This thread will become a shitstorm.

[NanceGreggs]

I just want to say up front that is not my intent in starting this discussion. But I believe this should be discussed.

This is directed at the Bernie supporters (and I was probably alerted on right there).

Despite not sharing your support for Sanders, I do understand it. I understand that his policies are in keeping with your own ideals. I understand that he represents ideas that you would like to see implemented. I appreciate that he can be charming – and that when he is brusque and outspoken, that has its own strong appeal.

But what needs to be recognized is that he is a divisive figure, and there are many of us who don’t trust him. There are many of us who see him as an opportunist who uses our party to further his own political aspirations. There are many of us who bristle at the way he demeans our party while running as “one of us”.

Whether you think that’s fair or not is of no consequence. The truth remains that this is the way many of us see him – and we are never going to be convinced otherwise.

At a time when winning in 2020 is a matter of life-and-death for our democracy, should we be supporting any candidate who divides us as a party? Should we not be focused on candidates who can unite us, given that their main job upon being elected will be to unite a highly-divided country?

I am as yet ‘undecided’. I might be convinced tomorrow that Harris, or Biden, or Warren, or Buttigieg is the way to go. But I will never be convinced that Bernie is the unifier who will bring us together after every divisive thing he has said about our party and its members.

If you continue to support Bernie, that’s your prerogative. But please keep in mind that there are those of us who will never support him because of what he’s said and what he’s done, and will never be persuaded otherwise.

I understand your support for your candidate-of-choice. But it’s time for you to understand that the lack of support for Bernie among many of us will not change.

I, for one, will never trust a Democrat-of-convenience who uses my party’s resources while demeaning it. And I am not alone.

Just be aware that you are supporting a candidate who already has a substantial portion of Democrats against him, who will never be persuaded otherwise.

We "Bernie haters", as you like to call us, have heard what you Bernie-supporters have to say, and continue to do so. But by the same token, you should listen to what we non-Bernie-supporters have to say as well.

IMHO, this is not the time to be promoting a divisive candidate when there are so many unifying candidates to choose from. This is not the time to be promoting a candidate who is facing an up-hilll battle to win over "his own" (?) party, no less members of the opposing party.

Isn't it more to our benefit to support a candidate who is already in a position to get everyone behind them, than a candidate who will never get everyone on board?

Food for thought.

[Celerity]

1. it is simple, if Sanders is the nominee, Trump is re-elected, why do we want to lose?

[Lancero]

5. The only way Trump wins is if Democrats stay home and refuse to vote.

It's amusing, really. We've got people claiming left and right that Sanders supporters are going to refuse to vote for whoever the nominee is... Meanwhile, they're also claiming left and right that Harris/Biden/Buttigieg/Warren/Whoever supporters are going to refuse to vote for Sanders if he's the nominee.

You know what? It's not just amusement. It's a bit of admiration too. Admiration for the sheer hypocrisy it takes a person to make these statements.

[Hortensis]

29. Let's be clear, only SOME Sanders supporters refused to

vote for any other Democratic candidate and instead voted Trump or third party in 2016, roughly a quarter, and only SOME polled say they'll vote Trump or third party, or not vote at all, this election also. Contemptible.

The rest of his Democratic supporters are...just variations on us and of course will vote Democrat come 2020. One poll said they’re only 42% as many as in 2016.

No one has said normal, non-zealot Democrats wouldn't vote for Sanders against Trump if he were the nominee, but that appalling situation of over 100 million Democrats and left learners having no choice but a very flawed and inadequate man who bizarrely sees the highly diverse party of America as intrinsically and irredeemably corrupt and who has profound contempt for any collective values and wishes that don’t fall in line with his won't happen.

[SFnomad]

121. Some Sanders Supporters? Try many people on his 2020 staff ...

2016 General Election / 2020 Staff ...

Co-Chairman: Nina Turner - Jill Stein voter
National Press Secretary: Briahna Joy Gray - Jill Stein voter
Campaign Speechwriter: David Sirota - Jill Stein voter
Top campaign adviser: Cornell West - Jill Stein voter

[Amyishere]

257. He's got Russian influence, then.

no thanks to both him and gropy Joe.

[leftofcool]

102. Looks like the claims have merit

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2019/04/20-sanders-supporters-say-theyll-vote-trump-buttigieg-warren-win/

[namahage]

185. Even ratf---ers can have moments of honesty. n/t

[radical noodle]

230. Supporting Sanders so

trump can win.

[LiberalLovinLug]

227. +1000

Blindness, stupidity, pig-headedness. I can think of a few more words.

[LiberalLovinLug]

228. Interesting how such a "turncoat", such an outlier, such an apostate, such a non-factor...

Always gets the most active, longest, most passionate threads.

[DownriverDem]

68. Says it all

"I, for one, will never trust a Democrat-of-convenience who uses my party’s resources while demeaning it. And I am not alone."

[Gothmog]

127. If sanders is the nominee, trump will win 45+ states

[JonLP24]

134. Internal polling has him beating Trump in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan

[BlueFlorida]

141. Internal polling

[Gothmog]

145. No one takes internal polls seriously in the real world

Link to tweet

?s=20

[JonLP24]

146. Every campaign does internal polling

It helps them map out strategy.

[Gothmog]

147. in the real world, these polls are not taken seriously

Link to tweet

?s=20

[BlueFlorida]

211. Campaigns generally don't release internal polling

It is for the strategists.

Also, internal polling against Trump a full 19 months before the election is presumptuous and a complete waste of money. (Unless of course Old Towne Media, LLC is the polling outfit.)

[Celerity]

137. I think that is a tad harsh, here is my best guess (still a slaughter)

Only ones I hesitated on were NV (high Hispanic turnout) Virginia (as so many government workers) and MN (but Trump almost won that in 2016)

[BlueFlorida]

213. I don't think he will carry NY and CA

Both are entrepreneurial states and socialism is not popular. A lot of people in CA and NY make money on bonuses and stock options which will become nearly worthless under socialistic plans.

Also, your estimate is as it stands now. Things will be different after Trump is done with Sanders' negatives which we don't see on DU but are widely talked about out there.

[Celerity]

220. If it is a 2 person race, zero chance Trump wins CA, absolutely zero, I know my state well enough

to say that with utter certainty Bernie would also probably have a VP who would help. Also, Bernie is not a socialist anymore, he is a bog standard social democrat (but has a bad personality IMHO, and has huge socio-racial blindspots) and I highly doubt he goes all all full dem soc and starts to nationalise every major industry. It is ludicrous to say stocks, equities bonuses will become worthless. They thrive under the Nordic Model.

Now add Bloomberg and/or Schultz into the mix, then it MAY get dicey.

[Eyeball_Kid]

201. There is SO MUCH in motion right now,

by election time, we'll be living on a whole different planet. There are the federal investigations that will be completed by that time. There are going to be Congressional investigations, with accompanying hoopla. There will be other calamities procured by Trumpy alone. There will be the Dem candidates doing their various dances with the public. There will be even more bizarre and chaotic ramblings by Trumpy. There will be changes in the trajectory of the economy (deceptively important). And there will be more variables. Making a prediction about the 2020 election at this time is less than meaningless.

[Grasswire2]

242. that's not what polling shows. nt

[KayF]

2. he has a good chance of being the nominee

I realize some people would never support him, but I think it would be a small number, I think the vast majority of people would come together in order to beat Trump.

[NanceGreggs]

6. I think he has a zero chance ...

... of being the nominee.

Yes, the vast majority of people will come together in order to beat Trump. But shouldn't we be looking to a candidate that stands for more than I'm better than that alternative?

The current crop of Dems have a lot more going for them than that. The 2020 election will be a statement about what Democrats have to offer - and "I'm better than Trump" is an incredibly low bar to run on.

[oldsoftie]

19. And beware the "i'm better than trump" boast; thats not gonna be enough.

No, Sanders will go far but not be the nominee. His past, his wifes past, his policies; all will be taken apart by the top 3 by the time Super Tuesday arrives. He has provided no REALISTIC way to fund those programs.
And if those who so adamantly support him decide to take their ball and go home, then they cannot complain if trump wins again by the margin of Bernie non-voters

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

156. Yeah, that's all Bernie's saying, he's better than tRumpy and that's not enough... riiiight!!

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

[oldsoftie]

174. If you havent seen people say that about every candidate you havent been paying attention.

Too many are thinking that just NOT being trump is enough.
And if the nominee is Sanders, theres no way he picks Warren.

[cwydro]

34. No way he'll be the nominee.

No.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

157. Glad to hear that, so, hopefully the Bernie bashing will stop, since there's nothing to worry about!

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

[Control-Z]

166. He still will have damaged the nominee, though. n/t

[samnsara]

44. well whoever is the nom i hope that we all come together and for for him or her..

...we dont have to like them.. just vote for them if they are the dem nom.

