Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
"How many times does Bernie Sanders have to get caught cheating before we admit there’s a problem?"
When the Bernie Sanders campaign improperly accessed Hillary Clinton’s private data last month, we all gave him the benefit of the doubt and assumed it was an isolated incident. After all, Bernie Sanders has been Mr. Integrity for decades. But since that time, he and his campaign have been caught doing one dishonest thing after another. And now two prominent liberal groups have each accused Bernie of cheating in the past two days alone. We must now admit that his campaign has gone off the rails, and that the democrats have a crisis at hand.
Yesterday the League of Conservation Voters accused the Bernie Sanders campaign of improperly using its logo on fundraising mailers after the group had endorsed his rival Hillary Clinton. Today the Nevada Culinary Union accused the Bernie Sanders campaign of disguising its staffers as if they were union members so they could campaign in restricted areas. These are serious liberal groups, and these are serious accusations that can’t be ignored.
On their own, they each could be written off as mere happenstance. But put them together, in light of the data breach no less, and it starts to spell out a pattern. Throw in Bernie’s dishonest lawsuit against the DNC to try to turn his own scandal into a phony conspiracy so he could fundraise on it, his sudden attacks on Bill Clinton, his comparison of Hillary Clinton to Dick Cheney, and his verbal attack on Planned Parenthood simply because it failed to endorse him, and suddenly we realized the past month has amounted to an undeniable pattern of dishonesty and outright cheating on the part of Bernie Sanders. So what now?
Many democrats and liberals, even some who plan to vote for Clinton, have said that they fear calling out Sanders for his consistently unethical behavior over the past month because they don’t want to muddy the waters for him on the small chance that he ends up being the party’s nominee. Super Tuesday polling has already made clear that he won’t be the nominee. But even that aside, it appears that Bernie is counting on our unwillingness to talk about his behavior. If we want it to stop, we’re going to have to call him out on it before he goes further off the rails.
Yesterday the League of Conservation Voters accused the Bernie Sanders campaign of improperly using its logo on fundraising mailers after the group had endorsed his rival Hillary Clinton. Today the Nevada Culinary Union accused the Bernie Sanders campaign of disguising its staffers as if they were union members so they could campaign in restricted areas. These are serious liberal groups, and these are serious accusations that can’t be ignored.
On their own, they each could be written off as mere happenstance. But put them together, in light of the data breach no less, and it starts to spell out a pattern. Throw in Bernie’s dishonest lawsuit against the DNC to try to turn his own scandal into a phony conspiracy so he could fundraise on it, his sudden attacks on Bill Clinton, his comparison of Hillary Clinton to Dick Cheney, and his verbal attack on Planned Parenthood simply because it failed to endorse him, and suddenly we realized the past month has amounted to an undeniable pattern of dishonesty and outright cheating on the part of Bernie Sanders. So what now?
Many democrats and liberals, even some who plan to vote for Clinton, have said that they fear calling out Sanders for his consistently unethical behavior over the past month because they don’t want to muddy the waters for him on the small chance that he ends up being the party’s nominee. Super Tuesday polling has already made clear that he won’t be the nominee. But even that aside, it appears that Bernie is counting on our unwillingness to talk about his behavior. If we want it to stop, we’re going to have to call him out on it before he goes further off the rails.
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/opinion/how-many-times-does-bernie-sanders-have-to-get-caught-cheating-before-we-admit-theres-a-problem/23693/
139 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
Bernie’s dishonest lawsuit against the DNC to try to turn his own scandal into a phony conspiracy so he could fundraise on it, his sudden attacks on Bill Clinton, his comparison of Hillary Clinton to Dick Cheney, and his verbal attack on Planned Parenthood simply because it failed to endorse him
Dude sounds totally impartial.
logos, lunchrooms, really?
fake accusations about bringing in ineligible voters?
there's no comparison with the wholesale influence peddling of the Clintons
They claim they want to discuss issues, but when a post full of issues hits them, what do we get?
*Crickets chirping*
But what can they do? How to argue with the truth, presented in such formidable way?
BainsBane, this deserves to be an op, and to have its own thread.
