Why are *some* Bernie supporters crapping on Conor Lamb?

[dansolo]

Last edited Wed Mar 14, 2018, 02:56 PM - Edit history (1)

Conor Lamb won with the exact message that Bernie has been claiming the Democrats must use to appeal to the voters that voted for Trump in 2016, but now I hear complaints that he is not liberal enough. So which is it? Conor Lamb was an excellent candidate, and will be an excellent Representative.

Edited to add - This post was in response to a caller into Mark Thompson's show on Progress XM this morning. And I probably should have qualified my title to refer to some Sanders' supporters (which this caller was one) instead of implying I meant all of them.

[BumRushDaShow]

1. I literally am listening to Mary Frances Berry on Joe Madison

saying the same thing.

[beachbum bob]

2. sanders represents an idea of pretty much wide-eye liberalism and those who buy into

want all democrats to be subjected to their litmus test and that will not get democrats back into power. All our candidates MUST be able to win votes in THEIR districts. We are and MUST remain a big tent party. We should NEVER kowtow to either extreme of democratic party or we face massive defeat.

[BumRushDaShow]

6. Exactly

She was saying - "We have to see how he votes" and something along the line of his type "not being helpful".

I know it is frustrating as hell when you have moderates and blue dogs going along with some issues but in order for us to have the chairs of the committees and to control the legislative calendar, we need them. And we generally agree on 80 - 90% of the issues. What has to happen in the interim is to find that common ground agenda and get that implanted into those communities over a long period of time and then maybe introduce some other liberal ideas.

[tonyt53]

37. We ARE an big tent as a party!

[BumRushDaShow]

44. I just posted this in post #41

41. I heard the argument from Mary Frances Berry this morning on Joe Madison

Basically she claimed - "You will lose the Democratic policy fight with blue dogs".

And I think this is what it all boils down to and it is probably a viewpoint that will be difficult to reconcile.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210355161#post41

[Beartracks]

102. Does she mean "Blue dogs win elections but not re-elections"?

===========

[BumRushDaShow]

121. I think she means

"Blue dogs" don't help us win "progressive" legislation. I.e., they would rarely or never vote for certain things that progressives want enacted. And by the vehemence of her statements, I interpreted that to mean that she believes it would be a waste to elect them at all since they would ultimately be unhelpful. Her remarks on Conor Lamb were to "see how he votes" before passing judgment in any case.

And I get that. There was nothing more frustrating than to see Max Baucus flitting around and watering down the ACA (while he and others like Lieberman blocked the Public Option). But then when we lost control of the chamber, we lost control of any semblance of getting a Democratic agenda even scheduled on a calendar, so by getting rid of the blue dogs/moderates, it becomes 6 on one side and half a dozen on the other.

[Beartracks]

141. The Baucus thing was disappointing. But, yeah, we do need to get...

... as many (D)s as possible in order to get/retain a majority and control the legislative agenda.

Not every elected Dem will be a star player, but we need to get the team onto the field so the VIPs can do their thing.



==========

[Demsrule86]

158. Claire McCaskill has won reelection...I pray she does so again.

[Hortensis]

90. Exactly. And there's nothing liberal about one faction

among many being unable to respect and cooperate with other factions, to the point of constant squabbling and shooting inward. All the other factions in our big Democratic tent, who of course agree on most issues, are able to find ways to achieve a workable degree of consensus where they differ.

Respect, tolerance and acceptance of differences are a huge part of what it is to be liberal, and intractable intolerance of and opposition to everything but what one little faction wants is specifically illiberal.

[Demsrule86]

160. Which leads me to believe that some are really

anarchists and not liberal or progressive... those who call for a lockstep ideology that would destroy our party...blow it up types.

[pandr32]

110. He has exempted himself in Vermont

On numerous occasions, in response to his mixed record on gun control, he has brought up the pro-gun ownership nature of Vermont voters. So if he adapts to the rural nature of many people in Vermont why should we accept a purity litmus test across the country where there is also diversity in the local culture?
We need Democrats to win. We can begin to make a positive change with a solid majority in Congress, so making that majority happen is of the utmost importance.

[EffieBlack]

149. Except when he's telling us that we must reach out to white Trump voters

I sincerely doubt he thinks they're going to be won over by a liberal pitch.

[NCTraveler]

42. I listen to the Black Eagle on my way into work.

Really like his show.

[BumRushDaShow]

48. Yeah, he tells it like it is

Have listened to him on and off since he was first on the air here in Philly on the graveyard shift in the late '80s on WWDB FM and then found him on WRC & WOL.

He was the main reason why I got a subscription to XM back in 2007 when I first found out he was on satellite (simulcasting WOL) and then XM became SiriusXM and I still have the subscription (plus one in my car when I got a car that had the service available).

Funny I found this from almost 30 years ago when he was here -

[KPN]

70. Is Mary Frances Berry a known Sanders' supporter? There may be rogressives who

aren't necessarily Sanders' supporters. MFB is a pretty credible progressive. Her views aren't crackpot or even negative in any way are they?

[BumRushDaShow]

116. She has a new book out

History Teaches Us to Resist: How Progressive Movements Have Succeeded in Challenging Times

Time interview - http://time.com/5188876/resist-history-mary-frances-berry/

I think the issue that I am trying note in my posts in this thread (and I saw a post I think in LBN that illustrated what the OP was saying that ended up being removed but had a number of responses to it) is that there are a contingent who believe that by electing someone like a Conor Lamb (or a Claire McCaskill, etc), the "progressive agenda" will never have enough votes in Congress to succeed. And that was basically what Mary Frances Berry has said today.