[TNNurse]

54. I will but Sanders and Gillibrand are at the bottom of my list.

[RobertDevereaux]

148. Fair enough...

But we all have such a list (or it's forming).

I'll vote for those on the bottom of MY list if one of them happens to win the Dem nomination.

I'll be happy to do so . . . if not ecstatic.

I'll donate, vote, and work for that person's election.

"We must all hang together, or we'll surely hang separately."

[Tarheel_Dem]

219. I'd place Gabbard, Moulton & Ryan in that same category with the two you named. nt

[sop]

56. Many Democrats have forgotten that's how elections are supposed to work

In our current system, the only rational course of action is to support the candidate we like in the primaries, then vote for our party's eventual nominee in the general election, even if we didn't support that candidate during the nominating process. Doing anything else means Trump will be re-elected.

[ehrnst]

49. No, I don't think he has a good chance at all. Many of his supporters are convinced that his

Last edited Tue Apr 23, 2019, 07:33 AM - Edit history (2)

appeal is far, far greater than it is, especially if their friends on social media are supporters as well.

The tendency of many of his supporters to shut down or shout down any criticism of him on social media amplifies that misperception.

Sanders supporters often don't understand just how many people aren't going to vote for him, because many people just don't feel it's worth the effort to endure the abuse and accusations of being a corporate stooge that often directed at those speaking up about why they like another candididate or what they see as Sanders' shortcomings when there are Sanders supporters present.

Dissent or disagreement with anything he says is not tolerated by Sanders and his surrogates, and many of his supporters take that as a directive to attack/try to silence it whenever they encounter it. "You just can't say anything nice about Bernie, can you?" is often the nicest response at someone who doesn't go silent after comments concerning Sanders' record or statements that isn't praise.

That's a bit of that going on right now on DU.

[Cary]

52. As Nance said, he is divisive

How does that translate into getting things done?

That's what bothers me about a "Democrat of convenience." One needs to put in one's dues, build consensus, and work with and for others in one's coalition. Does Sanders even have a coalition? I vote for the party, not the person, because at the end of the day the party makes the person not the other way around.

And this party bashing makes me sick. Party bashing is the surest way to grab defeat from the jaws of victory, just as we did in 2016.

It is just as easy to find the good things about our party as it is to rag on the negatives, yet some people bash us out of some strange compulsion.

[ehrnst]

67. +1000. (nt)

[Mr Tibbs]

72. Declare someone divisive

Then bash them and their followers mercilessly for years?

What's wrong with this picture?

[Cary]

74. You're evading

[Mr Tibbs]

175. The whole (bashing) issue is very one-sided

[Cary]

179. What does that mean?

All people bashing Democrats are really Republicans?

I am willing to call out anyone who bashes Democrats. Are you?

[Mr Tibbs]

181. Take it literally

[Cary]

184. You didn't answer my question

[Mr Tibbs]

189. Only one Dem candidate is openly bashed here

Along with his supporters. Hint: I'm talking about the 2020 primaries.

Have a nice day!

[Cary]

191. I have seen virtually every Democrat bashed here.

Are you trying to tell me to not believe my lyin' eyes?

[Cha]

237. It's called Vetting.. No exceptions.

[Mr Tibbs]

283. Cool story!

[namahage]

261. Tulsi Gabbard's a he? n/t

[True Blue American]

252. You accidentally

Got that right!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

105. No shit!! For some, it's called the "heads I win, tails you lose" devisiveness game. Let's play...

If Bernie WINS the Democratic nomination, then it's "Heads I win," because he'll supposedly lose to tRumpy... so, of course, Bernie and his supporters need to stand down or else it'll be THEIR fault... if Bernie LOSES the Democratic nomination, it's "tails you lose," because it'll STILL be Bernie's fault if tRumpy wins, no matter what, because the false charge will be - and already IS - that his supporters won't vote in large enough numbers for the eventual nominee... even when they DO vote that way, in GREATER numbers than Hillary supporters voted for Obama.

Like I said, it's "heads I win, tails you lose"... thanks for playin!!


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

[shanny]

109. Thank you.

[Demsrule86]

128. No one has done what you say.

[BannonsLiver]

163. Nothing.

[Sherman A1]

268. +1000

[Eyeball_Kid]

209. Hmm... that indicates that...

if you were a Republican in the 2016 election, you would have felt obligated to vote for Trumpy, no matter who he is or what he's done.

And no, I don't think that Sanders is the best choice at this early stage, and he may not be the best choice next year. If Sanders were to maintain his high status past the primaries and is nominated, I don't think that the Democratic Party will fret and worry that he's not really one of them, either. He has natural and philosophical allies in the Dem Party. But I hope he fades by then, as I hope Biden will fade by then. There are leaders in the Dem Party who have good sense, charisma, energy, (relative) youth, and strong ideas about the future of the nation. And the Democratic Party, right now, is brimming with talent. Let's use that talent. We don't have to rely on the old standard bearers who may have name recognition, but lack in creating excitement around their candidacies.

[Cary]

225. I don't pretend to understand Republicans

Last edited Wed Apr 24, 2019, 04:32 PM - Edit history (1)

I do appreciate some NeverT*umpers but cannot reconcile their newfound rationality with their role in fucking up their fucked up party.

[sop]

271. I had a conversation with a Bernie Bro' right after the 2016 election

The one in which he and many others like him had publicly vowed to either stay home, or vote for Jill Stein. "See, I told you Killary would lose," he gloated, "if the DNC hadn't rigged the primaries, Bernie would have easily beaten Trump."

"So how do you know that would have happened?" I responded. "Because more Democrats would have turned out to vote for Bernie," he noted. "Oh, you mean all of Hillary's supporters would have voted for Bernie, because that's the only way your guy could have won."

"Sure," he answered, "that's what you're supposed to do in the general election, come together and support your party's nominee." "Right, just like all you Sanders supporters did for Hillary," I laughed. "And why would Hillary supporters do that, particularly after so many of you guys vowed to never vote for the lesser of two evils?" Complete silence.

His total lack of self-awareness was jarring. I hope not to have similar conversations after the 2020 election.

[Cary]

278. We cannot count on the radical left

[Sherman A1]

3. You are certainly entitled to your opinion

and the primary process will sort out the nominee. It is designed to do that as I understand. If you are against any particular nominee because of what you believe to be some deficiencies or past perceived offense that is also your choice. I will vote for and support as I can the nominee in the general whomever that happens to be, I held my nose last time and voted for the Democratic Nominee (or rather voted against the Republican if your prefer) If you choose to do otherwise, that is likewise your choice. If you perceive yourself to be a "Bernie hater" that is your choice. One also might consider that Senator Sanders is more of a Democrat than the Party happens to be as he speaks and acts in more progressive ways than our party which seems to have moved more to the center (but that is my opinion to which I am entitled).

So do and believe as you choose. That said, your lectures do become tiresome.

[NanceGreggs]

10. I never identified myself as a "bernie hater".

I don't hate him - I just don't trust him. And I am not alone in that distrust.

If you choose to ignore that fact, that's your prerogative.

As for the "Bernie is more of a Democrat" bullshit, we've been there, seen that, and have the tee-shirt. It doesn't change the fact that he has repeatedly demeaned the Dem party and its members while pretending to be "one of us" when convenient.

BTW, when you characterize a call to discuss a current problem being faced by the party as "a lecture", you've already lost the argument.

[True Blue American]

16. I had pretty much

Quit watching Bernie. But just a few minutes last night of the arm waving, hysterical man finished me.

I want a person who is calm, good in leading and acting in the best interests of the American people.

3 years of ranting, tearing down, unlimited demagoguery will last me a lifetime. Whatever I have left.

[samnsara]

42. I tried watching him but there was nothing new..he was meh...i got really excited...

....watching Amy and Liz. I was disappointed with Kamala and Pete. I expected more policy from pete and I didnt think kamala came off as confident as the others.... and BS was just more of what he professed a few years ago..with the hand waving and finger pointing. I dont wanna be lectured.


when is the next town hall? We have a lot of candidates to go through.

[True Blue American]

55. You sat through all of them?

Congratulations! Just kidding.

I am waiting for the debates when they face each other.

[Sherman A1]

20. Horse Hockey

It was not a call to discuss an issue. It was another Lecture and frankly a boring one.


Good Day!

[Kurt V.]

23. +1000

[NanceGreggs]

27. If you don't want to discuss the issue ...

... just move on.

Simple enough for you?

[LanternWaste]

118. So you keep alleging...

Odd though... something so boring to you keeps both your presence and attention. By your own choice.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

124. Yep and tl;dr. I tried. I got to "divisive" and thought "then get over it." Problem solved.

[BannonsLiver]

165. I thoroughly enjoyed it.

You seem really into Bernie. Why are you a Yang supporter since he has zero chance of being the nominee or president? I know you once boasted about backing the losing candidates in a bunch of primaries over the years so perhaps it’s just tradition.