I need a bowing smilie! I guess I'll settle for the hat tip. Epic and awesome
They'd all be up! I'll have to settle for this:
Do they think we forgot all about her racist 2008 campaign?
The daily display of manufactured outrage is quite a show.
Last edited Sat Jan 30, 2016, 08:32 AM - Edit history (1)
Why should anyone care about any of the problems listed above? I mean, we are talking about Bernie after all, not a mere mortal. How can anyone suggest that Bernie isn't entitled to do anything he wants?
If Clinton is so racist, why is she supported by the overwhelming percentage of voters of color? Why do Sanders rallies in diverse areas like S Carolina and the Twin Cities draw overwhelmingly white crowds? So much so that a few black folks who enter end up being racially profiled as potential disruptors? http://www.citypages.com/news/racial-profiling-alleged-at-bernie-sanders-rally-in-st-paul-8000955
Yet a number of Sanders supporters would have us believe that it is white people who are oppressed by having to endure speech that talks about how people of color have been profiled.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 28, 2016, 11:23 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.
RACIAL PROFILING ALLEGED AT BERNIE SANDERS RALLY IN ST. PAUL
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511086919
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
the caps alone, not just the racist crap makes this op unacceptable.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This alert is a clear attempt to silence anyone critical of Sanders. Censorship is not becoming on a Democratic board. Please leave it.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: To quote Airplane! "Surely you can't be serious
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerting over all caps certainly takes the cake! The OP is sourced and anyone can challenge if they wish, but there is nothing hide worth in the OP.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251587673#post173
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=563036
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22beam+me+up+scottie%22+%22race+baiting%22&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&gws_rd=ssl#q=+%22beam+me+up+scottie%22+%22race+baiting%22+site:democraticunderground.com
I've seen enough of your comments about "race baiting" to know better than to take lessons from you on what constitutes racism. For that, I prefer to listen to what people of color have to say on the subject.
Somehow, most voters of color don't share your take on racism: they don't believe that they are racist for daring to talk about racial profiling or racist behavior by whites. Amazingly, they don't think affluent white men, members of the political elite, to be more oppressed that the subaltern. Go figure.
I disagree in the strongest possible terms that black folks engage in "race baiting" by discussing profiling against them or racist murders. I do not share the view that the most racially oppressed people in America are white, particularly affluent white men with political power seeking to acquire yet more power.
I actually think the racism that matters is that directed toward people of color and that includes efforts to silence them and accuse of them of "race baiting," or accusing white people who actually give a shit about diversity of "race baiting." The function of such rhetoric is to enforce white control over public discourse, to ensure that matters of diversity and actual racism toward people of color is attacked as illegitimate subjects of discussion because it makes the white people uncomfortable, or perhaps simply because it fails to advance the career of one man. Then of course there is the use of the alert system to purge the site of anyone who fails to fall in line behind the dominant cultural expectation that race cannot be discussed unless it is to attack Clinton and people of color, or to highlight the horrible oppression of white people at the hands of uppity black folk who dare to assert their rights, talk about racist killings, or racial profiling.
Meanwhile, the Sanders campaign's strategy for victory is to focus on states with low voter turnout in order to get around the influence of voters of color.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/bernie-sanders-iowa-obama-playbook-218137
As much as you think it hateful to talk about the importance of voters of color in the Democratic Party, I do not. I think their influence important, and seeking to get around it or censor all discussion of it is intended to nullify that influence in favor of greater influence by whites, and white men in particular. African American voters have become aware of their voting power and intend to use it, as they well should. That is not racist; it is smart. It is how they will compel politicians to address their concerns, concerns that matter, regardless of how determined some are to silence it through insults like "race baiting."
I was an Obama supporter in 2008, though I made my mind up only shortly before Super Tuesday when I caucused. I was considering other candidates but not Clinton because of my opposition to the war. I remember finding some in 2008, especially by Bill Clinton, to be highly offensive. They were unacceptable, but Hillary has since made great efforts to mend bridges with African American communities, and she has by and large succeeded.