However what the OP is saying (although I know many in this thread believe this is a troll/flame bait OP) is that Bernie has promoted the notion of reaching out to those disaffected Raygun Democrats to sell them on populism, and that is basically what Conor did. For example per this excerpt of an article by AP -

<...>

Lamb embraced Democratic orthodoxy on the new GOP tax law, hammering it as a giveaway to corporations at the future expense of Social Security, Medicare and the nation's fiscal security. And he embraces unions, highlighting Saccone's anti-labor record at the statehouse, which was a notable deviation from the retiring Murphy's status as a union-friendly Republican.

The AFL-CIO counts 87,000 voters from union households - around a fifth of the electorate.

http://6abc.com/politics/pa-house-race-too-close-to-call-lamb-claims-win/3212643/

So you have some on DU who promote Bernie's populism but not for some who are running on a similar stance but in red districts like Conor who would be considered "blue dogs" or "conservadems" or "moderates". I do think on DU that in this particular case with Conor, it's probably a small minority. But the question might be Conor's other, more conservative viewpoints (gun control, choice, etc), and would that be permissible/acceptable as well given his economic populist views?

[dansolo]

123. My post was in response to a Bernie supporter on Make It Plain

I was listening to Progress on XM this morning, and a caller into the show was complaining about Conor Lamb and saying that he will end up voting with Republicans. I found that rediculous enough, but what inspired me to post was that the caller compared him to Joe Manchin, and used as examples against him was voting for Betsy DeVos and for taking away healthcare. The problem is that Joe Manchin voted with the Democrats on both of those issues. Even having someone who votes with us half the time is still better than never.

[BumRushDaShow]

126. I wish Mark Thompson was on at another time

(I think he used to be on in the afternoons).

And I agree that if you can get 80 - 90% of their votes, it is worth it to have the chairs of the committees. But I guess the heartburn comes when there are some really critical votes and some "moderates" tend to showboat (like a Susan Collins) and exert some abnormal power over the process. And if not to get a reasonable compromise, they end up killing the most impactful parts of the progressive legislation.

[True Blue American]

156. There is not one thing Conor Lamb

Said that I disagreed with.

Of course I am a Moderate Liberal who supports moderate ideas. I will never be in that far left group.

[Zoonart]

3. This has to stop right now.

The purity test has to die before it kills the Republic. Candidate serve their constituants not the BOrg.
This is how Democrats can snatch defefat from the jaws of victory....again.

[alarimer]

114. You say purity test, I say principles.

Obviously there are lines in the sand. I won't vote for someone who is pro-life and willing to legislate abortion rights away. Lamb is pro-life personally. BUT the true test is how he votes, should that come up. Many of these personally pro-life actually end up voting that way as well, in terms of nibbling around the edges of abortion rights (waiting periods, ultrasounds, ending late-term abortions) because they think they can get away with it. Maybe he has pledged not to do that, but we'll see what actually happens should there be a vote on something like that.

I remember many folks here invoking these "purity tests" about abortion when it came to Sanders support for a pro-life Democrat in the Omaha mayoral race a year or so back. Then, of course, they claimed they would NEVER vote for this particular pro-life Dem (who lost anyway).

I don't care that much about this race because there will be a new map in place for November, which affects this district and I don't know what happens to Lamb then. Obviously, the entire House is up for reelection so it may not matter anyway.

[pnwmom]

119. He has ALREADY made it clear that he is PRO-CHOICE. Why is that hard for you to accept?

There are lots of Catholics in Congress, like Tim Kaine, who have a political pro-choice position because they are keeping their personal religious choices in their personal lives.

[alarimer]

154. Because actions speak louder than campaign promises

Most of which are usually lies, or half-truths.

[pnwmom]

165. Which Catholic Democrats can you point to who ran on a pro-choice platform

and didn't live up to it in Congress?

[True Blue American]

157. I agree!

[LonePirate]

4. How much of their agenda will be enacted with a Republican in that seat?

Their priorities are warped, to say the least.

[TheSmarterDog]

5. Because they think there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans.

And while the goal of Democrats is to improve the lives of as many people as possible, and the Republicans goal is to improve the lives of as few people as possible, the goal of Bernie supporters is to be outside the tent pissing in, no matter who owns the tent.

[beachbum bob]

8. unfortunately true.

Its easier to do so when you lack answers and solutions.

[Jakes Progress]

9. They are the only ones spreading this lie.

Republicans don't say there is not difference. Democrats don't say that.

This meme is wholly spread by the faction that gained its only power by trashing Democrats. It was probably invented and put into play by russian bots. It makes a sensational headline and is intended to appeal to those who only read headlines and desire spectacle and intrigue. Work and thought aren't part of their agenda. Gripe and blow it up is their only move.

I'm getting a little tired of it.

[jrthin]

31. That meme is so destructive. I hear it too often

among people who choose not to vote. And you're correct: Republicans would never say it, and neither will Democrats say it. That meme eats away at possible Democrat voters.

[Historic NY]

32. They have to hijack a political party, because thats the only way

they get traction. They are Steiner's and Brobots.

