblues]

7. Yeah sure!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

14. Yup... I've been VERY supportive. Sorry, the facts are the facts!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

18. As you would say, "yeah, riiiiight".

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

32. Didn't think you could back up your misstatement that I didn't like Mayor Pete...

Quick... change the subject!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[mr_lebowski]

115. I can back BlueState on this one ...

S/He definitely has shown Pete love the past few weeks. I've seen it ...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

120. The truth ALWAYS prevails... thanks for that. Some will say anything..

to try and get a charge out of you... hell, they'll even make up quotes about things you never said!!! Then, when faced with the truth, instead of admitting their error and apologizing, they conveniently change the subject. Someone here - the one exception - DID apologize, so that at least was encouraging.

All the best!!




Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[mr_lebowski]

131. N/P, just keepin' it real, brother/sister :)

[LanternWaste]

220. Damned ironic you ask others to support their own conclusions

As it seems an allergen of yours to do so yourself.



Evolution, Not Revolution.

[ehrnst]

231. " Quick... change the subject!! "

Pot meet kettle!

[True Dough]

30. You'd know better than anyone else

If you'd care to link posts where you express approval for Mayor Pete (not full-throated support, but a positive impression), please link a few of them here so we can be convinced.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

47. LMFAO!! Like I care whether you or anybody is convinced or not.

My positive opinions of Mayor Pete, since the day he announced, are well known to many here with whom I've communicated about Pete.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[True Dough]

49. Funny how no one but skeptics are appearing in this thread

Maybe some of those "many" will pop up to back up your account of things.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

61. They're more than welcome to pipe in about my prior expressions of fondness for Mayor Pete.

Of course, I reserve the right to change my opinions about ANY candidate, positive or negative, as their political views, past or present, become more fully known. That's how the primary process is sposed to work.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[redstateblues]

70. Fondness? Lol

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

75. Yes, as I've said many times, I was starting to really like Mayor Pete...

Perhaps, you're confusing my views on Mayor Pete with those on Uncle Joe, who is the LAST candidate I could see voting for in the Democratic primary.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[sheshe2]

101. Uncle Joe of DU is Biden?

I think we better start using initials for the candidates. Every time I see someone mention Uncle Joe I think of the poster here.

So from now on:

Uncle Joe of DU can be UJ and Uncle Joe Ex-VP should be JB. It sure would help clear things up.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

112. Oh, okay... haha!! Now THAT Uncle Joe I could definitely vote for in the 2020 primary!!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[sheshe2]

134. Which one? nt

[True Dough]

85. A Mayor Pete supporter just did vouch for you

My apologies.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

91. Okay, no worries, that's very kind of you to say... apology accepted.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[JonLP24]

60. I will say it for me

What Happened When Pete Buttigieg Tore Down Houses In Black And Latino South Bend
"Everyone wants to find a villain," a South Bend politician said of Mayor Pete Buttigieg's housing program. "This is just how economic development happens."

SOUTH BEND, Indiana — Regina Williams-Preston got into politics so that the city wouldn’t do to anyone else what the mayor’s big redevelopment plan did to her.

His program to knock down hundreds of homes in black and Latino neighborhoods like hers smacked of gentrification and ultimately cost her family several investment properties they hoped to repair but couldn’t after Williams-Preston’s husband suffered a serious illness.

Williams-Preston turned her anger into a successful run for city council. She pushed for more resources and fewer fines for those eager but struggling to renovate vacant homes. She demanded a deeper understanding of how big redevelopment plans can wipe out the fragile capital accumulations in communities of color. And now she is running for mayor, a job that’s opening up because the man behind the aggressive demolition program wants to be president.

Pete Buttigieg, the improbable, suddenly upper-tier Democratic contender, treats the initiative as an unfailing example of his executive leadership and one that shows why the mayor of South Bend, Indiana (population 102,000), deserves a promotion to the White House. Buttigieg gave himself a nice, round-numbered goal and an urgent deadline: 1,000 vacant and abandoned houses bulldozed or repaired within 1,000 days. Then he finished ahead of schedule.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/henrygomez/mayor-pete-buttigieg-south-bend-gentrification

TYT exclusive

Buttigieg's Police Issues Go Beyond Secret Tapes

A legal settlement signed by South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg required a fired city employee not to reveal what she heard on secret tapes of police racism because it “might have a negative impact on ongoing or future prosecutions,” according to a copy of the document obtained by The Young Turks.

TYT has also learned that Buttigieg, now a presidential contender, allegedly fired another city employee one year later for failing to “deep six” a separate investigation into another police incident involving race, according to the former head of South Bend’s Board of Public Safety.

Over the course of several days in South Bend, multiple sources shared with TYT allegations of wrongdoing, including racism, by both the South Bend Police Department (SBPD) and the county’s homicide unit. Much of it, but not all, predated Buttigieg's mayoralty. In response to an email Friday with questions regarding allegations cited in this article, a spokesperson for Buttigieg’s presidential campaign wrote, “This is a lot that is going to take awhile to sort out.”

In the case of the tapes, Buttigieg does not appear to have publicly cited protecting prosecutions as a rationale for keeping the tapes secret. Instead, the mayor has said that releasing the tapes would violate federal wiretapping laws, because the police say they were taped unwittingly.

https://tyt.com/stories/4vZLCHuQrYE4uKagy0oyMA/2bmmTSQD7wsAQXplMP6XVY

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/us/politics/buttigieg-black-police-chief-fired.amp.html

Pete Buttigieg argues against free college. This is why progressives can’t agree about subsidizing tuition.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/2019/04/05/pete-buttigieg-argues-against-free-college-this-is-why-progressives-cant-agree-about-subsidizing-tuition/

Also comparing Bernie to Trump voters offends everything I ever believed in over a lifetime especially on the anti racism front.

[crazytown]

74. So TYT has gone into South Bend digging up dirt?

[True Dough]

79. I don't think Pete was saying Bernie and Trump voters possess the same values or ideologies, Jon

I think he's referring to the "burn the house down" mentality, which is true of a portion of Bernie voters in 2016. Look at how divisive Bernie/Hillary was here at DU, for example. JPR ensued.

Not everyone believes free college is achievable, at least not with the costs that will be associated with it. Pete says he doesn't want the working poor to face higher taxes so that university grads who go on to high-paying occupations get to enjoy gratis education. He has spoken in favor of expanding the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program and reducing or eliminating interest on student loans.

As for the housing issue, I'd invite you to read this story for a different take entirely:

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/04/21/how-the-media-is-getting-mayor-petes-south-bend-gentrification-story-wrong/

I don't know much about the "secret tapes" issue. Will have to read up on that.

[JonLP24]

97. I don't blame Bernie Sanders voters for the divisiveness here

The tearing down homes was a big deal breaker along with firing the police chief.

I disagree with Pete strongly with his argument 'why should those that don't go to college subsidize those that do' s a RW talking point. We all subsidize corporate welfare and non-sports fans subsidize stadiums which both are transferring taxpayer wealth into the hands of private interests. We also spend trillions on defense, give tax breaks over and over, corporate subsidies, etc again mostly transfering taxpayer wealth into the hands of private interests. There are other measures besides raising taxes on the poor when the richest corporations pay 0% tax like Amazon who was still wooed with sweetheart deals to come to New York & Virginia.

