2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie Sanders campaign spokesman urges Bernie supporters to be respectful
if you support @berniesanders, please follow the senator's lead and be respectful when people disagree with you.
8:47 PM - 25 Jan 2016
957 RETWEETS1,624 LIKES
https://mobile.twitter.com/cascamike/status/691844891652001792
More:
agree with @joanwalsh. no one should apologize or face abuse for supporting any candidate. lets work to create a more inclusive politics.
1:43 PM - 27 Jan 2016
34 RETWEETS70 LIKES
https://mobile.twitter.com/cascamike/status/692462875676393472
From Joan Walsh :
Watching people trash your daughter on social media isnt fun. It got worse when Hillary Clintons Twitter account retweeted her, and worse again when she tweeted about Planned Parenthoods Cecile Richards, a woman she admires, in the wake of the groups controversial decision to endorse Clinton. It turns out Richardss daughter works for Clinton as well, and that began a new round of insults to both our daughters. Either they were beneficiaries of our nepotism, or they somehow used their influence to corrupt their dimwit mothers into ignoring Sanderss obviously superior feminist qualifications. It is interesting to me that none of the ladiesnot Clinton, not me nor my daughter, not Richards nor her daughterare credited with competence or integrity when the Berniebot keyboard warriors break it all down.
http://www.thenation.com/article/why-im-supporting-hillary-clinton-with-joy-and-without-apologies/
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Not-Bernie.
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)Are you calling me an asshole. Hillary supporters say stuff that is over the top. Rude or what.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)and so few of you.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)People don't feel the need to rush to her defense. They figure she can pay for it given all the millions she collects from the oligarchs.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)...Hillary surrounds herself with douche bags like David Brock.
Rockyj
(538 posts)I have been watching the vitriol here, on twitter, blog comments, etc. & it always starts with very nasty Hillary supporters! As soon as Bernie started catching up with her in the polls & his crowds grew bigger & bigger the thin skin Hillary supporters started to get worse! I just got tired of it & fought back. On several occasions I just pointed out the differences between them on DU & I was voted off threads. I seldom comment on anything here anymore.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)is considered to be a vicious attack.
Des Moines De Mon
(35 posts)Sanders doesnt have supporters as much as he has believers. Sanders supporters cannot call on facts to support their fervent belief that his message of radical change is possible, because the facts do not support this belief. They become belligerent and hostile any time anyone questions this belief.
That Sanders is right and so his followers are right is taken as an elemental matter of faith. Sanders represents the light and all that is good; anyone who questions this must be an agent of the dark and all that is bad.
Link
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)With so many lies about Bernie's ideas, policies and who his supporters are.
There is no stereotypical Bernie supporter, despite the attacks on them.
Looks like we're at the point in the campaign when the supporters are being attacked and mocked. They tried this before. Clinton can't build herself up, so we must be torn down.
Ridiculous.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Like how the establishment and their lackeys in the media have lost their collective shit because it finally looks like a liberal might win.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)This is rich.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)I think I know what was on his mind.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)interrupted Sander's presidential campaign--5 days before the Iowa caucuses to tell Bernie to please make sure that his Twitter followers and FB friends are being kind and respectful?
I mean...you could be right.
I'm so intrigued by this meeting. It's just surreal beyond measure.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Obama met with Bernie because Berniebro was mean to Al Franken?!
artislife
(9,497 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)The idea that the President of the United States called in a United States Senator who is running for President to scold him because his supporters are rude.
Seriously?
You really want to go with that?
SamKnause
(13,088 posts)Bernie requested the meeting in December.
merrily
(45,251 posts)What part of Cali Democrat's insightful point is escaping you?
femmedem
(8,197 posts)you liken a leading Democratic presidential candidate to a child being called in to the principal's office?
How would you react if a Sanders supporter had referred to Clinton that way?