[Hekate]

134. Ralph Nader (Green) peddled this lie when he helped defeat Al Gore...

"There's not a dime's worth of difference between them" -- said Nader, in direct reference to the GOP and the Dems.

Nader never took it back and he never said he was sorry that Dubya got to be the POTUS.

So this particular lie was out in the land before there were bots. Why would they invent something new, when our own weapons lie ready to hand for them to use?

[NurseJackie]

19. Excellent analogy and description.

That's quite a visual you've created... and it's SO TRUE! That's EXACTLY what they do!

[Gothmog]

22. The lie that there are no differences between the parties is a lie

[KPN]

64. I don't buy the "they think there's no difference". The only place there's similarity is

campaign finance. The no difference issue strikes me more about big money contributions from Wall St., corporations and billionaires than anything else.

I also don't buy the "pissing in" bit. The goal is to get the party to represent average people over corporations and the extremely wealthy better than they have in the past. The Dems are far better than the Rs. I don't think there are many rational progressives who contest that. They are just trying to influence some change in a positive direction.

[TheSmarterDog]

76. If you want all those wonderful liberal/progressive policies to be implemented

Attacking Democrats won't make it happen. Just the opposite. Attacking Democrats will ensure that it does not happen.

[KPN]

84. Who is attacking Democrats? I haven't seen attacks on Conor Lamb this morning.

I have heard and seen some statements of fact: that he's somewhere to the right of HRC for example, that he's a moderate. That's just stating where he is on the political spectrum, it's not an attack.

Some of it is, "let's wait and see" before we get too excited about this, in other words lets see what the results are, i.e., results relative to advancing the progressive agenda are the important thing. And some of it is applying pressure on the politician and the party. That's how we influence policy and results. They are not attacks (at least I haven't seen any).

[TheSmarterDog]

88. Did you read the OP?

Go back and read the OP.

[melman]

108. The OP doesn't offer any examples or proof of what it alleges

Perhaps it's you that needs to reread it.

[KPN]

167. Yes. It calls out attacks without any

evidence. Exactly my point. I

[NurseJackie]

177. The op is smart enough to know that call-outs are forbidden...

... and publicly drawing negative attention to a DU member (even a bad actor) puts the op at risk. Why would he want to do that? What purpose would that serve when anyone can simply read for themselves to see what's being referred to.)

[KPN]

178. Pointless OP then. Stirring up trouble is all

it does if your explanation is correct.

[NurseJackie]

179. Valid OP. Questions worth asking. But...

... I can understand why there may be some people who might object to being called-out, even if passively and indirectly.

[KPN]

180. So you are saying people here at DU

who are Bernie supporters were cropping on Lamb?

[NurseJackie]

182. LOL! Actually, I'm not the one saying that. 😆

The OP is simply suggesting it... and it looks like some people can figure it out what the op is getting at without having to be spoon fed the answer. Woo hoo ... Congrats! Gold star!

[KPN]

186. Not taking the bait. Bye now.

[NurseJackie]

187. Too late.

[True Blue American]

159. There is a world of difference

Between Democrats and Republicans!

We can not let the extremists in our party hijack us as the Republicans have..

[Demsrule86]

161. The goal is to win elections...and stop tinkering with the party. We need

a big tent ...these folks have accept and respect different viewpoints...or they are of no use.

[Eliot Rosewater]

83. And MFB comments prove she does NOT understand how the 2 party system works.

[tonyt53]

175. Nice analogy!!

[MineralMan]

7. Probably because they have no common sense at all.

That's my guess.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. Funny, I remember a different reaction here when Sanders campaigned for Mello in Nebraska

Then it was supporters of a different leading Democratic Party coalition figure who were complaining about that Democratic candidate for Mayor of Omaha not being liberal enough and blasting Sanders for trying to help get him elected.

Supporters of any politician are each individuals with free will, and every major political figure has millions of supporters who reach their own conclusions - sometimes wise sometimes wacky often some of both.

I am a "Bernie supporter" and I am thrilled Conor Lamb won. For the record Bernie didn't lobby me either way.

[KTM]

15. + 1

Yep. Im very happy he won. I dont know that much about him, but from a cursory glance I thought he was liberal on economic issues and more conservative on social issues... outside of not supporting medicare for all maybe, I dont see why Bernie voters would be against him ? It seems from what little I have read that it would be those who espouse more social liberalism that would be upset ? After all, he is seen to be wooing white, Catholic, union members who had become disaffected with the Democrats... isn't that exactly the sort of voter that Bernie was talking about in Texas ? I dont get why people think Bernie supporters would be upset by his win. Regardless, this Bernie supporter and lifetime Dem is very happy to see him win.

[Demsrule86]

164. Mello actively voted to end a woman's right to choose in Nebraska. He sponsored bills.

Being personally pro-life while recognizing a woman's right to choose is very different from what Mello did. He hurt women in Nebraska with his votes for and sponsorship of anti-choice legislation which
remains the law to this day. Sen. Sanders made a mistake endorsing this guy. Nina Turner and Jane Kleeb were involved as well.


https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Heath_Mello%27s_voting_record_on_abortion

[Tom Rinaldo]

166. Thank you for the reply

I know he was far from a real pro-choice candidate, as you point out. But you don't note that he met with local pro choice activists in Omaha and made pledges about pro-choice positions he would take as Mayor, and as a result was being supported by them over his Republican opponent. The Republican did end up winning on a platform far worse than Mello's.