Amazon's Ransom Vs. Stadium Deals: Which Is Worse?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/deadspin.com/amazons-ransom-vs-stadium-deals-which-is-worse-1830467603/amp

Tuition costs are skyrocketing and student debt is out of control we need to do something about it imo.

[True Dough]

98. Sounds like your mind is definitely made up

Good luck to your candidate.

[JonLP24]

110. I forgot to add

About his comparison most of the #NeverHillary were conservatives

You might be tempted to think that these #NeverHillary voters are leftists who thought Clinton was too much of pro-corporate, warmongering centrist. But relatively few of them were. Less than a fifth of them voted for Stein, for example. Instead, these voters were disproportionately likely to describe themselves as moderate or conservative. Among the 31 percent of self-described conservatives who voted for Sanders in the Democratic primaries, more than half were #NeverHillary voters, for example. A large minority of the independents and Republicans who supported Sanders were #NeverHillary voters as well.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-was-helped-by-the-neverhillary-vote-what-does-that-mean-for-his-chances-now/amp/

Hillary Clinton had supporters of her own that abandoned ship in 2008 maybe came around for Obama in 2012 was all in for Hillary Clinton or the former GOP Hillary Clinton supporters especially the ones that didn't like Trump.

After McCain's defeat in the general election some commentators accused PUMA of essentially misrepresenting their influence or numbers, as some exit polls showed that Obama won over 90% of the Democratic vote. But later studies found that between 24% and 25% of voters who supported Clinton in the primary voted for McCain in the general election.[48]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_United_Means_Action

Can't control what flaky individuals are gonna do. I'm actually open to other candidates only a couple I have ruled out. Just saying I didn't know much about Mayor Pete but the more I learned the less I liked.

[True Blue American]

146. Progress always means tearing down old buildings.

I would like to know what Pete did to help those who had their dilapidated, old houses torn down to live elsewhere.

It is foolish not to think some will be replaced..

[marylandblue]

157. The homes were all vacant or abandoned, that was the point.

With nobody living in them, they became dangerous eyesores. In some cases they helped rehab the homes so the owners could move in or rent it out. Some owners complained they were too quick to tear down, so they shifted the program a bit and to allow more rehabs.

[Celerity]

257. tear down houses, lolol and 'firing' the police chief (who just, btw, retired in 2017 with a full

pension, that is how much he was 'fired'). Do you even read anything that actually happened in any of these instances? The police chief was under FBI investigation for breaking federal wiretapping laws at the time. Buttigieg asked him to resign, he did, and then 12 hours latter Boykins took it back, and he was demoted, not fired. The police chief had been illegally taping cops for over a year (long before Pete was even mayor) after he discovered their phones were still being recorded from an old set up.

As for the 'Oh noes! Pete tore down houses!' meme

try this on for size if you care to


How the Media Is Getting Mayor Pete’s Gentrification Story Wrong

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2019/04/21/how-the-media-is-getting-mayor-petes-south-bend-gentrification-story-wrong/

South Bend, Indiana was a prosperous manufacturing town through much of the 20th century. It achieved a measure of fame for hosting the auto plant that built the Studebaker. But as the economy changed, so did the town’s fortunes. Between 1960 and 2010, its population plummeted by nearly 25 percent. Left in the wake of mass departure and economic stagnation was a rash of urban blight: thousands of homes and other buildings stood vacant, left to disrepair. With blight came decreased home values and a rise in crime.

South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, now a Democratic presidential candidate, launched an initiative in February 2013 he called “1,000 Homes, 1,000 Days.” The goal: identify 1,000 vacant or abandoned homes (about a third of the total) and either demolish or repair them. By November 2015, 427 homes “were repaired, 569 were demolished, 10 were deconstructed, 6 were set aside for repair by community development corporations, and 110 were under contract for demolition,” according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which provided a block grant supporting the initiative. If Buttigieg’s reelection with 75 percent of the vote is anything to go by, South Bend’s citizens have signaled their approval. The city’s population has steadily increased since 2013.

Buttigieg has made the initiative’s success a centerpiece of his presidential campaign, so it should be no surprise that journalists have looked into it. But two remarkably similar stories published last week—in Buzzfeed and on CNN.com—said the initiative “smacked of gentrification.” That this odd phrase appeared verbatim in both stories is perhaps interesting. (Buzzfeed’s Henry Gomez, who published his piece first, should wonder where CNN’s Dan Merica and Vanessa Yurkevich got their inspiration.) What’s puzzling, however, is the decision to frame the demolition and rehabilitation of vacant and abandoned homes as akin to displacing minority communities. (Judging from 2011 and 2019 population estimates, no displacement appears to have occurred. What’s more, it’s hard to displace people from homes where no one was living.)

The two major challenges Buttigieg’s initiative faced were the town’s lackadaisical enforcement of building code violations and absentee owners of the targeted homes. One of the initiative’s biggest obstacles was determining if the blighted properties’ owners were both sufficiently willing and able to improve them. Both the Buzzfeed and CNN stories lean heavily on two sources: Stacey Odom and Regina Williams-Preston, two African American women who had purchased blighted properties. Odom purchased one, which she hoped to fix up and make her own home, without knowing that the initiative had already slated it for demolition. Williams-Preston had purchased three vacant homes “with plans to refurbish them and either sell them for a profit or create a business, like a day care for local kids,” CNN reported. Sadly, her husband fell seriously ill and money that would’ve gone toward their investment went toward health care instead.

Both stories strike a decidedly oppositional tone. Buzzfeed seemed particularly intent on framing the story as a conflict between a robotic, white, impersonal politician and a black community. (The word “data,” and the mayor’s abiding interest in it, somehow became grounds for opprobrium.) Ironically, both stories show Buttigieg to have been an exceptional leader. Odom struggled to get her property off the demo list, but then, as CNN reports, she had a chance encounter with Buttigieg. What happened next was governance par excellence:

snip

[JonLP24]

259. He was recording them saying racist stuff

Of course I read what I posted all the way to the bottom.

He came out in favor of felony disenfrinchisement which is something I don't support.

[Celerity]

260. No. He recorded them for over a year illegally, and another person

Last edited Wed Apr 24, 2019, 01:58 AM - Edit history (1)

the communications director heard what she later claimed was racist things and possible criminal acts. She went to the chief, Boykins, who then threatened the other cops, as it was a power struggle. The other cops freaked out and went to the FBI and they started a federal investigation.

Much of that happened before Pete became mayor. He was finally told about the ongoing federal investigation. Boykins never told him he had been illegally taping the other cops. Neither did the com director. At some point Buttigieg asked for Boykin's resignation, and he resigned, but the next morning took it back. Buttigieg demoted him, and fired the coms director.

Almost no one other than Boykins and the communications director have heard the tapes. A federal judge ruled the were illegal and should be destroyed in 2015. The City Council appealed, and it was kicked back to a state court, where a RW judge appointed by Pence will soon rule. Everyone sued. The other cops got the most, half a million. The coms director got a lot less, but Boykins, the chief, only got 75K.

Boykins stayed on the police force in SB the whole time and retired in 2017. Pete has never heard the tapes. He only has guardian custody until the court case is decided about them once and for all. He will destroy them if the state judge upholds what all the other courts/judges have said, except for the federal appellate court, namely that they were criminally made.