Karma13612
(4,544 posts)Was not a last minute scolding, at least according to some DU member couple days ago.
catnhatnh
(8,976 posts)Horsecock.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)And Nathaniel Pearlman (NGP VAN) was chief technology officer for Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign.
merrily
(45,251 posts)This thread is the funniest I've read this week. Love it.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)There's no friggin' way the POTUS called Sen. Sanders into his office to say "tell your supporters to stop being mean on facebook!"
Sorry to burst ye olde bubble.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)That made me LOL, thanks!
FSogol
(45,448 posts)It has to be some grand anti-Sanders conspiracy!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)The fact that he met with H earlier? Are you implying that he threatened Bernie in some way? Because running for office is not something that should be considered wrong.
Or is it your interpretation that your gal should have had no one run against her?
What a silly post. And yes, silly is not the word I am saying in my head.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)It would have been acceptable to have a pretend candidate or two, the charade of an actual primary contest on the way to the inevitable result; but to REALLY challenge her, when it is clearly her turn?
UNACCEPTABLE.
And that's what is at the root of all the "unhinged" loathing of Sanders and those who support him, in some corners.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Even in this OP, they can't help but prove it.
Its forced me to recognize how little society respects the passion of the many young womenand menwho are putting their souls into electing the first female president.
But you are right (in another thread)...it's not just any woman. It's this woman.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)It would have been interesting to see how those arguments would have been spun had that come to pass. I actually suspect we still would have heard the same bargle- even back then when there was real hope to see a EW candidacy, when she was the clear preferred choice of those of us here who wanted a more progressive alternative, the same rumblings were there ---- about how opposing Hillary meant "misogyny".
"How can it be Misogyny if I want Elizabeth Wa---" LA LA LA I CANT HEAR YOUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)I wished she would have run too, but Benrie does have a stronger record on the issues...he's been for it longer than Warren.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I also think there was serious in-party Pressure on Warren not to run, which Bernie wasn't subject to or didn't care about.
But if he gets the nomination I would think that might not apply, in which case maybe EW would go on the ticket. Which would be awesome.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)It is surprising that she is suddenly coming out more strongly in support of Bernie's policies and platform, after seeming to side with Clinton...I wonder if she just decided to slip the throat hold and be herself.
Bernie requested the meeting in December.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)Not that the really over the top people will listen.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)campaign for putting this out there.
pnwmom
(108,958 posts)rpannier
(24,328 posts)It's fair and I criticize it
But the Vince Foster, Whitewater, the Clinton's Kill People, etc grows really annoying and it angers
It happened in 2008 as well
I just hoped we had moved past that
Oh... and the Goldwater Girl thing
Unless you can tie that to more recent behavior it's old and antiquated and irrelevant
pnwmom
(108,958 posts)while she was being raised by her Republican parents, has zero relevance. It's easy to be a progressive if you were raised by progressive parents and that's all you've ever known. I'm more impressed that she rejected the politics of her parents even though she continued to love them.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)his home town. Then I went to college, began to think for myself, and voted for McGovern. But once I switched, I never looked back.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)we not supposed to mention that little fact?
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)pnwmom
(108,958 posts)Many people even here blame her for Bill's affairs, Vince Foster, Rose Hill law firm, and all the other garbage that the Rethugs have thrown at her over the decades -- with the updated empty accusations surrounding Benghazi.
How can you not be aware of this?
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)might need someone to be bring in the southern vote.
artislife
(9,497 posts)KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)It's really not that damn serious.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Because reasons.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Every Hillary supporter who slimed Bernie from day one will make an appearance. I'm waiting for the ones who posted anti-Semitic slurs and called his wife a felon to show up.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Spot on, Holmes. Spot on.
ecstatic
(32,653 posts)message board and people cyber stalking / bullying specific Hillary supporters who they don't agree with.
So far, I've only seen stalking /cyber bullying coming from Bernie's side. The moment a person or organization endorses Hillary, all hell breaks loose. It's disgusting and immature. BTW, I haven't seen one example of someone thrown under the bus for endorsing Bernie.