[Sherman A1]

167. We will see who comes out as the nominee

I believe Yang has a very good chance to be that individual as he has well thought out policies on numerous issues listed on his website. I also like Bernie Sanders for his many years of pushing progressive ideas and would be happy with him as a nominee. As to the rest, well that’s perhaps because I’m a progressive and not wanting to settle for the lesser of.....

[BannonsLiver]

168. So you haven't found one nominee in the last 3 or 4 primary cycles that meets your standard?

You are a tough customer.

[Sherman A1]

223. Not what I said

but you seem to like putting words in my mouth so I will just let you write the posts for me if that is to your liking.

[BannonsLiver]

231. I'm not interested enough to go to all that trouble.

But good luck with the Yang campaign. Who knows maybe he’ll catch on.

[lapucelle]

131. In case you're keeping track, BS is no longer FDR.

Ro Khanna tweeted yesterday that he is now Paul Wellstone.

[BlueFlorida]

142. lol nt

[peggysue2]

170. LOL!!

I didn't catch that recent shift by Sanders' surrogates.

Flailing much? And why is it necessary to attach your name (Bernie, that is) to a past politician. I thought we were all about the future, no?

[lunamagica]

188. Paul Wellstone? The same Paul Welstone who fought Sanders over Sierra Blanca?

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/8/1481494/-Sierra-Blanca-Bernie-Sanders-Paul-Wellstone-a-Poor-Minority-Community-and-a-Nuclear-Waste-Dump



Sierra Blanca, Bernie Sanders, Paul Wellstone, a Poor Minority Community and a Nuclear Waste Dump

In 1998, then Representative Bernie Sanders cosponsored and actively ushered a bill through Congress that would allow Vermont and Maine to dump their nuclear waste in the poor disadvantaged Hispanic community of Sierra Blanca, Texas.

Three West Texan protestors went to Vermont to plead with then Representative Sanders that the dump site shouldn't be located in this poor minority community, Mr. Sanders told the three activists, "My position is unchanged and you’re not going to like it.” When asked if he would at least visit the proposed site in Sierra Blanca, he said: “Absolutely not. I'm gonna to be running for re-election in the state of Vermont."

“He didn't listen,” Curry said. “He had his mind made up."

[lapucelle]

208. Yes, indeed.

[lapucelle]

214. "Environmental racism"

Mr. Sanders could have stood behind this very poor Hispanic community, but as his response to the protestors revealed, he chose the political expedient route. In this case, he didn't stand up for the less fortunate in Sierra Blanca.

Paul Wellstone would later call this injustice against the people of Sierra Blanca a case of "environmental racism”.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/8/1481494/-Sierra-Blanca-Bernie-Sanders-Paul-Wellstone-a-Poor-Minority-Community-and-a-Nuclear-Waste-Dump

[Cha]

232. lol.. like he knows

what he's talking about.

[Owl]

53. +1

[Atticus]

62. "---more of a Democrat than the party happens to be---"?

Don't really understand what was meant by this and that's ironic. I also still don't feel certain I understand Bernie.

That's why I agree with Nance.

[Sherman A1]

64. As the GOP & the RW Media moved to the Right

The Democratic Party moved Right as well more into more of a Centrist area over the decades. Sanders, Warren, AOC, Yang and others are speaking to more of the traditional Democratic ideals from what I see.

I hope that clears up what I thought was already fairly clear to anyone who has watched the last 4 decades of politics.

[Atticus]

75. "Four decades", eh? The first dollar, literally, I ever earned was for tacking up Democratic

pole signs in 1956. I was 7 and my union member Dad was a precinct committeeman. Back then, one could choose to be a liberal or a conservative Democrat, but those were relative terms: you had to BE a Democrat before either adjective mattered.

IMO, your phraseology concedes that Bernie is "something else".

[Sherman A1]

91. Your opinion

to which you are entitled. I believe that Bernie is more of a Democrat than many that sit in our legislative branches today.

[shanny]

110. +1

[Atticus]

143. Ok. nt

[lapucelle]

244. For the most part, it's narrative and apocrypha.

Nancy Pelosi is a Hard Core Liberal
http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Nancy_Pelosi.htm



Elizabeth Warren is a Hard Core Liberal
http://www.ontheissues.org/Elizabeth_Warren.htm


Hillary Clinton is a Hard Core Liberal
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Hillary_Clinton.htm


Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a Hard Core Liberal
http://www.ontheissues.org/NY/Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez.htm


Kirsten Gillibrand is a Hard Core Liberal
http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Kirsten_Gillibrand.htm

[ehrnst]

73. If one wants to call fact checking Senator Sanders "Bernie hate" that is also one's choice.

One might also show how one comes to the conclusion that Bernie is "more Democrat than the party happens to be."

Not one of several people who has said that has been able to produce those metrics when I ask for them. Other than, "Well everyone knows this, because voting record, use the Google for yourself, I'm not going to do the work for you."

Maybe you'll be the first?

[Mike Nelson]

4. I've seen some...

… Bernie supporters in the "Bernie or nobody!" category. They are true believers in "the Revolution"... There were those like that in the Clinton & Obama camps, too... but they mellowed. I thought Bernie did well in the Town Hall last night and wish him well... I agree, he should be more unifying... I think i's great that he's running with the Democrats. If he ran as an Ind., we'd have four more years of Trump & possibly eight with President Pence... horrific!

[NanceGreggs]

12. I'd like to think ....

... that we have more going for us than "if he ran as an indy, we'd have four more years of Trump".

Are we really supposed to be grateful for the fact that Bernie could have caused more damage to the Democrats, but decided not to?

[betsuni]

7. "you should listen to what we non-Bernie-supporters have to say as well."

[melman]

11. Right

because that's such an underrepresented point of view here.

[Celerity]

13. IF the real world Bernie supporters were like the DU ones, like you, and the rest, well then

the level of distrust for Bernie would be MASSIVELY lower here towards him.

BUT alas, they are not, AND to make it worse, many of the official ones where bloody hired by Bernie himself.

He is surrounded by poison and venom. It is not a good look. Sirota, Turner, some of the truly vile ones from TYT. His legions of Twitter goons (I do grant that there are legions of goons opposing him too on Twitter) etc etc etc. They are going scorched earth and of course people here (and in the real world) are going to punch back, and punch back hard.

That Buttigieg slur/LIE (and repeated by a US Rep as well!) about Pete supposedly saying Bernie and Trump were the same was beyond the fucking pale.

Bernie needs follow the old adage of 'Don't shit where you eat' whilst he is dining at Cafe Democratic Party.

[betsuni]

14. Oh, melman.

I know why Bernie supporters like him. They think the primary was rigged and Democrats are the same as Republicans. Why do you think people don't care for Bernie? Have you listened? Personal insults aren't the answer.

I sound like a therapist. Oh, melman.

[NanceGreggs]

18. Whether it's an "under-represented" view here or not ...

... why are so many Bernie supporters unwilling to acknowledge that view? Why do they simply pretend that this in-your-face issue is not an issue?

Why can't they engage in honest discussion about the fact that there are many of us who distrust this Democrat-when-convenient, without resorting to you're just a Bernie hater rhetoric?

If Bernie supporters have something to say about their candidate of choice, shouldn't it be something more than "haters are gonna hate"?

[betsuni]

31. +1

[progressoid]

66. What would be the point of that "honest discussion"?

Devil's advocate here.

You freely admit you don't trust him. How would an honest discussion make any difference? Other than to placate those of you who distrust him, it would seem like a waste of time. Your mind is made up.

[NanceGreggs]

80. That is exactly the point.

Our minds are made up on the subject of Bernie - while they are not made up on the subject of the other candidates.

So why keep promoting the candidate who HAS "the problems" instead of those who don't?

[progressoid]

104. Ah, so the discussion would be meaningless. Kind of like this thread.

p.s. all candidates have problems.

[JonLP24]

136. That just seems like a personal problem

Hillary Clinton ran very divisive campaigns in 2008 & 2016 while Bernie Sanders has a lot more class.

[BlueFlorida]

144. whataboutism .... nt

[lunamagica]

192. Sanders more class than Hillary?

[BlueFlorida]

210. Who needs comedians eh?

There is plenty of humor right here!