Finally, he is NOT in favour of felony disenfranchisement ONCE the prisoner is released. Only, like almost everywhere, when they are actually locked up. Bernie's position is political suicide here in the US.

You really need to read things more carefully. You have been sold a false bill of goods based off what you are incorrectly claiming.

[JonLP24]

262. I read them just fine

You just provided a different source I haven't came across.

I had to read your whole post to even see that line.

[murielm99]

123. TYT, huh?

Can't say I am surprised by their yellow journalism.

[JonLP24]

133. I think they were following up on this story

Pete Buttigieg Fired South Bend’s Black Police Chief. It Still Stings.

SOUTH BEND, Ind. — Pete Buttigieg had been mayor just 13 weeks when he faced a leadership crisis.

It was March 2012, and 300 residents of South Bend, Ind., solemnly marched to the Martin Luther King Center to protest the killing in Florida of a black teenager, Trayvon Martin.

A prominent figure at the demonstration was Darryl Boykins, South Bend’s first black police chief. Admired for teaching tennis and boxing to young people, he had been promoted to chief five years earlier after winning the respect of both black and white officers in a department that sometimes divided along racial lines.

Mr. Buttigieg addressed the protesters, but seemed not to interact with Mr. Boykins. What no one in the crowd knew was that the police top brass were in turmoil — shaken by allegations that Mr. Boykins had improperly taped phone calls of senior white officers who were said to have used racist language, including about him.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/us/politics/buttigieg-black-police-chief-fired.html?searchResultPosition=1

I think TYT went down and learned additional information relating to this according to their sources. In any case I'm just the messenger.

[murielm99]

139. The police chief was demoted,

not fired.

TYT is not a reliable source and anyone who posts their tripe here is suspect, IMO.

[JonLP24]

140. I just used the New York Times

I never had issues with TYT but I don't work for them so I am not responsible for their content.

[murielm99]

141. I would recommend this thread:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128780752

[Locrian]

252. SB and neighboring city Elkhart

are cesspools of problems with police racism

It's a shame that Buttigieg inherited it - but it does sound like there's been a few mistakes made.

[murielm99]

253. Please read the thread I recommended.

Mayor Pete's actions are being completely misinterpreted. I don't know if it is by mistake, or on purpose, in order to smear a rising candidate.

[Locrian]

254. thanks

Yes - I read the article and totally agree with it.

I actually LIVE in South Bend (went to his launch btw) and it (the article) fits with the issues SB has with property etc.

The issue I don't think is resolved is the "demotions" and at what appears to be the handling of the issues with some of the racist remarks made by the cops on tape and reporting of those (and handling of) by the mayors office.

[Celerity]

78. tbf, the poster has been pretty nice towards Pete

[True Dough]

82. Thanks for saying so, Celerity

I trust your take on things.

[Celerity]

87. yw!

[crazytown]

57. Testimony: InAbLuEstate has been supportive of Mayor Pete's campaign

from the get go. He is absolutely correct, and had Buttigieg as his third choice after Bernie and Warren.

I would say to him

I don’t think it’s news that’s Bernie supporters want to blow up a status who that has seen the top 1% groe fantastically rich while working people have gone backwards.

It also not news that Mayor Pete has said some people voted Trump ‘to burn the house down’

What is news is that Pete did say, as he has in the past, that the Trump campaign channeled people’s anger and frustration of being left out and left behind into racism and xenophobia.

[George II]

77. I've been supportive of Mayor Pete from the beginning.....

I had his as 16th of 19 after 15 others.....

[crazytown]

89. My memory is he has made a number of supportive comments

and had him as number 3 at one stage. I can go looking for a link if you like.

That’s he’s done a 360 on one story shows that Bernie supporters can be, ‘how you say’, a little excitable after guidance from head office.

[sheshe2]

137. "a little excitable after guidance from head office."

[George II]

208. Not only just one story but a matter of 17 minutes - look at posts #2 and #29. My head is spinning.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

86. Wow!! Thanks for speaking the TRUTH... not that I care what some people

continually fantasize about regarding things I did or didn't say. Some will even make up quotes!!!

But, thanks again... very kind of you to say.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

167. fAcTs ArE fAcTs?

hAd a ReVeLaTiOn On ThE tOpIc?

[ehrnst]

223. When you say "facts are facts"

That's just....

[sheshe2]

34. This

[Celerity]

93. not going to go crazy and post a tonne of posts to show it, but here is one

InAbLuEsTaTe is telling the truth


https://www.democraticunderground.com/128737480#post3

[George II]

162. That's not "supportive", that's just stating what everyone else knows, Buttigieg is very smart....

It says nothing about what he thinks of Buttigieg's policies. Note the name at the bottom of the post you provided.

[George II]

11. No you weren't.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

29. Riiiiight... well if you say so!! You never get tired of being wrong I see.

I've been VERY high on Mayor Pete until just recently, though I'm still willing to hear the guy out. But, go ahead, feel free to speak for me... but, at least try sticking to the subject and rely on the use of plain english.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

38. Sorry to disappoint, I have NEVER been wrong in interchanges with you. And....

...in college my minor was English, no need to lecture me on "plain English", or the King's English. BTW, "riiight" isn't a word in the English language.

So, we're back to the eternal discussion, when have you been "VERY high on mayor Pete", or will you just revert back to the same ol' "I've already shown you" (without doing so).

The fact is Ro Khanna is out of line attacking Mayor Pete on this, he should just stick to differences in policy. After all, he IS Sanders' co-chair. For the most part the criticism of Democratic candidates and campaigns have been coming almost exclusively from one camp, wonder what that one is?

[sheshe2]

41. Interesting.

I've been VERY high on Mayor Pete until just recently, though I'm still willing to hear the guy out.

Link?

[George II]

48. Details, details.

[sheshe2]

66. Frankly.

[George II]

95. Indeed.....

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

100. Can't you EVER just admit when you're wrong, apologize and move on?!

I'd be more than willing to accept your apology.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

107. Like I've told you countless times, I'm perfectly willing to admit when I'm wrong, but....

....in interchanges with you it has yet to happen. You?

PS - "Apology" for what?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

136. LOL, I prove you wrong EVERY TIME, then, like now, you pretend you have nothing to apologize for.

It doesn't bother me the LEAST BIT... actually, I find it kind of amusing now that people have caught on and have started to see a pattern.

But, please, go ahead... keep denying the undeniable fact that I've been very supportive of Mayor Pete. It would be a lot easier if you just admitted your error and apologized for misrepresenting my views yet again, but, to be honest, I don't expect it, nor do I really care if you do or not.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[betsuni]

155. "I find it kind of amusing now that people have caught on and have started to see a pattern."

[George II]

172. People have "caught on" to what exactly?

I've already shown your inconsistent, contradictory statements made just in this thread alone, only 17 minutes apart.

On the one hand you say you were "starting" to really like him, on the other hand you've been very high on him "until very recently". So which is it? How can you have been very high on someone until very recently and yet you're just starting to like him?

These are your words, exact quotes. They're not mine or anyone else's. I'm sure you have a logical explanation, riiiight?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=80542

"Disappointed in Mayor Pete.. was starting to really like him."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=80581

"I've been VERY high on Mayor Pete until just recently"

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

180. Pretending I didn't respond to you on this point isn't going to fool anyone either.

But, go ahead, keep making the same ineffective point over and over and over again and ignore my response, just to avoid admitting you were wrong to not acknowledge my fondness for Mayor Pete. I've told anyone who'd listen, many times since he burst onto the scene, what an AWESOME guy Pete is... but, of course, you already knew that!!