2008, however, does not nullify or excuse what is going on now in 2016. Too many Sanders supporters have demonstrated deeply conservative values by insisting leftist activists like BLM need to be deferential to a member of the political elite. That reveals a profound bias against people's movements--at least movements by people of color--in favor of a man in power. There is little that can be more reactionary. Some of those attacks have taken overt racial tones, through racist insults, etc. Others may simply invoke racist tropes in order to advance Bernie's career, just as they invoke sexism, but ultimately the effect of both approaches is the same. Evidently they feel the goal of "taking America back" (a phrase that carries multiple meanings) justifies any and everything. In the process, they expose precisely who they are.
First let's clear something up, once again you're putting words in people's mouths, I didn't say she was a racist - you did. I said she ran a racist campaign and I'm not the only one who noticed even if you didn't:
Clinton aides claim Obama photo wasn't intended as a smear
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Monday 25 February 2008
Barack Obama, right, is dressed as a Somali elder by Sheikh Mahmed Hassan, left, during his visit to Wajir in northeastern Kenya, near the borders with Somalia and Ethiopia
Barack Obama's campaign team today accused Hillary Clinton's beleaguered staff of mounting a desperate dirty tricks operation by circulating a picture of him in African dress, feeding into false claims on US websites that he is a Muslim.
Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, described it as "the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we've seen from either party in this election". Obama has had to spend much of the campaign stressing he is a Christian not a Muslim and did not study at a madrassa.
Aides for Mrs Clinton, who is fighting a last-ditch battle to keep her hopes of the White House alive, initially tried to brush off the furore, but later denied having anything to do with the distribution of the picture. "I just want to make it very clear that we were not aware of it, the campaign didn't sanction it and don't know anything about it," Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson told reporters. "None of us have seen the email in question."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/25/barackobama.hillaryclinton
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
Monday 25 February 2008
Barack Obama, right, is dressed as a Somali elder by Sheikh Mahmed Hassan, left, during his visit to Wajir in northeastern Kenya, near the borders with Somalia and Ethiopia
Barack Obama's campaign team today accused Hillary Clinton's beleaguered staff of mounting a desperate dirty tricks operation by circulating a picture of him in African dress, feeding into false claims on US websites that he is a Muslim.
Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe, described it as "the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we've seen from either party in this election". Obama has had to spend much of the campaign stressing he is a Christian not a Muslim and did not study at a madrassa.
Aides for Mrs Clinton, who is fighting a last-ditch battle to keep her hopes of the White House alive, initially tried to brush off the furore, but later denied having anything to do with the distribution of the picture. "I just want to make it very clear that we were not aware of it, the campaign didn't sanction it and don't know anything about it," Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson told reporters. "None of us have seen the email in question."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/25/barackobama.hillaryclinton
Obama Trounces Clintons’ Racist, Entitled S.C. Campaign
Posted: January 27, 2008
Matthew Rothschild
The trouncing that Hillary Clinton got in South Carolina proved that the racist and entitled campaign that the Clintons ran there backfired.
The Clinton campaign kept saying, “He’s black, black, black,” as author and South Carolina activist Kevin Alexander Gray pointed out on Jesse Jackson’s “Keep Hope Alive” program Sunday morning. And Bill Clinton used coded language, like the “old okie-dokie,” which served to remind whites of Obama’s blackness, Gray added. That's like saying don’t fall for the old “shuck and jive.”
And speaking of “shuck and jive,” that’s exactly the phrase Andrew Cuomo used to disparage Obama in New Hampshire, saying he can’t use that “shuck and jive” at press conferences.
Obama’s black, get it.
Or Bob Kerrey, another Clinton supporter, saying, “I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim,” and that he went to school in a madrassa, as Bob Herbert noted in The New York Times. Kerrey later apologized, Herbert added, as did Andrew Young, for saying, “Bill is every bit as black as Barack. He’s probably gone with more black women than Barack.”
Or take Bill Clinton's ludicrous comment that Hillary is "stronger than Nelson Mandela." (The not-so-subtle dig being that she's not only stronger than that black man Obama, she's stronger than the strongest black man on the face of the Earth.)
To say nothing of the nonsense about Clinton being the first black President, which Obama was forced to address in the CNN debate, and which Bill Clinton seems to revel in.