According to the polls, the vast majority of Sanders supporters also like Clinton--so I know it's only a few Sanders supporters who are guilty of bullying and harassment. I guess it's all the new millennial types who are also attracted to Trump.
Response to ecstatic (Reply #41)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Do tell.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Could it be because that is specifically what you are looking for?
Lazy Daisy
(928 posts)ecstatic
(32,653 posts)Last edited Fri Jan 29, 2016, 12:33 PM - Edit history (1)
But the list of people under the bus for not giving 100% glowing reviews to Bernie has been growing exponentially: Al Franken, Planned Parenthood, HRC, NARAL, Chris Hayes, Rachel Maddow, Ta'nehisi Coates, the entire Congressional Black Caucus, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Paul Krugman, Lena Dunham, Joan Walsh, Anita Finlay, Emily Nussbaum, etc.
These people are receiving vile and vicious attacks, and the funny part is, some of them haven't even endorsed anyone yet!
merrily
(45,251 posts)NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Poor kid.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)by the press... not just Sanders' folk ... for saying "millions and millions of Americans would be without health insurance..." That was a lie...straight out. She hasn't learned the art of dog whistles yet.
merrily
(45,251 posts)What are facts and reality?
Number23
(24,544 posts)to say anything at all, even if what they did finally say is too little too late.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... the minute the stories started circulating about how vile BSers are on-line, would have gone a long way - not only among his True Believers, but in terms of making himself look like he was aware of the situation and addressing it.
So the questions remain: Is Bernie aware of what's going on and ignoring it? Or is Bernie unaware - and why doesn't he know what's going on?
Either way, it doesn't come off as an example of leadership.
The swarming of the FaceBook pages of Democrats who endorsed HRC - where BSers left some of the vilest comments imaginable - is well-known by people who don't even use FB. Why didn't Bernie speak up then? And if he didn't, why not? And if he didn't KNOW about it, why didn't he know?
Number23
(24,544 posts)black folks on Twitter and Facebook. I kept saying "they'll stop all this crap when he tells them to" and he never did. Some clued in Sanders supporters resorted to making videos saying that Sanders needed to be saved... from his own supporters. It's only gone downhill since.
This week alone, Ta-Nehisi Coates and Joan Walsh have both released pieces in response to the harassment they've received from some Sanders supporters. It is so NOT a good look.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... from him back then. I thought it was the perfect opportunity to step up to the plate and say, "This is NOT what I'm about, and this is not what my campaign is about."
It was a truly golden opportunity to show true leadership - and it would have been more than noticed.
Given the negative publicity surrounding the behaviour of BSers, how could you NOT SEE how damaging your own supporters are to your campaign? How could you NOT be aware of it - and determined to address it?
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)DFW
(54,302 posts)In an interview in TIME last fall he said for the record that he expected that some of his followers would do or say some things he'd have to disavow. From Howard, I know how an intense campaign can result in a candidate being practically shut off from the rest of the world by well-meaning staffers. A Republican I know met Bob Dole during the 1996 campaign and asked him if he was planning to swing by Dallas some time during the campaign. Dole replied that he didn't even know where he was supposed to be the following day.
I'm sure that Sanders saw (or someone close to him showed him) some Facebook page, or maybe even a thread from DU (remember, he and Thom Hartman are close and Thom reads DU), and someone figured out that some of their supporters (or people who claim to be, anyway) might be doing them more damage than good. But I can indeed imagine that Sanders and some of his higher-ups might have really gone this long without having seen what everyone else (both friend and foe) has been seeing on a daily basis.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)The problem is that he hasn't.
I certainly don't expect anyone maintaining a grueling campaign schedule to be aware of every single detail of what's going on around them. However, there's been ample evidence that Bernie's campaign has been a classic case of the right hand not knowing what the left is doing. Remember that BS's campaign issued an apology to BLM after that fiasco - which Bernie immediately stated he did not authorize or agree with.
If he can't keep track of what's going on with his own staff (like the fact that they'd illegally accessed HRC's computer data), it doesn't exactly scream "leadership".