Honestly, I really don't care whether an anonymous poster on a chat board believes me or not. The truth is the truth.

But, do carry on.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

181. So then, how do you explain two totally contradictory statements made 17 minutes apart...

...in the same discussion? "Ineffective point"?

How can the same person "just start" to like a candidate and at the same time be "very high on him until recently"? Which one of those is true, they can't both be.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

182. Just read my response to the 1st time you made that same weak argument...then you'll know.

Or, just keep pretending I didn't already respond, like you keep pretending I've never been fond of Mayor Pete. Either way, I STILL don't care whether you believe it or not.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

184. So you can't explain your contradictory statements. I can accept that. Can you?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

186. As I've ALREADY splained, ummmm, cuz they're NOT contradictory... are you SERIOUSLY denying

that I responded, showing the weakness of your argument?! Anyone can see I did. Perhaps, someone can help you out... obviously, I can't!! Or, you just playin? (Can't tell.)


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

191. No you haven't. It's not an argument, it's a statement of fact. Within 17 minutes you said two....

....completely contradictory things. "Anyone can see you did".

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

192. Okay, I tried. Don't believe I've stated my fondness for Mayor Pete... I'm good with that!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

200. Yours first...

[sheshe2]

106. Pitch Perfect.

Chirp Chirp Whoo Whoo.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

154. Yes, "Pitch Perfect"... DEAD WRONG & won't admit it, as usual!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

165. pOt, MeEt KeTtLe...

[George II]

174. Nice editing.

[ehrnst]

190. IKR...

[George II]

206. You can insult me as much as you want, it won't change the truth - your own words are right here....

....in this thread, first saying you "were starting" to like him at 10:20 last night, then saying "you've been very high on him until recently " at 10:37 last night - both in this thread.

So, sling away at me, it's all there in black and white.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

210. Yes, it IS all there... if you care to read my response to you...

Sorry, if you insist on ignoring my words that are "right there" that DIRECTLY addresses the point you keep making over and over again. It doesn't bother me though... it's kind of amusing that you won't even acknowledge my response to the same weak argument you keep making, let alone actually respond.

It tells me, and everyone else, you know you're wrong.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

219. LOL!!!

Last edited Mon Apr 22, 2019, 06:26 PM - Edit history (4)

Like all those posts with "the math" you've posted "many time" are there? Screenshots show the whole story, sweetie.







If you show me yours, I'll show you mine. Until then, your own standards prove you to be telling stories about what you have and haven't posted.

[sheshe2]

229. ...

I saw your original. BTW, I am not stupid.

[ehrnst]

170. cOpY aNd PaStE tHiS aS mAnY tImEs As YoU lIkE,

iT sTiLl DoEsN't ChAnGe YoUr MaNy ReFuSaLs To AdMiT BeInG sHoWn YoU aRe WrOng.

lIvE iN a GlAsS hOuSe?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

176. I honestly don't care you won't admit I've been fond of Mayor Pete since he emerged onto the scene.

The truth is out there... for anyone who cares to find it. But then, you already know it's true.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

178. nIcE tRy At EvAdInG...

Glass house getting uncomfortable about now?



Bernie's office is open right now. Did you talk to his staff about his curious statements about not being a Democrat, and letting Senate.gov continue to list his party affiliation as Independent?

We're counting on you to prove us all "wrong" on that!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

183. What does the fact that Bernie is a member of the Democratic Party have to do with

my fondness for Mayor Pete? Talk about evading!! hahaha!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

189. That call didn't go well?

[George II]

196. In post #2 you say you're "starting" to like him, in the present tense.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

241. Nope, you misquoted me again...said "starting to REALLY like him" There goes your theory!! BOOOOM!!!

Been fond of Mayor Pete for a long time... the true quotes are there for all to see ... nothing wrong with being fond of someone and then starting to REALLY like them. (Careful... don't do it!!)

Why would you feel the need to give fake quotes of what I said?? I don't get it... it's a sign of a weak argument... but ooookay!!!!

Try again if you like, but, the facts speak for themselves. But, if your going to quote me, at least quote me accurately. Your conscience thanks you!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

255. "facts speak for themselves"

You've had a recent revelation?

Still waiting on that "math" and "facts" you keep saying are factually real posts here on DU.

[ehrnst]

199. "Never get tired of being wrong?"

You don't even have to apologize. Would that make it easier for you to admit your mistake??

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

203. If I was wrong in saying that Bernie is a member of the Democratic Party, ABSOLUTELY, I would

admit my mistake. But, I'm not wrong about that. Bernie IS a member of the Democratic Party... or else, under Party rules, the DNC would not allow Bernie to run for the 2020 Democratic nomination and participate in the Democratic primary debates.

It really is that simple.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

204. Sanders: "I don't consider myself a Democrat"

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/329418-sanders-i-do-not-consider-myself-a-democrat

You still haven't answered this: What Democrats hire former Jill Stein supporters who have trashed the party as senior campaign staff?

Someone "whose always been a Democrat?"

You are simply wrong. He's not going to be a Democrat until the minute he absolutely has to be, then he will go back to being Independent the MINUTE he he concedes the nomination.

I take it you aren't brave enough to call Sanders' office and ask why he's still listed as an Independent on the Senate.gov site?

It was updated this morning.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

207. LMFAO!! You're quoting an article from 2017?! Really?! Good one!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

209. So you are admitting you are wrong when you say that he "has always been a Democrat?"

GOOD FOR YOU!!!

See, that wasn'tso hard, was it? That didn't Bern at all, did it? And "Bernie's good name," which you say you personally need to defend, is still OK, even if you are WRONG about some claims you believe about him!

A little humility and a realization that one has things to learn is GOOD!!! Admitting mistakes is all a part of the learning process.




Now if you can just admit you didn't type any of those "many" posts where you say you gave the sources and stats to back up your unfounded claim that he "votes with Democrats more than most Democrats do" then you'll be on the home stretch!

And admitting that you were also WRONG about the Senate.gov website - that it isn't "outdated" because it doesn't say what you need to back up a hastily typed claim of yours here on DU. In fact, it's been updated today.

It's not that hard. You can do it.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

211. Last I checked, it's 2019... I wasn't referring to Bernie's political affiliation in 2017

and you know that. You don't have to twist what I said - Bernie is a member of the Democratic Party - just to win some silly argument!!

I really don't care if you believe what I'm saying about Bernie being a member of the Democratic Party... what's important is the DNC knows I'm right!! How else could he run in the 2020 Democratic primary and participate in the Democratic primary debates?! You know the answer... go ahead, just admit it. It won't kill you.

But, feel free to keep referring to two years in the past and claiming somehow you've won a "strawman argument"!!




Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

212. "Bernie has always been a Democrat."

Last I checked "always" covers 2017 and today on the Senate.gov website, as far as anyone else is concerned.



But, go ahead, keep referring to "always been a Democrat" as not including 2017 and today's senate.gov website... and still trying to claim somehow you're "right," and everybody else is just "not wanting to say nice things about Bernie."