(I just corrected this to note that the office Mello was running for was Mayor of Omaha - not Congress. I knew that but must have had Lamb on my mind)

[Demsrule86]

168. I knew what you meant. Hey I wanted Mello to win. I just don't think he should be endorsed by.

any Party leaders. I also think had Kleeb and Turner not gotten involved, he would have had a better chance. Republicans are always much worse than even a Democrat like Mello. It would have been better for all of us and especially Nebraska had he won. If I lived their, I would have voted for Mello.

[pangaia]

35. I could say something about some of the posts here, Tom. But I won't.

It is totally predictable.

[Demsrule86]

163. Mello voted in favor of restricting a woman's right to choose...

Lamb is pro-choice but personally opposed...big difference. I have posted a link so you can read the details...Mello should never have been endorsed by our side. He not only voted for anti choice laws but sponsored them. He voted to disallow the ACA exchanges to cover abortion.


"During his time in the Nebraska Senate, Mello voted for three bills that put restrictions on abortion.[3][4][5] Mello also voted to bar health insurance plans offered through state-run exchanges from covering abortion; to require that, if an ultrasound is performed prior to an abortion, its images be displayed; and to require that women undergo screening for various risk factors before the procedure.[8][6][7]"

https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Heath_Mello%27s_voting_record_on_abortion

[GaryCnf]

11. Identify these mysterious

"Bernie supporters"

Or is this just more b.s.?

I support Sanders and his push to move our party to the left. I also maxed out my individual to Lamb. Did the same thing for Doug AND went down to Montgomery twice to do outreach in its impoverished community.

If we had left either of those campaigns to the same "moderate" geniuses who brought us 2016, the results would have been much different.

Connor is anything but a carbon copy of past candidates and his campaign was anything but an affirmation of our former unsuccessful efforts.

[Evergreen Emerald]

30. The Bernie supporters that I met during the primaries...

...were libertarians who said they would never vote for a Democrat and were supporting Bernie.

[RiverStone]

46. 90% of Bernie supporters I met in Oregon voted for Hillary!

Including me! The OP is the usual divisive BS.

Time to kick republican ass in Nov!!!

[askyagerz]

105. Every Bernie supporter I know

Voted for Hillary. Now because one commenter says something we once again all get lumped in the gotta be super left or nothing group. I sold my soul and voted for Hillary. It was really against my principles since she voted for the war but I did it. Yet all I keep getting is grief here from usually the same 10 posters. How about a thanks for once?

[GaryCnf]

57. Libertarians

Who supported big government Bernie over Gary Johnson?

Nice anecdote.

[Evergreen Emerald]

142. Thanks. It was a nice ancdote

We have caucuses in WA. And the room was full of admitted libertarians, who argued for Sanders and admitted they were not Dems. And, yes it is anecdotal. I did not have time to do reviewed research.

But: https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds

you may want to read this.

Snip: "Schaffner's numbers show that after a bitter Democratic primary, more than 1 in 10 of those who voted in the primaries for the very progressive Sanders ended up voting for the Republican in the general election, rather than for the Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton."

[GaryCnf]

146. Are you aware how the PUMA vote split in 2008?

[CentralMass]

153. Well, the Washington Post had a good analysis on this last summer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/?sw_bypass=true&utm_term=.62f06b837207

The executive summary is that by at least a 2:1 margin Hillary voters voted for McCain in 2008 vs the Sanders voters who voted for Trump in 2016. It also cited that "Perhaps the most important feature of Sanders-Trump voters is this: They weren’t really Democrats to begin with."


"How many Sanders voters voted for Donald Trump?

Two surveys estimate that 12 percent of Sanders voters voted for Trump. A third survey suggests it was 6 percent.

First, the political scientist Brian Schaffner analyzed the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, which was conducted by YouGov and interviewed 64,600 Americans in October-November 2016. In that survey, Schaffner found that 12 percent of people who voted in the primary and reported voting for Sanders also voted in November and reported voting for Trump."


Schaffner examined only voters whose turnout in the primary and general election could be validated using voter file data. This excludes people who said they voted but actually did not — although it also excludes people who voted in caucuses or party-run primaries, for which validated turnout data are not as readily available.

Hillary Voters in 2008
"Another useful comparison is to 2008, when the question was whether Clinton supporters would vote for Barack Obama or John McCain (R-Ariz.) Based on data from the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project, a YouGov survey that also interviewed respondents multiple times during the campaign, 24 percent of people who supported Clinton in the primary as of March 2008 then reported voting for McCain in the general election.

An analysis of a different 2008 survey by the political scientists Michael Henderson, Sunshine Hillygus and Trevor Thompson produced a similar estimate: 25 percent. (Unsurprisingly, Clinton voters who supported McCain were more likely to have negative views of African Americans, relative to those who supported Obama.)

Thus, the 6 percent or 12 percent of Sanders supporters who may have supported Trump does not look especially large in comparison with these other examples."

"What kinds of Sanders voters supported Trump?

Perhaps the most important feature of Sanders-Trump voters is this: They weren’t really Democrats to begin with.

Of course, we know that many Sanders voters did not readily identify with the Democratic Party as of 2016, and Schaffner found that Sanders-Trump voters were even less likely to identify as Democrats. Sanders-Trump voters didn’t much approve of Obama either.