Somehow I think that if HRC supporters were swarming the FaceBook pages of anyone who endorsed Bernie and leaving vile comments, she'd be made aware of it and would address it immediately.
I have little confidence in a potential POTUS whose response to anything is, "Gee, I had no idea. If only I'd hired some staffers who would have let me know." It makes me wonder what kind of advisors a president Bernie would rely on to keep himself informed.
DFW
(54,302 posts)It is his decision as to whom he hires, and how forcefully he reacts to what goes down "on his behalf." I do give him credit for foreseeing that some of his supporters would go overboard. It is obviously not enough to shrug his shoulders and say, "I told you so." He did fire staff after the file accessing. If that is the only reaction he has to offer to excesses on his behalf, including verbal ones, I would indeed find it disappointingly underwhelming.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... after the file accessing - including a worker described by his campaign as a "low level" employee, who was actually the campaign's director of data.
If you can't keep track of who's who in your campaign, I doubt you can keep track of who's who in your administration.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)up to "mischief." Now why would I think that based on what I've seen to date..
Prism
(5,815 posts)Tax cuts!
Single payer is the devil!
Neoconservative foreign policy is amazing!
Wall Street just needs some stern eyebrows!
And on. And on. And on.
I'm this close to believing if Clinton said various forms of abortion were bad, her supporters would tie themselves into knots to explain why it was right and proper and logical to think so. God knows, many of them have taken massive right turns on every other issue.
SunSeeker
(51,515 posts)Prism
(5,815 posts)He's not my Jesus. I didn't agree to abide by his personal standards. He's a nice guy and wonderful human being.
I'm not.
I cannot stand situational hypocrites.
I'm a gay man who spent 35 years watching the party he voted for telling everyone who would listen God says I can't have my family. So excuse me if I'm less than ultra kind to right-wing shit dressed up in a blue t-shirt. Are you new to that phenomenon? I'm not.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)my sister and I grew up with an 'uncle' really a second cousin and his friend in the 60's who had the time and showed us many exciting places. Later on some in the family learned the truth and they were not sure what to say, but we will always have fond memories of our adventures, the World's Fair in NYC several times, the Museum of Modern Art many times, learning to paint or counting the coins they threw into a jar and wondering where we could go with the money.
This afternoon we spent time with another friend we have known for 40 years and his Canadian husband, we spoke of HC and how they are thinking of splitting their time between the US and Canada, not wanting to let go of the HC system they have in Canada, but wanting to spend more time in a warmer climate. But it was also a stark reminder of how things have changed for the better, our son is gay and in his early 20's, he has it so much easier now compared to the 60's. These are the times when it is 'easier' to speak one's mind, still there are challenges, but easier than before.
Everyone should be judged for how they interact with others, not on some damn label. I myself went to a Catholic boarding school in high school and that was a trip, needless to say I did not always conform and attended too many 6 am masses as punishment.
We are all in this world together and should never inflict our beliefs unto another person.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)I credit a lot of this to PBO and cried through his speech officially taking LGBT out of the shadows and into the realm of acceptance. I believe, after that, the issue experienced a tectonic shift.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)and Obama did help advance the issue. Thankfully my son is experiencing a different world ... small steps.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)SunSeeker
(51,515 posts)His only condition was "If the other candidates are in."
It's right there in the video. http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/one-more-democratic-primary-debate-maybe-609555011560
And actually I got the date wrong. It's not Feb. 1. The Rachel/MSNBC debate is Thursday, February 4, as I note in that thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1079730
Sanders' flip flop is not going unnoticed.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/us-election-2016-clinton-omalley-034850592.html
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)And I really to do not care how the corporate media, thanks in part to Bill Clinton, spins the headline as a flip flop. Many people are too savvy and read beyond the corporate BS ... Thankfully!!!!
You got it wrong, there was never another DNC sanctioned debate scheduled for 2/1 or even 2/4. Even for 2/4 the DNC has not sanctioned the debate. You really should go back to those threads and admit you had it wrong and stop blaming Sanders as going back on his word, life is too short to play the game of the corporate/establishment masters, but that is JMHO.