[namahage]

262. Nothing says class like a "fart-in" at the convention. n/t

[JudyM]

93. Yep. Pointless.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

111. LMFAO!! So true Melman!!

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

[stonecutter357]

9. K&R

[Indygram]

15. There is that giant elephant in the room regarding Sanders that I find very troubling...

the Mueller Report Ongoing Matter redactions surrounding the portion that mentions Bernie's campaign. There is also the matter of his opposition to Russian sanctions. I believe that unless voters learn what is beneath those redactions that it's just too risky to even consider him as the nominee. There's just too much at stake. There are so many other choices who won't scare off moderates and who will be fully embraced by all those who are still and may always be harboring a deep lack of trust and hard feelings. I don't believe there is anything he can ever do or say that will change that and I don't believe he is capable of uniting voters against Trump for those reasons. I also know that Vermont is a unique state in that if he were to leave the Senate it is not a given that his seat would go to a Democrat. It could just as easily go to a Republican, especially since Vermont has a Republican governor right now. I used to live in Vermont and the politics there are very unique. I believe the more Senators that stay put to help Democrats take the majority, the better, especially if there is any chance a Republican could take that seat.

I don't believe Bernie will be the nominee. I just hope that it becomes very clear very early that he won't win and that he drops out early and gracefully this time, for the good of the country and his followers.

[ehrnst]

83. Many Sanders supporters think standards which would damn any other candidate as "unacceptable"

don't apply when it comes to Bernie.

Because reasons.

The rest of progressives, however do apply these standards to all candidates even if we don't talk about it around Sanders supporters because it's pointless. Sanders supporters then get the idea that when they shout down dissent, that they have convinced people to question their own candidates and not Sanders, and those people didn't really support their own candidate to begin with if they weren't inspired to get into a knock down drag out on social media to defend them against Bernie supporters.

That will lead to shock and disbelief on the part of Sanders supporters when the primary ballots are actually counted. We now know that there are those lying in wait to exploit that shock and disbelief and direct it against the voter-selected Democratic nominee.

We also know that there are those who are more than happy to benefit from that exploitation, and will deny that it's happening, even if they aren't colluding.

They know how it works now.

[Indygram]

103. I honestly think a lot of the Sanders supporters on social media are Russian trolls and bots

The reason I suspect that is because they seem to employ the same tactics and behavior of the MAGA Russian trolls and bots. I also stopped trying to engage in any dialogue with them. On twitter both groups get automatically blocked, often without having any interaction at all. It's been years of people trying to shove him down my throat and to be honest, if I never see or hear about him again the rest of my life it would not break my heart at all. I'm just over it. One of the first things I did when joining here after lurking for over 15 years was go into account settings and automatically trash all threads with the candidate's first and last name. I just would not be able to stick around here at all if I didn't do that because all the twitter nonsense has "bernt" me out. I pray to God he is not the nominee.

Just to clarify...the "supporters" I'm talking about are not people here...it's mostly on twitter where if you comment on anything about another candidate you get a ton of comments attacking you and the other candidate and shoving Bernie down your throat.

[ehrnst]

119. And that often leads Sanders supporters to think they are more numerous than they are.

I had one friend who was a Sanders supporter on FB ask me for an apology when it turns out Russian Bots were doing so much of the anti-Hillary messaging on Sanders pages.

I asked for an apology from her for all the times I fact checked and debunked unfounded Hillary smears on her FB page (during the general, even though she said that she was voting for Hillary, and defeating Trump was the most important thing) and she got defensive because she was more interested in having her anger and disappointment validated than she was in actually electing Hillary.

She will never admit she was letting her rage make her a mark for Russian attempts to divide Democrats. When she got a notification that she had followed, liked or re-tweeted Russian Bot accounts during the election, she just accused Twitter of trying to discredit Bernie because they were a corporation, and he was going to take them down.

She would also not use the FB tool to see if she had done the same with BOT FB pages.

She's at it again with posting every Jacobin and Intercept and anonymous Medium screed against every Democratic Candidate other than Bernie as a "Well that's another off my list!" while dismissing information that I share about similar things Sanders has done with "We need Bernie in the campaign to pull the message to the left - he is just too important to criticize now!" Interestingly, that's the reaction Masha Medieto recently revealed senior staffers had when she and others went to them to report abuses within the campaign.

My friend is not a bot, but she sure is an unwitting tool.

She's a scientist, so you would think that she could analyze the data logically. but since she is a scientist, she assumes that she is analyzing everything logically, even when she's freaking out. She has a dualistic, black/white, no grey area way of looking at things.

Bernie definitely appeals to those who share that, and seek it in a leader.

[Indygram]

160. Oh gosh...I had a friend posting all those anti Hillary Russian ad memes on facebook too

I would tell her they weren't true and give Snopes links and she would not deny they were fake but she would not take them down and became a straight up Hillary hater. She voted for Stein. I adjusted my settings to not see her posts and I ignore her now. I literally can't even with her...

[mopinko]

123. this is my bottom line re bernie- if putin wants him, we shouldnt.

and they surely do seem to be back.
i was on mirt in the run up to '16, and they were coming out of the woodwork. nobody told them that handles w bernie's name it them was a red flag here, even as it was the cloak of invisibility elsewhere.
and, imho, they are back. i have been getting jury calls daily, and they are all for every damn unflattering bernie post.

i know the guys have access to a lot more info than anyone here, and i sure do hope they will be on top of this shit.

[Indygram]

161. Totally agree

I want to see what's under all those redactions.

[aikoaiko]

17. Will you vote for him in the GE if he is our nominee or not?

[NanceGreggs]

25. I hope my vote in the 2020 GE ...

... will not be based on "well, he's better than Trump".

I want to vote FOR someone, and not simply AGAINST the alternative.

To be perfectly honest, if Bernie wound up being the best the Democrats can come up with in 2020, I would seriously reassess where my party is, and what it stands for.

[True Blue American]

28. Same here!

We know what the Republican Party has become.

Does any one here remember the respected Leader we had 3 short years ago? I want that again.

[aikoaiko]

30. Fair enough, you don't have to answer.

I’m prepared to vote for any Democratic nominee regardless of what I want in a candidate and save my reflection on the party for later.

I hope that everyone on this board is willing to support the party’s nominee.

But if your evasive answer is really a no or a yes then I would expect you to say so. Or maybe you don’t know.

[NanceGreggs]

39. I've said what I've said.

Whether you construe my response as "evasive" or not is of no consequence.

[Demit]

51. That question always sounds like a demand for a loyalty oath to me.

I think members of Democratic Underground should not be commanded to give it.

[aikoaiko]

114. Maybe, but was a question often asked of Bernie supporters in the past.

It's just a question and a fair one given the TOS.

[Demit]

129. "But if your evasive answer is really a no or a yes then I would expect you to say so"

Your expectation is more than just a question. Calling a member "evasive" because they don't jump to your demand is more than just a question. The Terms of Service says members must support Democrats in the general election. They don't say members must declare their loyalty every time another member demands they do.

[Kentonio]

57. Typical

So according to you Bernie supporters are supposed to question their support, but meanwhile you're talking about maybe not even voting Democrat if we nominate Bernie.

The hypocricy on display here is incredible.

[NanceGreggs]

63. Can you please point out ...

... where I said I would not vote Democrat if Bernie is the nominee?

TIA -

[progressoid]

71. So you will vote for him?

You haven't actually answered that question.

[Skidmore]

78. Thanks, Nance.

I agree. I have a real problem with Sanders and consider him to be faithless and not trustworthy. His one speech does not constitute either of those qualities, no matter how many times he delivers it.

That he cannot commit to rules while cynically using people and being willing to partner with dishonest, unprincipled brokers speaks volumes. He was willing to write off the whole nation in 2016 to keep his ambitions alive. He is willing to look aside at wrongdoing when he benefits from it. It demonstrates a lack of compassion and leadership to me. To me, he is the other Trump.

As long as I am able, I will work to make certain that he is not the Democratic Party's candidate.

[lapucelle]

234. "He was willing to write off the whole nation in 2016 to keep his ambitions alive."

Bookmarking.

[leftofcool]

82. Same here.

[defacto7]

222. In such a case I would seriously consider the vote count to be compromised.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

112. Cue the crickets... chirp, chirp

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

[Mjolnir1956]

21. No Bern No Way No How

I completely agree….

[defacto7]

224. That's not what she said.

[liberal N proud]

22. Bravo

Said what needs to be said!

[Kurt V.]

24. click bait

[NanceGreggs]

32. If you consider those who raise concerns abour Bernie ...

... as nothing more than click bait, you have already demonstrated that your fingers are in your ears as you yell "la, la, la, I can't hear you".

Committed supporters engage in conversation. Blind followers don't.

[Kurt V.]

37. have you considered I've already given this much thought, seeing as there is a sanders post

just like this daily.

[NanceGreggs]

46. Have you considered ...

... that the push-back against Bernie is real, and should be taken into account?

[Kurt V.]

48. jfc. yes. I've already told you, I've thought this over, you're not listening. see my candidate

[JudyM]

108. "Blind followers" insults the intelligence of those who believe in his positions.

But perhaps you didn’t mean that about those of us who appreciate the way he has changed the dialogue of our party to focus more directly on issues that matter. To us.