In fact, this was true well before 2016. In the VOTER Survey, we know how Sanders-Trump voters voted in 2012, based on an earlier interview in November 2012. Only 35 percent of them reported voting for Obama, compared with 95 percent of Sanders-Clinton voters. In other words, Sanders-Trump voters were predisposed to support Republicans in presidential general elections well before Trump’s candidacy."

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

66. The Bernie supporters I met during the primaries

were all Democrats who felt he was a better choice than Hillary.

And they all voted for her in the General Election.

As someone who still is sorry he didn't get the nomination, I really am tired of these unfounded slams on Bernie supporters.

[Demsrule86]

170. I think that is the truth which is why she was the nominee.

[R B Garr]

52. So you are going to claim credit anyway?? And conjure up

some lame attack on “moderates” as if no one had ever won an election before uttering revolution blah blah. Isn’t Lamb one of those candidates whose platform fits his district? WTF does 2016 have to do with anything here. Wasn’t Hillary the victim of unprecedented Russian meddling — that info is all over the news...Reality.

Thanks for making it clear what this thread is about . I wasn’t going to bother with it, but now I see what it’s about.

[JCanete]

101. maybe address the question rather than moving past it. Who are these Sanders supporters?

Is the op title at all justified? How about, some sanders supporters...how about a handful...how about, I heard this one guy...

Clinton was the victim of far more than Russian meddling though, which goes decades back. She's been demonized for years by the right with entire fabrication. In my opinion she shot herself in the foot by giving the left justified reasons to be wary of her, given a decade of triangulation politics, but given the climate(particularly pre-social media), that wasn't an entirely unreasonable approach to getting elected.

Russian meddling was child's play compared to American media bias anyway...unless it turns out they flipped votes in our machines. Of course, if that comes to light then the significance cannot be overstated.

[R B Garr]

127. Quit bringing up the primary. And I'll address what I want, which is exactly

what I did.

Your versions of reality don't match up with what is widely reported. She certainly didn't shoot herself in the foot because of your distortions about being wary of her, and I didn't bring up who else undermined her besides Donald, but to gloss over how she was demonized by all directions is just foolishness at this point. I don't have time for what is now proven facts about what happened to Hillary.

My post still stands, and it has to do with the inane aspersions cast on those demonized "moderates" and the inane references to more conspiracies excusing the tactics used against her by all sides. The "left" is my party, so you don't get to slice and dice it to fit some stale narratives. There was a concerted effort against her, and we know who they are.

edit: and wrong again. We've already been over this. You don't get to change reality. There are more people on social media than the cable news shows. That's why Russian bots targeted social media. FACT.

[JCanete]

136. large corps have huge influence on social media, plus all of the regular cable outlets, radio

personalities, etc. have significant presences online as well, but okay...its not like FOX talking points get around or anything...its not like online advertising by these same interests to the tune of multiple millions impacts opinion and shapes reality compared to the piddly hundreds of thousands Russia poured into the effort.

but yeah, it was a mistake to reengage here. We don't really get anywhere. Best of luck to you.

[R B Garr]

137. Everyone knows what Fox is about. RUSSIA influenced the

election per the FACTS that are all around us, real current news — everywhere. Comey, Jill Stein, etc. but it wasn’t coRp0rAtions that helped Russia. They helped themselves. Seriously, it gets really old trying to fit everything into blaming corporations just because of a two-year old campaign rally cry. Watch CURRENT news. Radio personalities like Russia Today also helped undermine Hillary...I imagine you’re not too concerned about that, though.

[JCanete]

143. Yes, of course I am. I just don't want us to pretend that THAT is the big picture. It very well may

have tipped an election. It isn't what made it that close in the first place. It isn't what legitimized Trump, giving him a massive media presence and refusing to challenge his ideas or his past, to the point where he sailed to the top of the GOP ticket.

[R B Garr]

144. Yes, I see what you mean about the excessive Trump

coverage, but they were doing that because he was a freak and they were covering his freakishness, not because he was viable. He said his goal was to manipulate the press, and that’s what he did. Not so sure “corporations” fit the scenario, though. He was a spectacle and a nasty pig so they led with him.

[left-of-center2012]

85. O.P. is just stirring the pot

Imaginary voices saying "this and that" to bring out the Bernie haters.

It's a game some play ~ a very sad game.

[GaryCnf]

87. It's pure destructiveness

They will burn the house down before letting the left move in.

[dansolo]

124. No, I am not stirring the pot

I was responding to a person who called to Mark Thompson's show on Progress XM this morning.

[TCJ70]

128. You wrote this OP...in response to one person...but lumped a gigantic group together...

...in your response? This is the definition of pot stirring.

[left-of-center2012]

129. Spreading the word

Like Parkay margarine?

[Anon-C]

12. Surprise !

[PA Democrat]

13. This type of broad brush crap is not constructive.

I would bet that the VAST MAJORITY of people who supported Bernie here in PA-18 voted for Conor Lamb. I know many personally and every single one of them voted for Conor Lamb.

[pampango]

28. Highlighting and trying to exacerbate divisions on the left makes RW'ers smile whether

it is done intentionally for that purpose or not.

[Owl]

33. Exactly

[RiverStone]

50. Agreed! Trolls still live with broad brushes

Says a B supporter who voted H in the general.

[elleng]

69. THANKS, PA Democrat.

[Orsino]

162. The reference to "Bernie supporters" is a tell.

Some will not be satisfied until Sanders is tried and convicted for primarying Clinton.

Pretending to be surprised that not everyone on the left is gonna toe a party line is so 2014.