But thanks, I really do appreciate the fact that you had the courage to admit your mistake.
SunSeeker
(51,515 posts)The other candidates are in; they are in for Feb. 4, not Feb. 1. I just put in the wrong date. I never said the Feb. 4 debate was a DNC sanctioned debate. As I said repeatedly in that thread, it was a Rachel Maddow's/MSNBCS idea.
My point was Sanders agreed with Rachel to be "counted in" if the others are "in." The others agreed to be in the Feb. 4 debate. Then Sanders went back on his word. I made no mistake about that. Rachel documents it all on that video at the link I provided.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)which Sanders did NOT to agree to in the link you provided.
Sorry but you need to get it together, you are confusing dates and ideas.
Sanders said in mid January 'count me in' and then Yesterday the idea of 2/4 was floated, NOT 2/1, but the DNC has not sanctioned the debate!
Wish you would argue as passionately for not invading another country under false pretenses and killing hundreds of thousands of people as you are for a damned debate!
SunSeeker
(51,515 posts)https://uk.news.yahoo.com/us-election-2016-clinton-omalley-034850592.html
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)never agreed upon in your link and an unsanctioned debate scheduled just yesterday. Do you understand, some people have jobs!
I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you just keep plowing ahead!
Sanders has another job. For those who do not have anything else besides raking in millions of dollars for a speech, cannot summon a private a jet and already have other commitments they cannot just turn on a dime. Maybe the 1% can do that, especially while they are declining in the polls, but not everyone can.
You were wrong, the Dems did everything they could to limit debates back in the summer, now that Hillary is sinking they want everyone to march in lockstep. Sanders called them out and some are all aghast that he is not falling into lockstep with their calling.
SunSeeker
(51,515 posts)Now Bernie won't agree to another debate unless the DNC sanctions it AND he gets 3 more late season debates. That is going back on his word. No mistake about that. At this point the date does not matter. He won't come to an additional debate on ANY date until his new conditions are met.
merrily
(45,251 posts)She was saying it all day on MSNBC Wednesday--that the campaigns and the DNC had to get together and set something up.
(Correction: she wasn't saying it all day, but they were re-running the tape of when she said it.)
synergie
(1,901 posts)canddiate?
Pretty much everything in every thread is from the Karl Rove playbook.
The personal attacks, the "clintons are evil", and on and on and on.
Bernie snarked at PP and HRC, and both received the level of abuse that usually comes form Republicans and CONS, even after he walked it back, the abuse is still going strong, with anti-choice talking points being banded about, as you folks tie yourselves into knots trying to explain why you're right and proper to attack them, and you take your own right turns, which is why they're seeking to appeal to the right for votes.
When the Republicans are feeding you your talking points, accusing your opponents of being Republicans is pure projection.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)So anyone who supports HRC is essentially a Republican? That meme is such bullshit. I am a lifelong Democrat who happens to think that HRC is the most qualified to be President. There are millions of Democrats that won't pass your narrow minded Puritopian rigid ideology. Insulting them does not help your cause.
frylock
(34,825 posts)TAX AND SPEND!!2
libodem
(19,288 posts)Don't take the bait!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)When this Bernie supporter gets banned from the Bernie group for advocating support of the DU TOS.
I want to disassociate myself from many DU Bernie supporters, but I will not disassociate myself from supporting and voting for Bernie in the primary, and the supporting and voting for Democratic nominee in the general election.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)treating unfairly by one group here, you still support the best candidate in the primaries.
I think we all tend to be a bit more sensitive and protective in a 'closed' and minority space. I know there is excitement for change outside of DU.
From what I have experienced with my kids there is a lot of excitement for Sanders, my kids are total opposites, they both would vote for Sanders in the primaries, would they both vote for another candidate in the GE? One would, maybe not the other.