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

214. LOL... "Bernie's always been a Democrat" is YOUR quote, not mine.

When did I say that?!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

215. LOL. Now you're denying it, in order to avoid answering for it...

Sad, sad, sad.



You only Bern yourself when you do that.




You've said it many, many times. You can find it that same search that shows you've "given those statistics showing Bernie votes with Democrats more often than most Democrats."

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

216. Wow, so you admittedly made up a fake quote of something I never said... that's all you got?!

Winning a silly argument whether Bernie is a member of the Democratic Party is SO critically important to you that you'll make up a fake quote of something I never said... and you find that amusing?! Really?! ("Sad" is right... your word.)


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

218. You are the one making up things you never said..."fake quotes"

Last edited Mon Apr 22, 2019, 03:41 PM - Edit history (4)

Like those stats you claim you posted many, many times... and never actually did.



Refusing to admit that you were wrong that senate.gov was "out of date" because they list Bernie as an Independent is SO critically important to you, that you now deny other things you insisted on?









You never shared that "math." That's why you can't now, and try to claim that you "won't," because people "have to show" you didn't.


I just did. I showed your repeated claims of previous posts, and you have failed to support them by producing links or the content you claim exists. Bascially, your bluff has been called, you have nothing in your hand, and you're now just repeatedly telling everyone that sees your hand that you won the pot. (That's Poker speak, BTW)

Sad.

Just admit your mistakes and move on. Trying to deny what everyone else saw you wrote is what is indeed sad.



Pssst: I really don't think that Bernie will be mad if you learn something.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

221. As expected...change the subject from your made up quote & misrepresent something else l didn't say.

Nice try!!!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

222. And more double downs!

You should fold when you have nothing in your hand.... not try to tip over the table and say you won.

No one is fooled.



Any news from Bernie's staff?



Did you find any of those fictional posts about "math" you keep insisting exist?

No?



"Berned" again by my posts? I see that you still have no actual response to them.





By all means, proceed with your non-responses. Especially concerning your "More Democrat that most Democrats" anti-Democratic party senior campaign picks.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

224. When you have to make up a quote about what I said & you think that's funny...

I don't think you're fooling anybody. Glad YOU do though.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

225. ...

Nobody's buying it, Hon. The fake quotes are the ones you claim you made...



Did you call Bernie's office? No?

Find those fictional "math" posts you say you wrote? No?

You got nothin. Everyone sees that.

Berns to be embarassed in front of people, doesn't it? Especially when you continue to give people the opportunity to show where you get it wrong.





That ignore feature might save you some more embarassment.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

227. Riiiiiight!! So you can't show where I said "Bernie's always been a Democrat"... didn't think so.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

228. Like you can't show where you gave the "math many times?"

BOOM!

BERNED!!!

But I did...with screenshots, Baby!! Screenshots beat countless posts claiming the opposite....











You still got nothing. I've been calling your bluff for days, and you still say you have a full house, when everyone sees your hand.



That ignore feature will save you a lot of frantic typing, you know.

[ehrnst]

226. Screenshots don't lie...

Unlike some posters here.

[Honeycombe8]

64. He didn't compare Bernie to Trump at all. The tweeter is mistaken (giving him the benefit of doubt).

Peter compared the two groups of supporters as "disaffected citizens who seek to change the status quo." That is not a criticism or compared the groups or candidates ideologically. It was just an observation.

It seems to be pretty accurate. Your own post states you are a Sanders supporter and ends with "Welcome to the revolution!!!" LOL.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

69. Oh okay, thanks for that... based on my fondness for Mayor Pete, I'm certainly willing to give him

the benefit of the doubt and look further into what he was saying.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Honeycombe8]

83. No, I didn't mean give Pete the benefit of doubt. His words are right there to read.

He clearly observes a common thing between the two groups of supporters, as for the reason they went for their candidate. Not in ideology. And did not compare the 2 candidates.

The Tweeter misstates what Pete said, saying that Pete compared the two candidates, and then lists what Bernie's ideological positions are. Which is not even related to what Pete said. It is HIM I'm giving the benefit of the doubt in being mistaken, rather than being dishonest.

His observation seems fairly accurate on the surface of things. Wouldn't you say? You acknowledge that you support Sanders because he would be "a revolution." Trump supporters view Trump similarly, I think. Not part of the status quo.

What he said doesn't seem like a big deal to me. And not something that isn't apparent.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

94. Okay, I'll check it out... this is the kind of intellectually honest debate I'm happy to have.

Thanks for your thoughts... all the best!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[femmedem]

90. The article about Pete likening Sanders supporters to DT supporters is from the Washington Examiner

Which is a very right wring rag. I'm sure that article's intent was to sow discord among Democrats. Having heard Pete riff on that them before, I'm fairly certain that article didn't give the complete context.

My neighbor--a good friend--is a Sanders supporter and he is so alarmed about climate change, income inequality and the influence of big money in politics that he talks about voting to "burn the house down." He would never vote for Trump, but he is the kind of voter I think Pete was talking about, someone who believes the system is rotten. Some people's cynicism and anger push them to Trump; others gravitate to Sanders but won't vote in the general for someone they see as an establishment candidate.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

96. Yeah, based on your comments and those of others, I'll have to look at this issue a bit closer.

Thanks for your input.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

156. Ah, now it's "fondness". So let's see what you've said just in this thread:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=80542

"Disappointed in Mayor Pete.. was starting to really like him."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=80581

"I've been VERY high on Mayor Pete until just recently"

So which is it, are you just STARTING to like him or have you been VERY HIGH on him until recently? Seems those two statements made just 17 minutes apart contradict each other.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

158. Can't just admit you were wrong?...

You do know the expression "and I was just starting to like so-and-so" can be used as a figure of speech? It means the OPPOSITE of the literal meaning. But, of course, you already know that and know that I've been VERY fond of Mayor Pete since he came on to the scene.

People with whom I've communicated know my fondness for Mayor Pete... that's all I care about. Don't care whether you believe me or not.

Just admit you we're wrong in mischaracterizing my fondness for Mayor Pete and apologize... it's really not that big a deal!! Or go on, trying to prove I was never fond of him... I don't mind at all.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

163. Not wrong at all - I show two totally contradictory statements of yours from just 17 minutes apart..

....and you say I'M wrong? Did you even read what I said?



Have to go, my wife and I are going to the Mystic Aquarium this morning, they have a new exhibit. Have a great day!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

168. Did you even read what I said? Don't respond... it really is okay.

But, I thought I could have a serious conversation with you... just to see if that was possible. I can see I was mistaken. (See, I admitted my mistake... easy peasy!!)

My fondness for Mayor Pete is well-documented... you do know that right? The people here I've spoken to about him, at length, are well aware of that, and that, once again, you are misrepresenting my views. Why would you do that?

Again, it doesn't bother me in the least. Go on, speak for me... tell everyone again why I've never been fond of Mayor Pete. Or, just finally admit you were wrong... you don't even have to apologize. Would that make it easier for you to admit your mistake??


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

198. pOt, MeEt KeTtLe...

Speaking of admitting you are wrong....

Still waiting on what Sanders' staff had to say about this.

Or, just finally admit you were wrong... you don't even have to apologize. Would that make it easier for you to admit your mistake??

[ehrnst]

171. yOu FiRsT...