[obamanut2012]

14. Some of that area is CRAZY red

As in, Delporable Red --I cannot believe Lamb made that race so competitive.

[BumRushDaShow]

16. He targeted the unions

<...>

Lamb embraced Democratic orthodoxy on the new GOP tax law, hammering it as a giveaway to corporations at the future expense of Social Security, Medicare and the nation's fiscal security. And he embraces unions, highlighting Saccone's anti-labor record at the statehouse, which was a notable deviation from the retiring Murphy's status as a union-friendly Republican.

The AFL-CIO counts 87,000 voters from union households - around a fifth of the electorate.

http://6abc.com/politics/pa-house-race-too-close-to-call-lamb-claims-win/3212643/

Saconne is a "Right to Work" shill in the state legislature.

[GaryCnf]

24. That sounds like

like, like . . . who . . . oh, that's right the guy the OP tries to paint as the enemy for doing exactly the same thing.

[BumRushDaShow]

29. But the OP doesn't appear to be talking about that guy

He's talking about "supporters" of that guy.

[GaryCnf]

38. Because that way

They can pull out 2 or 3 from MILLIONS of Sanders supporters and use them as straw men to attack the "Left"

Yea, I guess your right. The OP is even more incorrect than originally stated.

[BumRushDaShow]

41. I heard the argument from Mary Frances Berry this morning on Joe Madison

Basically she claimed - "You will lose the Democratic policy fight with blue dogs".

And I think this is what it all boils down to and it is probably a viewpoint that will be difficult to reconcile.

[Cha]

138. Yeah, what's this MFB's take on Conor Lamb's

WIN in PA18? She have anything to say about that?

Mahalo, BRDS

[BumRushDaShow]

169. Hey Cha! Missed this last night

(am nursing a cold so try to grab some rest when I can)

I posted in #121 that she didn't seem too pleased. Basically her remarks were along the line of "We will need to see how he votes" before passing any further judgement, but that Democrats need to keep focus on the progressive policies.

[Cha]

174. Yeah, whatever.. Conor Lamb is excellent for

his District.. nothing to do with her and her judgy.

Thanks, BRDS.. hope your cold gets better FAST!

[jpak]

17. We need a link to this "pants crapping"

do tell

[LanternWaste]

18. Cold you point us in the direction of this alleged divestment of crap?

Cold you point us in the direction of this alleged divestment of crap?

Else I may be compelled to think there's a narrative at work here more important to you than mere curiosity.

[GulfCoast66]

20. I think this OP is unnecessary

Lord knows I do not like Bernie, but I would guess 95% of his supporters and even Bernie himself are glad to see a Democratic victory.

As for the few who are not happy, ignore them. Otherwise we let them set us up against each other.

[RiverStone]

47. Agree! This is old divisive BS. Says another Bernie supporter who voted Hillary in General.

Now we ALL focus on Nov and taking back the House!

I thought these infighting type posts were gone? Guess a few wanna throw rocks at hornet's nests.

[Mariana]

78. Notice there are no links, and no names.

It's bullshit. And I suspect the percentage is much higher than 95%.

[Exotica]

21. They are under, more than anything else, a simple delusion

They think that if every Democratic candidate runs on single payer and free uni tuition that all the poor and middle class, no matter if they are black, white, hispanic, etc., no matter if they are in an inner city, a suburb, or out in a rural village, will instantly develop class consciousness above ALL ELSE, and vote in a veto proof "European social democratic-style" majority within 4 to 8 years. At that point, they think the US turns into Denmark or Sweden in terms if its socio-economic policies, that it will progressively tax all the wealthy and corporations far more fairly, and it will have a broad-based universal welfare state.

As great as all that may sound, it will never happen in the U.S. Not for decades, if ever, for a myriad number of highly complex reasons, some structural, some political, some socio-cultural, etc. In the meantime, the damage they do in terms of destroying the unity (via artificial purity tests) needed to fight the Republicans NOW, with a BROAD variety of situationally-tailored candidates, is truly cataclysmic in both past outcomes and future-forward potential.

[Wednesdays]

54. Who are these "they"?

[Exotica]

72. the majority of Sanders supporters, especially the BoB'er types

I absolutely think it is a fair summation of what they think needs to happen.

[R B Garr]

81. Your post was very fair and accurate.

That all-or-nothing mentality usually results in nothing. Handing over your power to Republicans is not progressive. You have to keep a constant presence that you build on to get results. Not just give con men all the power and hope the suffering is worth it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

99. "the majority of Sanders supporters" was neither fair nor accurate n/t

[boston bean]

23. They are just never happy and are conflicted with messaging that makes no sense.

[GaryCnf]

25. Big kudos to Connor Lamb

For overcoming Trump, Saccone, and the "brilliant" DCCC move of running to the press BEFORE election day to brag about how they were working behind the scenes.

[Blue_true]

104. The DNC is getting it right,

Quietly go in and support candidates. The DCCC are fucking idiots that have to run their mouths to look relevant. Perez at the DNC is the man, he knows how to operate, the DCCC should shut the fuck up and observe.

[GaryCnf]

115. This

[DavidDvorkin]

26. Lamb's stealing the limelight from Sanders

I really think that's the basis of many of these attacks. They want someone who will win and then bow in the direction of Bernie and give him all the credit.