What we post here means nothing to most of the population at large.
longship
(40,416 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,365 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)Empowerer
(3,900 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)anyone who endorses and or even supports HRC. Its truly is sad.
frylock
(34,825 posts)elleng
(130,740 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)Iliyah
(25,111 posts)The denial trains keep rolling while passing mirrors.
frylock
(34,825 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)mhatrw
(10,786 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)This isn't her first "bash the Berniebros" rodeo.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I think Hillary has hired the kids of quite a few people at MSNBC.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)MrChuck
(279 posts)of time passing me by.
In the interest of disclosure, I'm a Sanders supporter who has felt moments of extreme exhilaration at points in this campaign.
It's easy to understand how those feelings of righteous indignation could degrade, given the proper variables in temperament and context. In my youth I can remember smoking endlessly and shouting over coffee cups. That was before the internet where no one has a face.
Today, lashing out on the internet has taken the place of brawling in the streets. It's the new bullying and you can get away with it if you shield yourself behind enough accounts and usernames.
It's a way of life for a generation that's younger than mine. I see it and it makes me glad I'm as old as I am.
Despite my doubt concerning the younger generation, I still believe that they deserve certain things here in the greatest country in the world. I realized, not too many years ago, that the things I hope for in terms of progress in our government are all things that will really make the lives of future generations better. I'm probably halfway through my own life and it's been great but I'll be lucky to enjoy 30 years more. That's a long time but it's not as long as it used to seem.
I dont think supporting Clinton makes anyone a bad person and I'd never say so.
I hope that the youngsters don't screw themselves right out of this opportunity we have because we'll need Clinton supporters to win the general.
Just like they'd need us if it turned out in their favor.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)yardwork
(61,539 posts)I think of this as Reddit-type discourse. It's not a positive thing.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)If Sanders wins I will take a break from DU because I don't want to hear his supporters here gloat.
The main reason I don't like Sanders anymore is his followers online. They really can get nasty and they paint you as a conservative for opposing him. They are his biggest liability.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)yardwork
(61,539 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)It has only gotten progressively worse since BLM was harassed mercilessly back in July.
Gothmog
(144,937 posts)I love Joan Walsh and her article was great
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)He should also mention this to Sanders when speaking about great progressive organizations.
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)Maybe it's time for Bernie to address the issue.
Alfresco
(1,698 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
R B Garr
(16,950 posts)was the time to stop it and that was months ago. Poor Joan Walsh.
DUbeornot2be
(367 posts)...I'm sorry but the same media and politicians who have capitalized on turning citizens against each other, using the most manipulative tactics available to keep us Americans divided... Well they don't get to come back and demand that we start being nice hecause their or their families feelings were hurt.
They propagandize us then blame us... all while robbing us blind, destroying lives.
Fuck them!
Autumn
(44,982 posts)"Clinton volunteers are being encouraged to vote for Martin OMalley in cases where making him viable would prevent his voters from shifting to Bernie Sanders."
We are spending our time making videos to help our caucus goers convince people that Bernie would be a great candidate for them, and then I see the Clinton camp doing something like this... What can we do?
https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/433avs/clinton_volunteers_are_being_encouraged_to_vote/
Amos says that, at least in her county, food can also be a strategic consideration. A neighbor once gave her an expensive bottle of wine and asked her to switch her vote to a rival campaign (she didn't). In 2008, she said the Clinton supporters in Lucas County separated their home-cooked dishes from the main community potluck table on caucus night in order to make their corner of the room look more inviting. When I asked if the Clinton campaign intended to bring food this year, one local volunteer, Susan Cohen, clarified: Its not bribery, its all about hospitality and making it a good experience for everybody.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-01-25/the-secret-science-of-winning-the-iowa-caucuses
Thanks Segami
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511082155
Alfresco
(1,698 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Oh...NOW be respectful???
Where was this months ago?
That horse escaped the barn a hell of a long time ago LOL
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)Orrex
(63,172 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)Alfresco
(1,698 posts)jfern
(5,204 posts)polly7
(20,582 posts)Beacool
(30,247 posts)Suffice it to read GDP.