[elias7]

149. What part of Mayor Pete"s statement do you have a problem with?

[vsrazdem]

3. It seems pretty clear to me.

"It just kind of turns you against the system in general and then you’re more likely to want to vote to blow up the system, which could lead you to somebody like Bernie

[elleng]

16. ...and it could lead you to somebody like Trump. That's how we got where we are."

[vsrazdem]

19. It won't lead me to him. I'm a Democrat and will vote for whoever wins the primary.

[elleng]

24. I completed the quotation.

[vsrazdem]

27. K- sorry.

[True Blue American]

145. I am sick of the

” Blow up the System!”

That is how Trump won! I have not intention of voting for another.

For me,it is a person who tells me what he wants to do for the Country. Ne who explains how he expects to do just that.

I have no use for those who are basing their campaign on blowing up the system no matter who it is.

[Thomas Hurt]

4. Trump still squats in the WH and the Demoractic candidates are b*tching about each other.

[vsrazdem]

8. For Trump it is Divide (Dems) and Conquer.

[George II]

21. And the followers of a candidate are doing their part.

[vsrazdem]

25. From what I can see, a lot of people are doing their part.

[George II]

28. What is this the subject of this OP? Not "a lot of people".

[vsrazdem]

36. The OP is a Biden supporter, posting a negative comment about Bernie supporters done by Pete.

That's 3 different campaigns involved in 1 post. I know this is the primaries and it is bound to get ugly, that's just the nature of the beast. But we sure seem to be helping it along.

[George II]

40. I don't think the OP is part of any campaign, just a poster on DU. Not three "campaigns" involved.

[Cha]

264. Ro Khanna's tweet about Pete is

not going to be covered up.

[sheshe2]

44. Not just trump.

[marlakay]

267. That's how he won his primary

He took the republicans down one by one.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. Buttigieg makes a good point.

He's distinguishing himself from candidates who want to blow up the system.

[George II]

22. +1,000,000

[elleng]

37. Thanks.

'yet a lot of neighborhoods and families are living like this recovery never even happened. They're stuck.'

[IndianaDave]

52. Exactly - Pete is not criticizing Bernie.

He's analyzing the reasons why people might vote for people who advocate for anti-establishment ideas. It appears to me that some of Bernie's supporters are jumping to some sketchy conclusions. Simply because Pete isn't praising and exalting Bernie Sanders does not mean he's criticizing him. Bernie's supporters must know that Pete wrote an award-winning essay out of respect for Bernie. Or don't they know that! Frankly, I'm not sure why they're distressed.

[Honeycombe8]

58. That's my take on it. It wasn't a criticism.

Or an implication that the 2 groups or candidates are alike ideologically.

[IndianaDave]

84. I thoroughly agree. I'm not sure how this got to be an "issue."

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

185. I get how you would see it that way... and how some might see things differently.

My hope is that, in light of this "dust-up," Mayor Pete will clarify his remarks, so we'll know better what he was trying to say.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Cha]

143. Right.. but Khanna had to

jump on the insult tweet.

[ehrnst]

230. +1000.(nt)

[Blue_true]

242. He sure does.

Anger is at the root of Trump's success. A good portion of Bernie's supporters seem to be angry with the system as it is (justifiably) and seem determined to demolish it without considering what replaces it.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

243. Trump wanted to tear down the system, and enough people agreed with him

that he won at least the Electoral College, if not the popular vote. But Trump has caused so much chaos, anger, discord and confusion that I seriously wonder how many voters are going to vote for one more candidate who also promises to tear down the system, although from the opposite end of the political spectrum. Will people instead prefer a president in 2020 who offers stability, a return to the norms of government, reasonably predictable behavior, and a positive approach instead of anger?

[Blue_true]

248. You asked the $1 million dollar question.

And every one of us would be fools to place a bet on any outcome. There is a lot of seriously unfocused anger swirling around the country. People want "change" but they seem to have no idea what that change should look like. I honestly think that someone like Senator Warren, Senator Harris or Mayor Buttigieg would be the best change agents, but that is just my own thought.

[redstateblues]

6. A gaffe in Washington is when someone accidentaly tells the truth

[Me.]

9. So Is Pete Going To Receive The HRC Treatment Now?

Last edited Sun Apr 21, 2019, 11:10 PM - Edit history (1)

[sheshe2]

56. Simple answer?

Yes.

[Me.]

71. I Believe You Are Correct

[sheshe2]

73. Yep.

[SidDithers]

76. It's already started...nt

Sid

[Cha]

147. Check out one of BS' ardent twittter fans..

Link to tweet

Alohahoa, Me!

[Me.]

160. Tiresome Really

and so counterproductive.

Alohahoa to you....

[Cha]

164. And, so not what

even HAPPENED!

Oh well!

Hoaaloha, Me

[George II]

10. It's a disingenuous shot at Buttigieg, but not surprising. From what I've seen only ONE campaign...

....has been criticizing other Democratic campaigns up until now.

[Me.]

72. Hopefully What Comes Around Will Go Around

and proper vetting will be done

[elleng]

12. From NYPost, 'according to The Washington Examiner.'

NOT reliable at all.

Sorry Ro Khanna picked this up (IF he did.)

[highplainsdem]

15. "IF he did"??? His tweet shows the article he's commenting on. Why would you question that?

[elleng]

20. Sorry, doing a few other things and this got my attention.

Will try to follow up.

[highplainsdem]

33. I've seen tweets including CNN video showing Pete making part of those comments.

Here's one:

Link to tweet

Have tried to find a longer clip, but haven't been successful with that so far.

[elleng]

39. 'yet a lot of neighborhoods and families are living like this recovery never even happened.

They're stuck.'

[crazytown]

62. Buttigieg cut his teeth in gentrifying neighbourhoods

is an absolute lie.

[comradebillyboy]

132. Why are you posting bullshit attacks by Walter Bragman?

[Celerity]

135. why are you asking about a self-evident thing?

the poster I replied to posted a Bragman hit piece (neither of us with any bad intent btw, just showing what the attack dogs are doing), I just showed it was par for the course with Bragman with an illustration of another

[artislife]

13. oo...kay

I read the entire quote and it wasn't as awful as the condensed version but....I imagine the number of posts on this thread will increase by a lot with happy posters.


And that is that.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

54. You know the old sayin: never miss an opportunity to bash Bernie.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[artislife]

108. I know

but I must be careful. I am in the cross hairs at the moment.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

116. Aren't we all!! But, Bernie should not be allowed to be relentlessly trashed...

without an adequate response defending his good name.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[artislife]

118. In a perfect world

we could all be civil, but alas...

[ehrnst]

179. AWAYS POST SOMETHING! Even if it means repeating that you are "right" after being proven wrong!

Is anything else "less than an adequate defense of his good name," because you think that he won't do well if you don't?

That's what it looks like...

[BannonsLiver]

195. Don't interrupt the tales of woe!

There’s just so much quality woe there.

[ehrnst]

197. True this...

[BluegrassDem]

23. Bernie wants to blow up all the systems in America...

Wall Street, banking, health care, etc., etc. Pete does have a point.

[SFnomad]

26. It's intellectually dishonest not to draw comparisons between supporters and their motivation

Mayor Pete's truth is just a bit too uncomfortable for some people.
And notice ... who also lashes out on Twitter? Just saying. All the person is missing is a "Sad!" at the end of the Tweet.