[NurseJackie]

68. I believe you've summed-it-up perfectly. It's jealousy and resentment.

[Demsrule86]

171. I also think that some are beginning to realize that Sen. Sanders will not win a primary should

he choose to run which I hope he doesn't. Some die hard supporter want him to run.

[MrsCoffee]

96. This makes the most sense to me.

[R B Garr]

185. Whoa! This is it exactly.

Every word.

[marybourg]

27. Sour grapes?

[Owl]

34. Unrec

[David__77]

36. Your post is bullshit.

It’s right up there with “why did so many Clinton supporters vote against Lamb?”

And, by the way, I’m not making that claim. Just pointing out that such a claim is of a similar quality as the one you made.

[SHRED]

61. No links and lots of broad brush attacks

This is a bullshit thread designed to attack Bernie supporters and the DU is allowing it to stand.

It's a clear violation of the "no divisive posts" rule and the violation is being ignored.

[diva77]

106. +1,000,000 THIS

[NCTraveler]

39. Most names I see around here who I would consider over the top Sanders supporters....

Are happy as could be over the win. They are damn good peeps. I think you are referencing the HA Goodman crowd. They are ratfuckers and not to be trusted at any point in time.

[David__77]

43. I voted for Sanders and Im glad Lamb won.

Many posters here might be pissed at Sanders or see him as a bad political operator. That said, the original post is a terrible broad brush generalization and will do nothing to help Democratic unity. Some Sanders supporters might be assholes, some Sanders opponents might be assholes too.

[NCTraveler]

55. +1 to every word.

"I voted for Sanders" - It's was a solid vote. Not that you need me to say that. While I didn't vote for Sanders, I could have easily justified a vote for him.

"Im glad Lamb won." - I'm with you. So are an overwhelming majority of people who voted for or support Sanders, IMO.

"Many posters here might be pissed at Sanders or see him as a bad political operator." - I'm one of them.

"That said, the original post is a terrible broad brush generalization" - A incorrect and poorly thought out broad brush, at that.

"will do nothing to help Democratic unity." It's an open attack on you. It can help in no way. It's an open attack on many people who actually worked for Clinton after the primary.

[David__77]

67. Thank you.

I appreciate your post.

[SHRED]

40. Who are you referring to??

Anyone can post a claim like this in general terms.

Are you trolling?

[MelissaB]

122. I'd like to know this as well. I was a Bernie supporter

an this poster isn't describing me...

[Cuthbert Allgood]

45. I see what you did there

[SHRED]

51. Yep

Flame bait trolling.

[SHRED]

53. I don't understand why the top post is allowed to stand?

It breaks the "divisive" rule.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

56. Apparently shitting on Sanders is cool?

[NurseJackie]

71. Nobody is doing that.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

77. Whatever gets you through the day

[Mariana]

80. The OP isn't shitting on Sanders.

The OP is shitting on Sanders's supporters. The OP has also put forth exactly zero evidence that the assertions are true.

[EricMaundry]

49. Maybe they have Eeyore Syndrome.

Some people just aren't prone to happiness.

[samplegirl]

58. This guy knew how to win!

The real test is how he votes. Hopefully not like Claire McCaskill!

[NurseJackie]

74. What's wrong with Claire McCaskill? She represents her constituency and votes accordingly ...

... it's a fact that Vermont-style politics don't work well in Missouri.

I'm sure that Connor Lamb will ALSO make decisions and will vote based on the choices that best represent his constituency as well.

What's wrong with that?

[Eliot Rosewater]

86. People who do NOT understand how the 2 party system works, maybe never will.

[G_j]

59. Link?

didn’t think so..

[SHRED]

60. This top post is a troll and should be taken down

So much broad brushing replies.

What an ugly thread.

[BoneyardDem]

94. .....many barfing all over this thread over and over contributes the ugliness.

[G_j]

131. I tried

alerting, I’m sure I’m not the only one.

[democrank]

62. Quite a sweeping statement about Bernie supporters.

I voted for Bernie, then Hillary, and I'm thrilled about Conor Lamb's apparent victory. Same goes for the five Bernie, then Hillary supporters I've spoken with this morning.

[SHRED]

65. Can you imagine a generalized post about Hillary supporters...

...being this negative standing this long on the DU?

Yeah, me neither.

Double standard.

[Paladin]

73. I don't have to imagine it.

Bernie supporters supplied ugly, generalized Hillary-trashing every day during the campaign, right here at DU. I haven't forgotten, and I do not forgive.

Kudos to Congressman-Elect Lamb. Let's have a lot more of the same, over and over, until trump and his goons are just a distant nightmare.....

[SHRED]

75. This isn't the Presidential primaries

And I will add that I find generalized, broad brush bashing, with no links or sources to be abhorrent no matter which side does it and needs to be taken down.

[G_j]

132. There was a time

when that was expected here.
That is exactly what made DU worthwhile.
Credibility.. Sources...

[Demsrule86]

172. sure can...I have seen them.

But Hillary is a private citizen and not running...there are no supporters of hers bashing Democrats (assuming a Sanders supporter did this)

[Fiendish Thingy]

63. The proof will come in Lamb's votes

Will he vote to protect a woman's choice?

Will he vote to impeach when Dems gain the majority?

That's when it won't matter simply that he has a D by his name; that's when the rubber meets the road.

[Blue_true]

107. He should vote in a way that represent the legitimate interests of his constituents.

If he does not, he is not doing his job properly. What is right for someone in Burlington Vermont or Boston may not be right for someone in the districts that Lamb represent.