(Racist tactics are nothing new for Bill Clinton. After he all, he used the “Sister Souljah” comment to wink at the white base in 1992, and he made a point to hustle back to Arkansas during that campaign just so he could execute a mentally retarded black man named Rickie Ray Rector.)
And sure enough, after the embarrassing loss, the Clinton campaign tried to dismiss the results by stressing the black vote that Obama got and by mentioning that Jesse Jackson had won South Carolina in 1988, as well.
http://progressive.org/news/2008/01/5995/obama-trounces-clintons%E2%80%99-racist-entitled-sc-campaign
Posted: January 27, 2008
Matthew Rothschild
The trouncing that Hillary Clinton got in South Carolina proved that the racist and entitled campaign that the Clintons ran there backfired.
The Clinton campaign kept saying, “He’s black, black, black,” as author and South Carolina activist Kevin Alexander Gray pointed out on Jesse Jackson’s “Keep Hope Alive” program Sunday morning. And Bill Clinton used coded language, like the “old okie-dokie,” which served to remind whites of Obama’s blackness, Gray added. That's like saying don’t fall for the old “shuck and jive.”
And speaking of “shuck and jive,” that’s exactly the phrase Andrew Cuomo used to disparage Obama in New Hampshire, saying he can’t use that “shuck and jive” at press conferences.
Obama’s black, get it.
Or Bob Kerrey, another Clinton supporter, saying, “I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim,” and that he went to school in a madrassa, as Bob Herbert noted in The New York Times. Kerrey later apologized, Herbert added, as did Andrew Young, for saying, “Bill is every bit as black as Barack. He’s probably gone with more black women than Barack.”
Or take Bill Clinton's ludicrous comment that Hillary is "stronger than Nelson Mandela." (The not-so-subtle dig being that she's not only stronger than that black man Obama, she's stronger than the strongest black man on the face of the Earth.)
To say nothing of the nonsense about Clinton being the first black President, which Obama was forced to address in the CNN debate, and which Bill Clinton seems to revel in.
(Racist tactics are nothing new for Bill Clinton. After he all, he used the “Sister Souljah” comment to wink at the white base in 1992, and he made a point to hustle back to Arkansas during that campaign just so he could execute a mentally retarded black man named Rickie Ray Rector.)
And sure enough, after the embarrassing loss, the Clinton campaign tried to dismiss the results by stressing the black vote that Obama got and by mentioning that Jesse Jackson had won South Carolina in 1988, as well.
http://progressive.org/news/2008/01/5995/obama-trounces-clintons%E2%80%99-racist-entitled-sc-campaign
Hillary Clinton needs to address the racist undertones of her 2008 campaign
Ryan Cooper
July 23, 2015
McKesson is right to be suspicious. Hillary Clinton's record on race is not great. If she wishes to earn some trust on issues of racial justice, a good place to start would be with the distinctly racist undertones of her 2008 campaign against Barack Obama.
As the first primaries got underway in 2008, and Obama began to slowly pull ahead, the Clinton camp resorted to increasingly blatant race- and Muslim-baiting. It started in February, when Louis Farrakhan, the head of the Nation of Islam, endorsed Obama in a sermon. In a debate a couple days later, moderator Tim Russert repeatedly pressed Obama on the issue, who responded with repeated reassurances that he did not ask for the endorsement, did not accept it, and in fact was not a deranged anti-Semite. That wasn't enough for Clinton, who demanded that Obama "denounce" Farrakhan, which he did.
About the same time, a picture of Obama in traditional Somali garb (from an official trip) then appeared on the Drudge Report, and Matt Drudge claimed he got it from the Clinton campaign. After stonewalling on the origin question, the campaign later claimed it had nothing to do with it. A Clinton flack then went on MSNBC and argued that Obama should not be ashamed to appear in "his native clothing, in the clothing of his country."
Later, a media firestorm blew up when it was discovered that Obama's Chicago pastor Jeremiah Wright once delivered a sermon containing the words "God damn America." In response, Obama gave a deft, nuanced speech on racial issues, but Clinton kept the issue alive by insisting she would have long ago denounced the man.