[BeckyDem]

31. It's a primary, they're never nice.

I wouldn't worry about it and the constant pivot that everything will help Trump is foolish. Get Trump on policies, his are the most depraved I've ever witnessed in my life.

I see what Ro is saying and he is right to push back: "It just kind of turns you against the system in general and then you're more likely to want to vote to blow up the system, which could lead you to somebody like Bernie and it could lead you to somebody like Trump. That's how we got where we are."

[left-of-center2012]

35. "according to The Washington Examiner"

So says the right wing rag The Washington Examiner.
I didn't know we could use right wing sources?

[elleng]

42. and NYPost.

[highplainsdem]

46. I quoted a tweet from Ro Khanna, who was responding to the NY Post, which reported on the

same story as the Washington Examiner.

If you see my reply 33 above, you'll see a tweet including video from CNN this morning, video with part of the remarks Mayor Pete was quoted as saying. I haven't found any video clip showing all his remarks in Nashua yet.

[msongs]

43. hmm - Our Revolution - sounds a bit like blow up the system to me nt

[James48]

45. I think the would make a good team

Bernie and Buttigieg - If I could only
Pronounce his last name ....

[Demsrule86]

51. Right neither of them can win a general,

[OilemFirchen]

68. ...

[Celerity]

114. its simple............... boota jedge

[Honeycombe8]

50. Tweeter made a boo-boo. Pete didn't compare Sanders to Trump.

He said that their supporters are both "disaffected citizens who seek to change the status quo." That's not even a criticism of the two groups of supporters. It's an observation. The groups see something in Trump/Sanders that is NOT the status quo, is what he's saying. That doesn't mean the two groups or the candidates are alike ideologically.

[SFnomad]

53. And it's not like Mayor Pete is the first to make this observation

It's just the notorious thin skin of the BS team rearing it's ugly head again

[LongtimeAZDem]

59. Khanna unwittingly demonstrated Buttigieg's underlying point

[Honeycombe8]

65. In his or her own mind, maybe. I take people's words and intent as I read them.

He just made an observation of the two groups, which seems to be fairly accurate. Sanders supporters refer to the Sanders Revolution. Trump's supporters have been vocal in that respect.

There's nothing wrong with voting against the status quo. Pete just commented on that. Not a big deal.

[True Dough]

111. Best take on Pete's comments that I've read in this thread

Thanks for your analysis. I hope many others see your post.

[MustLoveBeagles]

126. This is what I got out of it too

and he's right.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

188. I see what you're sayin.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[JI7]

63. Sanders has been in public office for years starting before Pete was Born

[Honeycombe8]

67. And???? I don't get your point. nt

[appalachiablue]

80. fling, splat- trifling

[emulatorloo]

81. Scorched earth

[LongtimeAZDem]

88. I would say that it's intellectually dishonest to claim Buttegieg compared Sanders to Trump, when

what he clearly did compare Sanders' followers to Trump's.

[vsrazdem]

127. Yes, but as a Sanders supporter, it sickens me that his supporters are even linked in any way

to Trump, even in a sentence. Yes, I am passionate about the policies, and maybe even want to change the system, not necessarily blow it up, but if Sanders did not win the primary, I wound never in a million years vote for that asswipe.

[LongtimeAZDem]

130. So what? Unless he can't read, Khanna's tweet was a lie

[MustLoveBeagles]

92. I don't see anything wrong with what Mayer Pete said, but I know it's gonna piss some people off

[Jarqui]

99. He was not comparing them per se

Bernie is progressive - to the left of most Democratic candidates

Trump dead heads? Who knows there they're really at? They're arguably further to the right or extreme.

He's saying if the political middle isn't working, it will drive people further to the left or right.

He isn't making much of a comparison.
i'm a progressive who supported Bernie in 2016. What he said doesn't bother me in the slightest because he's basically correct.

So the Washington Examiner and the NY Post (both right leaning) make a stink over that and we're falling for it?

Pass.

[EndGOPPropaganda]

102. SOURCES: NY Post (Murdoch) Wash Examiner (Anschutz). Both rightwing billionaires!

STOP CITING MEDIA SOURCES RUN BY RIGHTWING BILLIONAIRES, DEMOCRATS!!!!

I would think Khanna should know this.

The whole POINT OF THE NY POST AND WASH EXAMINER is to SMEAR DEMS.

That's what they are DOING HERE. Twisting quotes from Buttigieg.

COME ON PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!

[RandySF]

121. Did he say it or not?

[highplainsdem]

125. I edited the OP to add links to video.

[EndGOPPropaganda]

237. Selective amplification is a thing.

First, nitpicking bits of things that people say and blowing them up is a rightwing propaganda thing. We should be aware.


Second, no -- the full context reveals Buttigieg was actually complimenting Sanders.
This was a hit piece by the NY Post. It was dishonest. And it hooked a bunch of us (including me at first). A good rule of thumb is to ignore anything sourced to the Murdoch Post.

[RandySF]

238. So Khanna took the bait.

[EndGOPPropaganda]

240. Khanna should probably not have said it.

Check these links - more explanation here.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=82475

I can't get too worked up at anyone here - Khanna probably shouldn't have said it; Buttigieg slightly misspoke, but it wasn't NEARLY as bad as the NY Post and Wash Examiner made it sound. The biggest effect is that the rightwing press amplified somethign small and made a bunch of us fight about it

I like both these guys - Khanna and Buttigieg (though I slightly prefer Warren).

[Renew Deal]

103. He just proved Buttigieg's point.

Last edited Mon Apr 22, 2019, 11:06 PM - Edit history (1)

They both promised those things. Don’t know if either intends to deliver.

[Blue_true]

244. The vice chair for Sanders is a "He". Congressman from California's Silicon Valley. nt

[BlueFlorida]

109. Ro Khanna is losing it nt

[Freethinker65]

113. Meh. It is essentional for candidates to be able to compare and contrast themselves.

It is campaign season.

[marylandblue]

117. Those who think Pete is flavor-of-the-month are mistaken. Pete is stirring up controversy

which sells, and he is targeting Sanders voters. Not the die-hard ones of course, but those who went for Sanders just because their voices weren't being heard by either party.

Khanna made the mistake of responding to Pete, which just fans the flames, and helps Pete reach his target audience.

[artislife]

124. I do think Ro over reacted

I read the whole quote and it sounded a lot like the comment Obama made about cleaving to the guns and the bible. Which sounded harsh in the sound byte but not when you hear the entire comment. (Not bashing Obama, just comparing how bent people got about the sound byte---I voted for him twice)

But I don't think this will help Pete reach his target audience. Hopefully it will all get lost in the shuffle for both candidate's supporters sanity.

[marylandblue]

128. For better or worse, the sound byte matters the most.

Few people bother to check the context.

[artislife]

129. This primary season

is old even now....politics pretty much is an energy zapper.

I should go watch kitty videos and be light hearted

[vsrazdem]

142. +++

[Cha]

265. Yes, Khanna way "overreacted" along

with other BS surrogates.

[Cha]

266. Way over re-acted..

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

217. The flavor of the month was Beto... I think he's pretty much done.

Mayor Pete still has the "mojo" from everything I'm reading.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[RandySF]

138. Credentialed elite?

Is that what we are now?