The “blindness” and divisiveness seems to me to be more in the emotional frothing of those who tear into every bit of news about him on a daily basis. That’s far more divisive, sorry. Far more passion exists here about tearing him down than about promoting anyone else. And those who tear him down have no real interest in “discussing” his policies, it’s all ad hominem. Blind ad hominem.

All the vitriol about him being an “outsider” smacks of the same tone and energy that’s used against immigrants. It doesn’t. Make. A. Difference... What matters to those who appreciate Bernie is rooting out corporations’/corruption’s sway on crucial policy decisions. About the crucial importance of acting boldly NOW on transforming into a green economy. About not following the leader into useless wars and other expenditures that don’t benefit us. About using that money instead for desperately needed social programs and infrastructure. Etc. We as a party should be acting according to our principles and maybe it takes an “outsider” (though he is no outsider to our fundamental ideals, he is promoting them more than we have been!) to wake us up about that. Look at our party platform now, look at the popularity of those values he ran/is running his campaign on. They are ours.

[dalton99a]

132. +1. When people showing insufficient adoration or posting legitimate concerns/criticisms

are condemned as apostates, then you know the candidacy has gone cultish and authoritarian

[progressoid]

77. Indeed. n/t

[underpants]

26. Rec'd for the subject line alone.

[cwydro]

33. K an r.

[samnsara]

35. amen

[amywalk]

36. So, what you are saying is that if Bernie is the Democratic nominee

you plan to stay home and not vote? That will give the presidency to Trump once more.

[NanceGreggs]

40. Thanks for putting words in my mouth ...

... that I never said.

[samnsara]

38. my thoughts exactly...

...i wanna know if they are gonna vote for whoever is the dem nom cuz i dont support bs... i dont even like the man for ALL the reasons stated and more.... but i will pinky swear to vote for him if hes the nom AND HOPE TO HELL WE CARRY THE SENATE cuz thats all we will have.

[patricia92243]

41. Didn't realize he would be 79 when he entered WH. He and others have passed

their "use by" date.

We need a new generation of leaders with new ideas for the future.

[justhanginon]

87. "Use by" date? Hey, I'm 82 and still going semi strong.

Yeah, I agree, it would be better to have younger people running the country as long as that is not the dominant factor in one's choice. Sometimes with the passion of youth there come mistakes that can be tragic for some when at the national level.
Now I will go and check in the mirror and see if I have a "use by" date stamped on my butt that I hadn't noticed.

[Haggis for Breakfast]

250. Thank you. I was hoping that I was not the only one thinking about age.

THE TIME OF OLD WHITE MEN IN THE WHITE HOUSE IS OVER. The demographic face of this nation is changing, and old white men are NO LONGER representative of us. It's just that simple.

Look at the diversity of our field. We have so many great individuals committed to re-dedicating our country to the ideals, morals and ethics upon which is was founded. Fresh approaches to setting us back on track. So many intelligent ideas to move us ahead and past the out-of-touch old white men. So many of the nominees are from working-class backgrounds, people grounded in what the average person lives with, deals with, understands as part of today's society.

I will never vote for another old white man.

It's a brave, bold new world. We need new fresh faces with new fresh ideas.

[KitSileya]

273. Isn't it funny how people howl when you suggest 79 is too old

but they have no problem with the lower age limit to the Presidency? Hypocrisy much?

[betsuni]

43. I just saw Sanders on CNN.

He was asked about his millionaire status and said: "I don't think anybody seriously believes that because I wrote a bestselling book and made money that I've changed my views and you now have me saying, 'Gee, maybe we might want to give tax breaks to millionaires.' I don't think it's fair to say that."

This is exactly what he accuses Democrats of doing. Quid pro quo. Why are Democrats always assumed to be corrupt? Why is that fair to say?

[KitSileya]

274. Yes - his supporters claim that Secretary Clinton was bought through being paid for her speeches

But he will not be corrupted by capitalism through selling his commodity on the open market. Never mind that Senator Sanders sells his book at Walmart and on Amazon - he'll stay pure as the driven snow. She, on the other hand, is a corrupt, establishment neo-liberal shill for giving speeches and being paid for it! Hypocrisy much?

[oasis]

45. I trust the Democratic Party will give us a strong nominee.

[NanceGreggs]

47. So do I.

And that's why it won't be Bernie.

[FBaggins]

59. Too late to trust the party

They already changed the rules to favor Sanders (whether intentionally or not).

Getting rid of winner-take-all primaries and blunting the power of the super delegates will combine with the ridiculously large field to almost guarantee that he stays in.

Those like the OP may or not be haters... they’re more likely terrified.

[comradebillyboy]

130. They did away with winner take all primaries in the Democratic Party

a few years ago, it had nothing to do with BS. BS was more damaged by Dems converting caucuses to primary elections and making the caucus process more accessible to more people.

[watoos]

50. If you are a Bernie supporter - don't be an asshole.

If you are a Bernie hater - don't be an asshole.

[Kentonio]

58. I'm sure the election will be completely put at risk..

..by the couple of dozen Bernie haters on DU who can't get over '16.

[MrsCoffee]

81. C.o.g.n.i.t.i.v.e. D.i.s.s.o.n.a.n.c.e.

You go ahead and believe it’s only a dozen people on DU if it helps you sleep at night.

[Kentonio]

90. Think you might want to look up the definition of cognitive dissonance.

Because its not actually relevant in this context.

[MrsCoffee]

92. Sure it is.

Convincing yourself something is or isn’t true in order to sleep at night sounds a bit like cognitive dissonance to me.

When confronted with facts that contradict beliefs, ideals, and values, people will try to find a way to resolve the contradiction to reduce their discomfort.

[Kentonio]

97. No-one has presented facts supporting their anti-Bernie arguments

Just opinion. There's no cognitive dissonance required in rejecting those opinions.

[Mr Tibbs]

60. It's the folks who can't stop attacking Sanders who are divisive

Threads like this one

[Sherman A1]

61. +1000

[NanceGreggs]

70. Why is questioning Bernie's viability as a candidate ...

... always considered an "attack" by his supporters?

[Mr Tibbs]

76. It's been ongoing nonstop for hour years now

You aren't fooling anyone

[MrsCoffee]

86. Hardly.

You are only fooling yourself. He wasn’t vetted in the slightest last run. That was a mistake.

[Mr Tibbs]

176. He had the kitchen sink thrown at him in 2016

Bashing is not vetting

[MrsCoffee]

177. Lol. You are definitely thinking of the wrong 2016 candidate.

[Mr Tibbs]

180. It never stopped

When he is the nominee, many folks will have to take a long hard look in the mirror

[MrsCoffee]

85. Oh noes! Bernie is being vetted this time!

[Mr Tibbs]

178. No amount of smears and divisive bashing will stop what's coming

Some folks are going to be between a rock and a hard place once he is the nominee

[Cha]

238. BS is the one who hired Jill Stein Voters

for his staff.

[NanceGreggs]

89. I believe it's the folks who think ...

... every discussion about Bernie is an "attack" are the ones who are being divisive.

[bpj62]

65. Thank you Nancy

You articulated my feelings about Bernie in a concise fashion. I refuse to engage Bernie supporters on this site because it ends up in a fight on every post I have ever read.

[Billsmile]

69. Getting Involved With The Democratic Party

Nance Greggs said:

"But I will never be convinced that Bernie is the unifier who will bring us together after every divisive thing he has said about our party and its members."

Bernie got me to vote straight Democratic ticket last presidential election. He also got me to become a Democrat again and get involved in local politics.

I say let the primaries play out & let the people decide. The more fair & democratic the process is the less divided we'll be in the end.

[True Blue American]

79. Amen!

[MrsCoffee]

88. Has anyone suggested not letting the primary play out?

Guess what happens in a primary. A candidate gets vetted. I know that’s going to be hard for his supporters to accept, but best buckle up.

[Mr Tibbs]

196. There's nothing left to vet

[namahage]

263. Problem is that any outcome that doesn't have Bernie as the nominee

will be automatically deemed "unfair," "undemocratic" and the like by the usual people who couldn't accept that the people DID speak in 2016, to the tune of nearly 4 million more--and despite the efforts of a certain campaign to override the will of those people by pleading their case to the same superdelegates they held in contempt.

It's good that Bernie got you to be a Democrat "again." Would that he could follow your example--oh, wait, he became a Democrat "again," just as you did.

[Kentonio]

276. In other words..

You’ve decided in advance that Sanders supporters will do something, before it’s even happened. He’s divisive because you say he’s going to be.

Ok then..

[DDySiegs]

84. Thank You Nance!

[RandiFan1290]

94. We can't wait to vote for Bernie again!!

[NanceGreggs]

95. Yeah!

Because it worked out so well for you last time around!

[RandiFan1290]

96. Hillary lost to trump

not Bernie

[lunamagica]

195. And Sanders lost to Hillary.

[namahage]

264. And the Cleveland Browns have never been defeated in the Super Bowl. n/t

[Cha]

269. Hillary didn't "lose".. the election was

stolen from her, and We The People.