[pnwmom]

120. He ran as a pro-choice person. Why wouldn't you believe him? n/t

[left-of-center2012]

79. What is your source?

Where are these voices coming from you are hearing?

This will stir the pot and bring out the Bernie haters.
Goal accomplished?

Sad.

[sarcasmo]

82. The real ? How many Bernie Bros are Russian bots?

[Demsrule86]

173. or libertarians?

[BoneyardDem]

89. A good candidate knows their constituecy

Many Bernie supporters are more likely to want to press a far left agenda, one that a majority of Dems have already rejected. That same far left agenda would have given this win to a Republican....and not any Republican, but RWNJ. Remember the last Hail Mary statement by Saccone? Dems hate their county, and God? Trying to appeal to and rally the other fundy RWNJs.

[MoonRiver]

91. Who cares?

[left-of-center2012]

92. All these "hate Bernie posts" stir the pot, causing dissension

Voices told you,
or you heard 'someone' say,
so you spread the word.

Sad.

[BoneyardDem]

95. Personally, I'm sick of all the rah rah Bernie posts

.....perhaps some feel the need to counter that narrative?

[KPN]

93. Yes. It stated that Sanders' supporters are crapping on Lamb for not being liberal enough.

I have not seen or heard that anywhere.

[NurseJackie]

135. I have. The usual cleverly worded and snide comparisons to McCaskill and Manchin...

... and declaring their "low expectations" and all-round general disapproval along with haughty proclamations of how they have too much "self respect" to ever vote for someone like Lamb if they happened to live there... which they don't... so it's just a vanity statement anyway. (Don't pretend it doesn't exist, because it does.)

[ornotna]

97. Oh dear, more of the same old nonsense

[mvd]

98. I'm very happy about his victory

I believe we should start out with high goals, but politics will always involve some compromise. Lamb is a good fit for his district. That doesn't mean we need across the board moderate to conservative candidates, but sometimes certain issues mean a lot locally.

[Gothmog]

100. Who is surprised by this?

Conor Lamb ran a great campaign and fits this district well

[RandySF]

103. Some but not all

And those who are crapping in Lamb are the same dead-Enders who refused to support Hillary two years ago. They are also the people who prefer to see Democrats lose because they see it as proving some point.

[Tom Rinaldo]

113. Perhaps then we need a different term to describe the people you refer to.

Because in truth it not only isn't all Sanders voters who harbor those views, actually a very small minority of them do. Sure they exist, they existed before Sanders became a national figure and they will exist after he no longer is one. There literally are some died in the wool Communists out there also, it's a big country with many viewpoints represented. There are many extreme Libertarian voters who equate both political parties as equally a "part of the problem" even though they agree with Democrats on many issues.

Extreme views are held by many Americans along all points of the political spectrum, and sometimes some of them end up supporting, for one reason or another, a candidate who differs from them in crucial ways. I think it slanderous to use the term "Sanders supporters" or Bernie supporters" as a reference to one small subset of voters professing support for him. It is no more fair than it would have been to refer to the P.U.M.A.s (Party Unity My Ass) as "Clinton supporters" in 2008 because they expressed a liking for Hillary while they supported McCain for President.

[melman]

109. Another hate thread

So predictable.

[Motley13]

111. If you don't win you can't make a difference & you can't win if you don't appeal to the voters

in your district

[still_one]

112. Connor Lamb won in his district because he is a moderate Democrat. A Democratic Socialist would not

have won in PA-18

Howard Dean's successful 50 state strategy was recognition of that

Different areas in the country have different views on issues

[NurseJackie]

125. There you go again... being all calm and reasonable and FACTUAL!!

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

117. We should welcome the blue dogs to the House (and Senate).

Once the Dems have the majority, we can gripe about their "impurities" on a liberal scale.

Let's get the majorities first.

[marlakay]

118. Everyone I know including me

Is supportive of Lamb. I worked on Bernie’s campaign was very involved. My family and friends voted for him, then Hillary.

I really wish who ever is trying to divide us on this forum would stop. We need to be unified and the more you all talk dirt about Bernie someone a lot of us here respect the harder that gets.

[Cha]

139. Good on you! The OP said "Some supporters" and

I know that's true.

[Ms. Toad]

150. You do know that "some" was added 6 hours after it was posted, right?

[Stinky The Clown]

133. Because they are NOT our allies

That's directed at SOME Sanders SUPPORTERS.

[Autumn]

145. As a Bernie supporter I'm thrilled he won. There is a big difference between "some" and the "one"

Bernie supporter you heard that called into the radio.

[ellie]

147. Because that is who they are

Bernie is not a Democrat.

[NurseJackie]

148. Many people agree with your observations.

[ellie]

151. I had several posts

blocked because of my post on Bernie Sanders. Thank you for your support.

[CentralMass]

152. The Bernie haters are climbing out of the woodwork

[NurseJackie]

184. LOL

[pwb]

155. Some, being what one or two?

[RandySF]

176. The Lamb supporters I see on Twitter

Appear to be the types who only started hanging around the party the past couple years and don't seem to self-identify as Democrats. So my guess would that we are talking about a fringe of Bernie's support.

[Lil Missy]

181. Who cares what they think.

[NurseJackie]

183. I know! The ones complaining the loudest about this thread...

... are the only ones who care so much (it seems.)