The late Michael Hastings, who covered Clinton's campaign, described one instance of this strategy on the ground:
[Clinton supporter] Buffenbarger launched into a rant in which he compared Obama to Muhammad Ali, the best-known black American convert to Islam after Malcolm X. "But brothers and sisters," he said, "I've seen Ali in action. He could rope-a-dope with Foreman inside the ring. He could go toe-to-toe with Liston inside the ring. He could get his jaw broken by Norton and keep fighting inside the ring. But Barack Obama is no Muhammad Ali." The cunning racism of the attack actually made my heart start to beat fast and my ears start to ring. For the first time on the campaign trail, I felt completely outraged. I kept thinking, "Am I misreading this?" But there was no way, if you were in that room, to think it was anything other than what it was. [GQ]
Then there was Bill Clinton comparing Obama's campaign to that of Jesse Jackson's unsuccessful run in 1988. The capstone came in May, when Hillary Clinton started openly boasting about her superior support from white voters.
The effort was not so blatant as George H.W. Bush's Willie Horton ad, but the attempt to play on racist attitudes through constant repetition and association was unmistakable — in addition to playing into right-wing conspiracy theories that Obama is a secret Muslim who was born in Africa. It's likely why in West Virginia — a state so racist that some guy in a Texas prison got 40 percent of the Democratic primary vote in 2012 — Clinton won a smashing victory.
http://theweek.com/articles/567774/hillary-clinton-needs-address-racist-undertones-2008-campaign
Ryan Cooper
July 23, 2015
McKesson is right to be suspicious. Hillary Clinton's record on race is not great. If she wishes to earn some trust on issues of racial justice, a good place to start would be with the distinctly racist undertones of her 2008 campaign against Barack Obama.
As the first primaries got underway in 2008, and Obama began to slowly pull ahead, the Clinton camp resorted to increasingly blatant race- and Muslim-baiting. It started in February, when Louis Farrakhan, the head of the Nation of Islam, endorsed Obama in a sermon. In a debate a couple days later, moderator Tim Russert repeatedly pressed Obama on the issue, who responded with repeated reassurances that he did not ask for the endorsement, did not accept it, and in fact was not a deranged anti-Semite. That wasn't enough for Clinton, who demanded that Obama "denounce" Farrakhan, which he did.
About the same time, a picture of Obama in traditional Somali garb (from an official trip) then appeared on the Drudge Report, and Matt Drudge claimed he got it from the Clinton campaign. After stonewalling on the origin question, the campaign later claimed it had nothing to do with it. A Clinton flack then went on MSNBC and argued that Obama should not be ashamed to appear in "his native clothing, in the clothing of his country."
Later, a media firestorm blew up when it was discovered that Obama's Chicago pastor Jeremiah Wright once delivered a sermon containing the words "God damn America." In response, Obama gave a deft, nuanced speech on racial issues, but Clinton kept the issue alive by insisting she would have long ago denounced the man.
The late Michael Hastings, who covered Clinton's campaign, described one instance of this strategy on the ground:
[Clinton supporter] Buffenbarger launched into a rant in which he compared Obama to Muhammad Ali, the best-known black American convert to Islam after Malcolm X. "But brothers and sisters," he said, "I've seen Ali in action. He could rope-a-dope with Foreman inside the ring. He could go toe-to-toe with Liston inside the ring. He could get his jaw broken by Norton and keep fighting inside the ring. But Barack Obama is no Muhammad Ali." The cunning racism of the attack actually made my heart start to beat fast and my ears start to ring. For the first time on the campaign trail, I felt completely outraged. I kept thinking, "Am I misreading this?" But there was no way, if you were in that room, to think it was anything other than what it was. [GQ]
Then there was Bill Clinton comparing Obama's campaign to that of Jesse Jackson's unsuccessful run in 1988. The capstone came in May, when Hillary Clinton started openly boasting about her superior support from white voters.
The effort was not so blatant as George H.W. Bush's Willie Horton ad, but the attempt to play on racist attitudes through constant repetition and association was unmistakable — in addition to playing into right-wing conspiracy theories that Obama is a secret Muslim who was born in Africa. It's likely why in West Virginia — a state so racist that some guy in a Texas prison got 40 percent of the Democratic primary vote in 2012 — Clinton won a smashing victory.
http://theweek.com/articles/567774/hillary-clinton-needs-address-racist-undertones-2008-campaign
Then there was this lovely speech from Hillary:
Frankly I'm shocked that you don't remember what happened in 2008 since you're so concerned with racial issues.