Those who care about Democracy, our Environment, SCOTUS, and everything that the asshole fascist has taken from us.

[tymorial]

98. K&R

[TheCowsCameHome]

101. I like Bernie a lot

but I will not vote for him.

He is too old this time around. The party needs young blood.

[marlakay]

255. I feel same way

Worked on Bernie campaign. Few other things too but don’t want to go negative because I like the guy has more to do with some of his young followers.

[shanny]

106. Unity!

[SidDithers]

152. Unity was needed after March 2016...

too bad one candidate, and his supporters, carried on a divisive dead-end campaign for 3 more months.

Sid

[marlakay]

256. That actually could go both ways

Us that were for Bernie last time were treated like crap around here ever since last campaign. Maybe she might have won if Hillary’s followers treated Bernie’s better. She was set to win and yes cheating, and Comey but Trump was so bad she should have beat with all of it.

[sellitman]

107. I wish you didn't go down this road

I was proud to vote for Bernie last time out. I was equally proud to support Hillary in the election. Bernie hatred has been promoted by the Russians as was Hillary hatred. You have taken the bait. Seeding this hatred from someone I respect really makes me sad. Bernie has many great idea. He WAS burned by the DNC last election so pardon him if he is a bit bitter. I would be too. He is a Liberals Liberal and if he wins the Primary I hope you line up ahead of me to vote for him over the Orange Traitor.

From you I expected better.

[MrsCoffee]

115. The only thing that has burned Sanders is his own scorched earth campaigning.

The guy has been trashing the Democratic Party and it’s members for some time now. Proudly proclaims he is not a Democrat, then pretends to be one when he needs a leg up.

Bernie is not the victim his supporters paint him to be and his bitterness does not benefit the Democratic Party nor our chances of beating Trump.

[CentralMass]

113. Enough with the negative posts. There are 20 Democratic

candidates in race. We have an election to determine the nominee.

[Cha]

235. Nance is just telling it like it is..

as usual. Most of us appreciate it.

[Gothmog]

241. Bernie is hoping for a brokered convention.

Link to tweet

[CentralMass]

247. And he pulls the wings off of butterfly's and waxes the stairs at the nursing home

[Gothmog]

248. If sanders can only get a max of 30% of Democratic primary vote, how can sanders get a majority

Of delegates? I trust Nate Silver on this

[CentralMass]

251. Your obsession with Bernie buoys my spirits. I need to send him some more money.

[Gothmog]

258. Go for it

I have given money to three different candidates so far. I was a maxed out donor for Clinton and was on the legal finance team.

I will donate to Biden after he announces.

[rgbecker]

116. Sounds like you intend to not support Bernie even if he gets the nomination.

"If you continue to support Bernie, that’s your prerogative. But please keep in mind that there are those of us who will never support him because of what he’s said and what he’s done, and will never be persuaded otherwise. "

Spoken like a true Democrat.

[leftofcool]

164. Which is her absolute right

[50 Shades Of Blue]

117. Excellent analysis. I voted for Bernie in my state primary in 2016 but

I wouldn't vote for him again unless he got the nomination which I hope he doesn't.

[rzemanfl]

155. Me too. n/t

[redstatebluegirl]

120. If Bernie is the nominee we lose and we get 4 more years of the orange moron.

I know a ton of the BOBs they are young graduate students in our college. They want free tuition, free healthcare, free everything. I would too if it were possible. However, it is NOT free, taxes would need to pay for all of this. I am willing to pay them, but many people in the US would not and we can't win on this issue. Just saying you want free tuition and healthcare without a way to pay for it is not a way to win elections.

I am also very cautious about a candidate who only joins our party to run for President and bash our party. We have a LOT of great candidates this time around. I could vote for almost all of them except for 3, Bernie is one of them. IF he somehow manages to win the nomination I will hold my nose and vote for him, but a ton of people will not. We will lose, hands down.

[dalton99a]

122. It's sad that people are using our existential crisis to build a cult following and sell books

knowing that they have zero chance of ever getting the nomination, let alone winning the general election

[Gothmog]

125. There are a large number of real Democrats who have good memories

These real Democrats will not forgive or forget

[Paladin]

126. Nicely put. Thanks. (nt)

[JonLP24]

133. I trust him because he has had the back of working class people over his political career

Rather than selling out to corporate donors which is what many here seem to prefer the party to continue doing that meanwhile there is income inequality.

[Decoy of Fenris]

135. Now you know how we felt. Many of your arguments here are what we said about Clinton in 2016.

When we saw her poll under double digits against Trump. When her unfavorability rating was on equal terms with Trump's. When we saw swing states within the margin of error in polling, states that eventually went for Trump. When we saw indies on the ground, Never Clintoners, but willing to vote for Sanders instead. When we saw the right-wing mobilize with a fury we'd not seen since post-9/11 Bush years against Clinton, but open to voting for Sanders. When the people we knew, lifelong Democrats, were unwilling to vote for Clinton. When we'd ask our friends, our family, our coworkers who was gonna win, they -knew- Clinton would lose without a doubt in their minds.

Your points of view and opinion are valid, but the time for this post isn't now. It was 2016. As it stands now, anyone supporting Sanders in this primary is likely unwaveringly in his camp. The same arguments you make against Sanders have had the exact same effect among some Sanders voters, too, just against the Democratic party. New voters brought into the fold by Sanders are firmly of the mind that only he, or possibly Warren, are worth voting for. The last primary put them off the Democratic party, possibly for good, not because of what Sanders or his surrogates said, but by what Clinton supporters and surrogates said and did as well.

The edge on this blade cuts both ways, Nance. To us, your second to last line is -exactly- what we said last Primary. "Isn't it more to our benefit to support a candidate who is already in a position to get everyone behind them, than a candidate who will never get everyone on board? " We saw the writing on the wall, knew where Clinton's support was, knew where it was lacking, and we knew she'd lose. We were just casually dismissed out of hand, and now you ask the same thing of us that we begged for in 2016, when we were trying to avert this horrid train wreck before it even got started?

Your point is as valid now as ours was back then, of course. That's why I'm open to swapping off Sanders (waiting for the Debates to make that choice), but understand that for many Sanders supporters, posts like yours are not cautionary, they're an affirmation that they're doing something right.

[pamdb]

138. Bernie

I partially agree. I don't want Bernie. Mostly because I want someone younger than me (I'm 68). Those of us who are
older have had our chance, now the country belongs to the 30/40/50 year olds. I want someone young and vibrant. I
really really like mayor Pete. And Kamala. And Amy. I like Biden, I wish he would have run in 2016 but again, he's even older than pumpkin head. I see Warren as more of a cabinet member.

Anyway, having said that, what I disagree with Nancy Gregg is that I think we have to agree that whomever the democrats
nominate, WE WILL VOTE FOR THEM. This election is too important to say,"well, I didn't want him or her, so I'm just going
to stay home and pout". That's bullshit. I would like to have woman on the ticket, I don't care if it's for President or VP,
but if the ticket ends up with 2 men, fine, I'll vote for it. I don't care what color they are or what sex they are JUST AS
LONG AS THEY CAN WIN.

So if your particular hopeful doesn't make the cut, tough. Buck up and vote democratic. Remember this, democrats fall in love, republicans fall in line. In this instance, we need to be more like republicans (words I thought I'd never say).

[BlueFlorida]

140. wow .. succinct, cogent and well-written

Brava Nance.

[dlk]

149. Well Said-Without a Candidate Who Unites All of Us, Trump Will Win

Given the Republicans will ramp up their cheating even more for 2020, we must stay focused on standing together. Nothing less than the very existence of our republic is at stake.

[Dustlawyer]

150. Hillary was a divisive figure and you supported her unconditionally.

Stating that nothing can change your mind about Bernie is the same behavior the Trumpsters exhibit for Trump.

I will support the Democratic nominee no matter who it is, will you?

[betsuni]

158. Why was Hillary divisive? Which fake story about her was true?

"Stating that nothing can change your mind about Bernie is the same behavior the Trumpsters exhibit for Trump." What does that even mean?

[OhZone]

171. She was only devisive because -

she was lied about for like 30 years.

[Cha]

239. BS is the one who hired 3rd party

jill stein voters on his staff.

[Sherman A1]

267. +1000

[rzemanfl]

151. Well said Nance. K&R. n/t

[Progressive dog]

153. I 100% agree with what you wrote.

My wife, who has voted for the Democratic candidate in twelve straight Presidential elections, firmly says that she will not vote for Bernie if he is the Democratic nominee. There are others that she won't support in the primary, but Bernie is the only serious Democratic primary candidate whom she has ever dismissed as unacceptable.