[betsuni]

148. "He wants to blow up credentialed elitism ... ."

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

201. They do love the jargon, don't they?

I'm just waiting for them to haul out pejoratives like "running dog lackey of capitalist imperialism," "bourgeois traitor to the proletariat," or maybe "counterrevolutionary reactionary industrialist."

[betsuni]

250. Oh, I know! Was thinking exactly the same thing.

That's the fun stuff.

[elias7]

150. How ironic! Intellectually dishonest to set up a straw man...

And call it intellectually dishonest.

[dewsgirl]

151. WOW, we thought 2016 was bad. I'm getting a sneaking feeling

this maybe even worse somehow. I really wish they wouldn't fight each other, I also understand the nature of politics isn't pretty...especially during elections.

[tymorial]

152. I am so over the senator from Vermont.

[LovingA2andMI]

173. Ditto!!!

To the 1500%. Beyond over him.

[liberalmuse]

159. As a former Bernie supporter who caucused for him,

I am embarrassed by a lot of his supporters. They were horrible at the caucus, horrible at the Democratic Convention and it looks like not much has changed. The cult of Bernie may have very well fucked our party once again. It’s too bad because I like a lot of his policies, but he is either unwilling or unable to reign in his more obnoxious, uncivil, loud mouthed followers. It’s pretty much put me off of him. They are a lot like Trump’s red hats in a way.

[LongtimeAZDem]

161. Thank you for this

[betsuni]

166. +1

[LovingA2andMI]

175. As a Former Bernie Supporter in the Primaries in 2016....

We agree with what you wrote here completely. It has also completely turned us off of the candidate and it is our sincere hope he does not secure the Democrat nomination were we would be forced to vote for someone we morally and ethically -- due to SOME of his supporters actions as well as the lack of Bernie showing any willingness to reign them in -- disagree with.

[marlakay]

177. I worked on Bernie's last campaign to

And I don’t understand all the people who are acting so crazy.

At first when I heard about them I thought it wasn’t really Bernie supporters but trolls or Russians trying to split up the party. Surely anyone who really knew what Bernie stood for wouldn’t act like that.

I still like Bernie, I like Pete heck I like a lot of them and hoping the primary doesn’t help Trump by our party tearing ourselves apart.

[marlakay]

268. I worked on Bernie's campaign too

I still like him but agree he doesn’t know what to do about his radical followers.

I moved on because the future belongs to our youth and we should give them a chance to guide their path.

[LovingA2andMI]

169. Really???

Maybe Ro, Nina and Bernie need to look in a mirror before making these types of statements. Just saying....

[Politicub]

187. The building of a tribe that doesn't want me included

That's how the Bernie surrogates make me feel. The candidate himself is fine. I agree with many of his positions. They echo positions of the other dem candidates.

About the tribe: It's not about positions, it's about behavior that surrogates and the in-crowd engenders. It's about the tone that Bernie is setting as being part of the Democratic Party. Trump's rhetoric will heat up in the general and the surrogates will join in the pissing match. Who can be the most outlandish? I'll fall in line in opposition to Trump, but not because I have optimism about what's to come. My attitude may change. I hope it changes. I want it to change.

Right now, I don't want to be part of the nastiness and hostility of the surrogates. I'm sick of nasty snipes on Twitter and elsewhere. I tune out most of them, but they are amplified on DU, so I can't help but see the words from the surrogates themselves. I'm sick of typing it (I should put it in my sig), but I will vote for whoever the eventual nominee is.

I want to feel like I am voting for hope and change, not change alone.

[JustAnotherGen]

193. Well done Pete!

You got an opponent's co-chair to put your name in his mouth.

Little pup is getting under film's skin - and I like that.

[AlexSFCA]

202. Pete should be more careful with BS

and I agree that comparison between BS and trump is dishonest. Bottomline, we cannot win w/o BS supporters in the general election. It is also a bad primaries strategy to go against BS especially that Pete supports all of his policies at least as eventual goals for the country. If BS wins presidency and we have simple majority in the senate, I know that tax law will be dramatically changed cause it is very easy to do and doesn’t require supermajority of any kind. With other candidates, I am not so sure cause they may still have that pipe dream of ‘bipartisanship’ which is no longer possible. Radical times require radical measures - we need a true revolution on the US, not business as usual. I don’t think Biden can do any of it.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

205. Abso-fuckin-lutely!! Revolution IS what's necessary... precisely why Biden is NOT the answer!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

232. Any revolution that dismisses all issues that don't directly affect

straight white men as "identity politics" isn't a revolution.

It's the status quo...

[namahage]

213. And Bernie can't win without the supporters of other candidates,

so calling them "intellectually dishonest" is a curious way to win them over.

[Blue_true]

245. The thing is, the supporters of other candidates will fall in line to defeat Trump.

Large swaths of Bernie supporters have said that they have no intention of working to defeat Trump if Bernie is not the nominee.

[Cha]

233. No, BS' surrogates should be

"more careful".

[AlexSFCA]

234. nothing can be done about them

we know BS will stop at nothing this time as his chances on getting the nomination are exponentially higher compared to 2016. He and his surrogates are prepared to smear any and all dem opponents during primaries and debates. It is his prerogative how to run the campaign. One thing I respect about him and his supporters is that they are real fighters.

[Cha]

235. No respect whatsoever from me.

[AlexSFCA]

236. you will if he wins the nomination

All dems will automatically vote for him. But the opposite is not necessarily true - many BS supporters mah mot vote at all if their candidate doesn’t win.

[Blue_true]

247. It is really sad to see them taking such a stance given what the country faces.

Do those people REALIZE that if we don't win the White House in 2020, Trump will build an arch conservative Supreme Court for the rest of their lives. They will get NOTHING of what they claim they want.

[Blue_true]

246. Most of the Bernie supporters here are ok, determined and willing to overlook flaws

that Bernie seem to be telegraphing, but that is a major part of really believing in someone.

[StevieM]

249. For once, I agree with Bernie and his people.

Mayor Pete is getting on my last nerve.

[Mike Nelson]

251. Congratulations to Pete!

… this shows he's reached the A-list!

[corbettkroehler]

256. This Sanders Supporter Feels The Campaign's Response Was Proportionate

Sanders chose Khanna very well as his co-chair. The congressman is the real deal. Initially, I was content to let the whole matter lie. Thanks to your added context, I know that Mayor Pete created an overlap between Sanders supporters and Trump supporters. In a purely academic analysis, an argument could be made on the question of charisma. On the more important traits of honesty and integrity, I consider myself the polar opposite of any Trump supporter.

That being said, given that Mayor Pete is a Rhodes Scholar, I wouldn't consider this incident as disqualifying in any way. If he won the nomination or were the eventual runningmate, he still would have my vote.

[Celerity]

258. Ro Khanna's Tweet was utterly detached from reality. Full stop. If that's your idea of proportionate

then best of luck to any hope for Bernie. We Democrats don't fall for misrepresentation bordering on outright falsehoods that were being pushed by RW rags like the NY Post and The Washington Examiner. Ro failed the discernment test massively, played right in the RW media's slash and burn/'divide us Democrats' sleazy hands.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Cha]

263. Mahalo for those tweets from, Nate..

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Cha]

261. BS hires 3rd party jill stein voters on his

staff.. so yeah..