I remember what happened even if you don't and even though I'm sure you'd rather everyone pretend it didn't and forget how your candidate campaigned that's not going to happen.
When Bernie resorts to that kind of dirty gutter politics get back to me, until then I'll continue to speak my mind.
Your trademark personal attacks and meta bullshit aren't going to intimidate or silence me.
And if you're thinking of alerting on my post don't bother, those articles come from credible news sources, not right wing ones, they were widely posted and discussed here in 2008.
half of Hillary's total. You have a lovely day now, you hear?
using the D logo 
A proven cheater pointing fingers.
I know that if they didn't, it wouldn't be the first time some group or other has issued a statement without full knowledge.
You say it isn't because some picture you saw on DU wasn't to your liking.
The image in question was actually provided by your fellows, promoting the "Sanders is a lying shit" conspiracy of the week. That image bears a sender's address and a postage mark, so it's clearly not enveloped. But it has no recipient address. it's not about whether or not it's "to my liking" it's that I've sent and received plenty of mail in my lifetime, and the lack of a recipient address is kind of strange to me.
You dismiss the use of AARP logos in photos disseminated by the campaign, despite the fact that the AARP has said it is not acceptable.
Well, there is a difference between using the AARP logo, and using a picture of people who happen to be wearing a sub-logo on their clothing. However, I didn't dismiss it, BainsBane.
While they're perfectly right to say "we don't endorse candidates and please don't use our logo"
if you would kindly refrain from trying ot lie to me about things I've said, I would appreciate that.
Impersonating culinary workers doesn't even merit a mention from you. Yesterday on DU, we had threads of people assailing the union as lying.
Well, according to the union the issue was resolved. Apparently Sanders' people were not trying to misrepresent themselves, but there was a miscommunication going on regarding the buttons.
My support for Clinton is hardly uncritical. In that sense, there is no comparison to Sanders supporters. I do not accuse everyone who criticizes, contradicts, or fails to vote for her of being liars or part of a conspiracy. I don't declare her to be the source of absolute truth. I am voting for her because she is the best qualified candidate and because I feel the other leading candidate wholly unprepared to execute the job of the presidency. Plus I don't believe him. I agree with Clinton on some things and disagree with her on others. I haven't shifted my views on any issue in order to accommodate hers.
Oh, I know you haven't shifted views. I do know that you were supporting her back in April, before you started your "fifty reasons Bernie supporters made me support Clinton' campaign that we all had a good laugh at, so that you haven't changed your stances isn't really a surprise. But... I hate to tell you but right now? You are calling everyone who doesn't support Clinton a liar. You are accusing them of conspiracy. Hell, you've been calling sanders a liar up and down this thread.
strange then that so far the only lying I've seen comes from you, first telling me I said something I clearly did not, and then saying you aren't calling anyone liars.
One key difference I have with Sanders supporters is the rather unrealistic view of the power of a president, or the importance of a single man, for that matter. I don't believe Hillary Clinton--or any other politician-- more important or superior to the voters she seeks to represent. I don't believe the people don't have a right to criticize or challenge her. I'm not willing to suspend all understanding of the legislative process or the constitution in order to vest all hope in her proposed policies. Those are all areas in which I diverge significantly from many Sanders' supporters approach to their candidate
This is a BanesBain I would like to see return to DU. Give her a ring.
How'd that work out for her again?
Live by the smear, die by the smear. 
Thanks for the reminder ... it helps me to feel even MORE confident that Hillary will win the nomination!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word
Many Clinton supporters are secretly members of the Raelian cult. Some Clinton supporters eat at Chik-Fil-A. Several people say that clinton supporters sing Creed songs while in crowded airports.
Many Clinton supporters are secretly members of the Raelian cult. Some Clinton supporters eat at Chik-Fil-A. Several people say that clinton supporters sing Creed songs while in crowded airports.
just when you think it can't get any more ridiculous!
...good one!
in the alert section. Truly unbelievable.
[URL=
.html][IMG]
[/IMG][/URL]