[SidDithers]

154. DU rec...

Sid

[BannonsLiver]

162. Bravo! Well said!

They need to know Bernie is an obstacle to taking out Donnie. Hard truths. Thank you!

[Stellar]

172. Here at DU, Bernie is still polling at 8℅ while everyone else keeps switching

...between Harris, Biden, and Buttigieg.

Despite not sharing your support for Sanders, I do understand it. I understand that his policies are in keeping with your own ideas. I understand that he represents ideas that you would like to see implemented. I appreciate that he can be charming – and that when he is brusque and outspoken, that has its own strong appeal.

I'm on the Bernie team because of his ideas/policies. If I wanted charm I would probably pick Mayor Pete, he's brilliant and charming but I don't have a clue of what his policies are, it's like he's always thinking about it.

Most of all Sanders is not taking any PAC money and huddled up with those that do give and take it like Harris, Buttigieg, O'Rourke and Biden. Corporate Dems tend to ensure that big money continues to rule in the Democratic party. So, Bernie can speak his mind and not worry what big money sponsors will think or not contribute to them the next time they need help.

Perhaps other Sanders supporters feel the same, I don't know. I'm only speaking for myself...just one of the still at 8℅ at DU..
BTW: If Bernie happens to win the Primary I would hope that you guys at DU would support him and NOT let Trump and his small band of supporters win the election.

(for those who I have discussed this with -
I've narrowed my monetary support to Sanders and Warren.)

[Celerity]

216. 'Meet Pete', his new database on issues and policy, 990 topics

and tonnes more to come.

https://meetpete.org/tags.html

[Stellar]

240. Bookmarked to read later. Thanks! nt

[namahage]

265. Bernie not take any PAC money?

Suuure.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/bernie-sanders-super-pac-218478

[Stellar]

275. In 2016? Three years ago, tactics can change to improve his chances, but...

In the first hyperlink (I'm kinda slow, help me understand) National Nurses United for Patient Protection...Number 3...What does it mean when it says "This committee has not qualified as a multicandidate committee?

Even so, it's not like he would be taking PAC money from an oil or coal mining company where he would be helping them out like others in the competition are doing.

[mtnsnake]

173. Looks like your "shitstorm" thread has done more to fan the flames of divisiveness than anything

It's one thing to bash Sanders or any other candidate, but to try to talk anyone's supporters out of supporting their favorite candidate is just plain wrong.

[BannonsLiver]

190. So by your logic

Candidates making their pitch to voters who have selected another candidate is just plain wrong? People who canvass homes of Dems to get them on board with their candidate are just plain wrong? A friend who says hey maybe you should consider voting for (fill in the blank) instead of (fill in the blank) are just plain wrong?

You have a very strange view of our process.

[mtnsnake]

194. Feeble effort at putting your words into my mouth.

Nice try.

[TCJ70]

199. That's not what's wrong with this thread...

...what's wrong with it is trying to assert that their own resistance to a candidate is why people shouldn't support said candidate. It's not an argument based on nothing but their own bullheadedness.

[mtnsnake]

203. Yup, that, too. n/t

[WeekiWater]

182. You're a prophet.

[Tarheel_Dem]

183. Thank you Nance!!!!

[Mosby]

186. Very well said, as usual. thx

[corbettkroehler]

187. Thoughtfully Put - The Reverse Also Holds

I thank you, friend, for providing one of the few posts opposing Sanders in a reasoned manner. I won't waste your time or mine in offering a rebuttal and that's perfectly fine.

I am convinced of 3 things and know that you may well differ with me:

1) Had Sanders secured the 2016 nomination, he would have won in a landslide.

2) Sanders' insurgent 2016 campaign did not cost Hillary the general election.

3) Sanders will secure the 2020 nomination BUT, should I be wrong, I will throw 100% of my support behind the Democrat. Even though I am registered as a member of the Green Party, were the Greens to have a candidate on the ballot, I would vote for the Democrat, as I did for HRC in 2016. I did not vote for Stein in 2016. I voted for Clinton.

I remain hopeful that, should I be correct about the 2020 nomination, you would make a similar commitment.

[ehrnst]

198. Why are you a registered Green Party member if you vote Democratic and not Green candidates? (nt)

[TCJ70]

193. You wanna talk about it? OK.

Last edited Tue Apr 23, 2019, 03:32 PM - Edit history (1)

I haven't chosen a candidate yet. It's too early for me. In general I go for whoever is going to push hardest left and show that they won't back down. Last primary that was Bernie. This time he's still up there but there are others who are just as high on my list. We'll see who's still in once my states primary comes around. That being said...

I'm not a fan of people who supported the candidate that lost the general last time, telling people backing a primary candidate that those supporters (still) don't like this time, that they're wrong. She lost. To Trump. Not Sanders. You were wrong. So maybe the people who have been grinding the same damn axe for the last 3 years need to get over it, and themselves, and try making a positive case for the candidates they support based on policy and not garbage "electability" arguments.

The only thing stopping you from unifying in this primary...is you.

Vote blue no matter who.

[Mr Tibbs]

197. In a nutshell

"So maybe the people who have been grinding the same damn axe for the last 3 years need to get over it, and themselves, and try making a positive case for the candidates they support based on policy and not garbage "electability" arguments."

[democrank]

202. Recommended

[melman]

215. Yes

Well said.

[democrank]

200. Took me a few hours to get through your shitstorm, but.....

Bernie is a Russian spy. He hates people of color. His ALLEGED Civil Rights activities were all fake. Vermont is too white, that’s why a large majority of Vermonters support Bernie. It’s Bernie’s fault Clinton didn’t win....even though she got around 3,000,000 more votes than Trump. Bernie probably messed with the voting machines in certain states. Those Trump states. Bernie did it. I know he did. He likes rocking the boat....something else that shouldn’t be allowed.

Bernie has no principles. He’s against all the money in our political system, but he’s a MILLIONAIRE himself....from BOOK sales. Who would buy his book? I’ll bet they’re people who hate America.

It’s TERRIBLE that Bernie is an Independent. We shouldn’t allow such a thing in America. He’s probably like that Angus King guy from Maine. You know....sneak around the country with an
(I) after your name. It’s terrible! Shouldn’t be allowed.

I’m a Joe Manchin Democrat myself. To hell with this Socialist Health Care Bernie is talking about. Socialists aren’t true Americans. Someone should tell them to get off their unicorns and get a job. That goes for Sanders too. He’s too old and has only teenagers following him. Like a freaky Pied Piper, ranting about student loan debt and 17-cent pills that cost $54.00.

This guy has to go, him and his know-nothing followers. Just because Democrats lost over a thousand state and federal seats in the last dozen or so years, it doesn’t mean something needed to change.

I’m with you. We don’t need Bernie Sanders, nor his followers, nor any Independents. All we need is the same old same old.

[rgbecker]

236. I'm with you all the way.

And he waited until April of 2019 to release his tax returns, for Christ's sake.

[David__77]

204. ...

At a time when winning in 2020 is a matter of life-and-death for our democracy, should we be supporting any candidate who divides us as a party?

I think that a candidate can cobble together a winning coalition without the support of certain groups within a party.

Should we not be focused on candidates who can unite us, given that their main job upon being elected will be to unite a highly-divided country?

I think that the president's main job will be to manage the executive branch of government.

Isn't it more to our benefit to support a candidate who is already in a position to get everyone behind them, than a candidate who will never get everyone on board?

I don't know of a candidate who will win universal support from all voters, or even universal support all the voters of a single political party.

[Tikki]

207. I will support and vote for the D nominee on the 2020 ballot. I hope it is not Sanders.

My family has a personal reason for supporting Ms. Harris at this time.

Taking “going back AGAIN” out of the equation is very appealing to me, though.

Tikki

[FakeNoose]

212. Thank you! This needed to be said

The Democratic Party cannot have Bernie as its candidate, because Bernie isn't one of us.
As you say, he will not - and cannot - unify our party.

[MineralMan]

217. While I will vote for Bernie Sanders if he becomes the Democratic nominee,

I don't think he will do that this time, anymore than he did it last time. In fact, with the long list of primary candidates who will be attractive to some Bernie voters from the 2016 primaries, I doubt he'll make it past Super Tuesday, frankly.

I realize that some people can't imagine that happening, but it's quite possible. I think it's likely, in fact.

That's just my opinion, of course, but it's based on watching the campaigns so far. There's a lot of talent in the race this time, and many of the candidates have characteristics that are going to attract potential Sanders voters in the primaries. Bernie would have to run the table to win the nomination, and I don't see him doing that this time around. He didn't do it in 2016, and this year, there's way more competition for those early primary elections.

The numbers just aren't there for him.

[liberalnarb]

218. Hmm

"Whether you think that’s fair or not is of no consequence. The truth remains that this is the way many of us see him – and we are never going to be convinced otherwise."

If that's the case, then the consequences are on you.

[Tom Rinaldo]

221. Nance, we can not have a full discussion on this thread. Wish we could

I got into discussing some of this, granted from a different view point, and I got my first "hide" in five years. You know me well enough to know that I'm not a flamethrower. However there is a Catch 22 on DU in regards to discussions about Sanders, his supporters, and divisions among Democratic activists. At root it is pretty simple.

Bernie Sanders remains an active elected politician and is once again running fro President. Hillary Clinton obviously isn't. The fact that Sanders is still in elective office and once again is a presidential candidate opened the door on DU for two plus years now of "scrutiny" of Sanders and his role in the Democratic coalition, both now and previously. It is called "vetting" and there is some legitimacy to that activity. That "vetting" often brings up the past, including questions about his "Democrat for convenience" status. For a long time it included discussion of the fact that Sanders did not release his taxes during the 2016 primaries. It includes discussion of how people associated with him now acted during the 2016 primaries. And so on and so on. Allowable it seems because Sanders is once again a candidate etc.

I however had my post hidden because I too referenced the past divisions in exploring our present and future. My post was hidden however for violating the TOS for "Re-fighting the Primaries". Support for Sanders on DU under performs the national electorate. It is much easier, with our current membership, to express serious concerns about Bernie Sanders here than it is to praise or defend him. That is simply the way it is, everyone is entitled to their opinions but most people tend to congregate in places where their views are not almost always under attack. That increases the likelihood that someone like me, who would like a serious discussion about the divisions that plague the Democratic coalition today, will get my post hidden for doing so, compared to a post like this from you where you can openly state that you will never trust a candidate with the profile you ascribe to Bernie Sanders.

There are real divisions within the Democratic coalition, even more when you expand that to include people who often vote Democratic but do not consider themselves as loyal Democrats. Their votes carry the same weight as the most loyal of Democratic voters on election day. You warn about divisions that will be evident in the next Presidential election should Sanders be the Democrats nominee. Those who feel drawn to Sanders may or may not heed them depending on why they are drawn to Sanders, just as many of those who were drawn to a former nominee did not see fit to heed warnings then about that person's low approval ratings etc.

On this board I feel it is safe to say that the overwhelming majority of members backed the Democratic nominee in the last Presidential election regardless of who they supported in the primaries. I feel the same will be true in 2020 no matter who becomes the nominee, including Bernie Sanders if that should in fact happen, regardless of whether that is seen as moderately likely or virtually impossible. Elections however are very rarely decided by Democratic Underground members. I will close with an obvious observation. If most Democratic primary voters view Sanders even remotely the way he is mostly viewed here, there is no way he can become our nominee. But the opposite too may need to be looked at. If Sanders starts striking a winning chord with the electorate, that will be a significant development. If he polls well across the board, like he did in 2016, that should not be dismissed. The average voter does not swear allegiance to the Democratic Party.

[JustAnotherGen]

266. All good points

Adding - if we can't discuss Sanders 2016 Campaign strategy and how he is either repeating or shifting strategy -

Then we can't have an honest discussion.

If his failed run is off the table, then Biden's past run(s) shouldn't be on the table either.

Both are ridiculous ideas - just my opinion.

[Runningdawg]

226. I just had his very conversation with a friend a few minutes ago

UNLESS Bernie is the nominee, I will not support him. My friend seems to think Bernie is owed the nomination because he "got screwed" last time and refuses to consider voting for anyone other than Bernie, even if he is not the nominee. And that folks, is how dictatorships are born.

[defacto7]

229. I will vote for the Dem candidate whoever that may turn out to be.

But I will never support Sanders in the primary. That was settled for me when he hired his campaign committee members way back. I hope to hell the candidate is not Sanders.

[Gothmog]

233. Nate Silver- Sanders Can Win, But He Isn't Polling Like A Favorite

Last edited Tue Apr 23, 2019, 05:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Nate thinks that it is possible for sander to win the nomination but this is not likely. sanders is not going to be the nominee of the party. sanders thinks that getting 30% of the primary vote is sufficient which means taking the fight to the contested convention. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-can-win-but-he-isnt-polling-like-a-favorite/

Historically, though, candidates who are polling at only about 20 percent nationally despite the near-universal name recognition that Sanders enjoys don’t have a great track record. From our research on the history of past primary polls, I found 15 candidates from past nomination processes who, like Sanders, (i) polled at an average of between 15 percent and 25 percent4 in national polls in the first six months of the year before the Iowa caucuses5 and (ii) who had high or very high name recognition.6.....

Achieving a delegate majority could be hard for Sanders
You could also argue that the three winning candidates from the list — Barack Obama and John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012 — aren’t good comparisons for Sanders, especially from a “The Party Decides” standpoint where preferences among party insiders and activists are leading indicators of voter preferences. Romney, for instance, had the backing of the GOP party establishment as a potential consensus choice, whereas Sanders largely lacks it from Democrats. Obama was a rising star, rather than someone left over from a previous cycle, and gained a lot of momentum among party elites as the 2008 cycle wore on, even if they also liked Clinton. McCain, who ran against the party establishment in 2000 but was someone the party could live with in 2008, is in some ways the most favorable comparison for Sanders.

In many respects, however, Sanders is more similar to Jesse Jackson in 1984 and 1988, George Wallace in 1972 and 1976 or Ron Paul in 2012, candidates who represented important constituencies within their respective parties but who didn’t have an obvious way to unite the rest of the party behind them or to win a delegate majority.

At times, Sanders’s strategists actually seem to be leaning into the strategy of being a factional candidate. The Sanders campaign may have all kinds of reasons to feel aggrieved by how the party establishment has treated it, especially when it reads articles like the one in The New York Times that suggest the establishment is out to get it again! Nonetheless, the campaign hasn’t sought to mend fences when conflicts have arisen this year. Instead, Sanders aides told The Atlantic’s Edward-Isaac Dovere that they think they can win the nomination with as little as a 30 percent plurality of delegates. That’s a risky strategy since it would necessarily entail a contested convention, where party insiders would play an outsized role. Nor would Sanders, a 77-year-old white man, reflect the various constituencies of the Democratic Party (and the demographics of the delegates themselves) as well as someone like Harris might.

sanders will not be the nominee if sanders only gets 30% of the primary vote. There are too many real democrats who have long memories and who will not forgive or forget. If this gets to a floor fight, the delegates for the other candidates will not support sanders and the super delegates will get to break any deadlocks after the first ballot.

[highplainsdem]

243. K&R. I agree completely. Thanks for posting this OP.

[Scurrilous]

245. K&R

[robbedvoter]

246. He is not even seeking our support He plans to be Mondale to 🍊's Reagan

which is why they indulge in erasing, insulting and alienating us. Here's the plan

Link to tweet

[Cha]

260. "Indulge" is the word alright.

[highplainsdem]

249. This thread is at the top of the Greatest Page. Why isn't it also at the top of the Greatest Threads

section of DU's home page?

[SunDrop23]

253. It shouldn't create a shitstorm...Bernie can not win. End of discussion.

Trump will beat him like a drum.

[The Wizard]

254. In 2016

I saw several posts by alleged Bernie Bros. I went to their pages and checked out their Likes and Groups. They were mostly in the Cyrillic alphabet.
That said, Bernie would have a hard time getting elected as a Jewish Socialist.
He could be used as a campaigner going to states like Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania asking the working class if they're tired of winning and what happened to all those living wage jobs.

[BooScout]

270. Concise, to the point...

...and 100% factual. It is what it is.

[R B Garr]

272. Thanks for this huge dose of reality, Nance!

[AlexSFCA]

277. BS murdered his candidacy after recent CNN townhall

suggesting that convicted felons still serving in prison should be able to vote in elections. This is the end.

[NastyRiffraff]

279. Bravo, Nance. I hope this stays up

It needed to be said, and you said it eloquently, politely, and truthfully. Unfortunately, the least criticism of Sanders often draws a swarm of retorts, sometimes outright threats, and spurious alerts. You're right in saying that some of us will never support Bernie Sanders. Personally, I feel safe in saying that, as he won't be the nominee, and I fully intend to support the nominee whomever I vote for in the primary.

We Democrats often disagree, and that's not a bad thing. But we really do need to unite behind the eventual nominee, whomever that may be. And it won't be Bernie.

[Ruby the Liberal]

280. Cosign

I voted for him in my 2016 primary, but that time is passed. Agree, he is too divisive.

[lillypaddle]

281. Well said, Nance

and nicely, too, I might add.

[demosincebirth]

282. Hey Gregg, this is the way the democrats try and shoot themselves in the foot practically every

election. there is always one faction that come hell or high water will want to get their own divisive candidate nominated. I will vote for the democratic nominee, who ever it maybe, where some will throw a tantrum and vote for a third party candidate who doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell to be elected, and the rest is history. I'm old enough to have seen it happen. One big example was 2000.
'