2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie just asked all of his followers to do everything they can to make sure Trump is defeated
Better late than never
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/6c27bad0a18e4375b925fa388407ce7e/sanders-says-he-will-work-clinton-transform-party
creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)Bernie wants to start a movement. The movement will have a much better chance of accomplishing goals with a Democratic president.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)SFnomad
(3,473 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Bernie does better against Donald J. (Jerkoff) Trump... THAT'S the reality... all I'm sayin'.
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)which is a reality you people want to ignore. His "better" numbers won't last long when the Republicans run ad after ad calling him a Socialist ... with BS calling himself a Socialist.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Since you're not very supportive of democracy with your demand that the loser of the election be declared the winner.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)SFnomad
(3,473 posts)the Tbaggers, Republicans and the rest of the right wingnuts are going to fight fairly? Really? And they're not going to be playing a "Socialist" tape on endless loop?
You're about as naïve as it gets.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)It's REALLY okay if you make a mistake, even a blatently obvious one by calling Bernie a "socialist." That doesn't make you a bad person, not at all... just misinformed. Hey, no one's perfect, not even Bernie himself.
And, there's certainly no need to try covering up your mistakes, or feel embarrassed and show your friustration for making them by lashing out, using ad homimem attacks and straw-man arguments, against those who kindly point them out. A simple "thank you" - not to mention, a small dose of humility - would do.
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)I mean, the fact that you keep conversing with someone who's supposedly "delusional" says more about YOU than it does me.
Anyway, no need for you to get nasty... save your vitriol for tRump in the general. In the meantime, just apologize and strive to do better next time. (You're bigger than this.)
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)"Socialist" label, then yes, you are delusional. It's not personally attacking you, it's just stating an obvious fact.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)What I clearly stated was that YOU wrongly accused Bernie of being a "socialist"... here's the quote from YOU referring to Republican ads... "with BS calling himself a Socialist."
Bernie calls himself a "DEMOCRATIC socialist," not a "socialist." So, by your own admission, you yourself are actually "swift-boating" Bernie. You see how silly you sound? Just admit your mistake and move on... but you won't... you'd rather make transparent straw-man arguments that only serve to embarrass yourself.
Shame on you... you owe Bernie and all of his supporters an apology... which will gladly be accepted btw.
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)Go ahead and continue to live in your made up world ... the rest of us will move on to the General Election
Do you really think a REPUBLICAN AD would call BS a "Democratic Socialist", when they can take him out of context and call him a "Socialist"? Which do you think is more red meat for their base? How often do right wingnuts take liberals out of context?
It's time for you to be honest about all this.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)That was the war cry of the Russian Revolution. This time it would be 99% versus the oligarchy. few over the age of 55 would ever vote for a socialist. Bernie's supporters evidently didn't learn much history in school so they never had bomb drills from the fear of a nuclear attack. I had one tell me that red-baiting didn't work any more. I just told them to ask somebody over the age of 55 - the people that do reliably vote.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)I know you're not delusional like you accuse me of being, so maybe it's time for YOU to be honest and admit, by your very own (well-placed) argument against Rethuglians, you too swift-boated Bernie by claiming he calls himself a "socialist," which is blatantly false. Indeed, I quoted you... all we get in response are <crickets>
Instead of realizing your silly mistake, you only further embarrass yourself by dishonestly putting words in my mouth using "straw-man" arguments. Normal, decent people - like I'm sure you are - would realize their mistake, be honest about it, and simply say "I'm sorry."
It's really not that hard... I assure you I would gladly accept your apology (no hard feelings).
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)SFnomad
(3,473 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)He adds the democratic part when he's explaining himself.
TwilightZone
(25,462 posts)The Democratic Socialist thing is relatively new.
""Socialist" the word is a loaded term and often a rhetorical weapon. But Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., seems to proudly claim it.
"Do they think Im afraid of the word? Im not afraid of the word," he said in an interview with The Nation published in July. "When I ran for the Senate the first time, I ran against the wealthiest guy in the state of Vermont. He spent a lot on advertising very ugly stuff. He kept attacking me as a liberal. He didnt use the word socialist at all, because everybody in the state knows that I am that.""
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/aug/26/bernie-sanders-socialist-or-democratic-socialist/
It kind of astonishes me how little some Sanders supporters seem to know about their candidate.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Throwing out the choice of the voters in favor of the loser of the primary would generate intense backlash. And Sanders wouldn't do nearly as well in the general as those polls from a month ago indicate.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Not saying it's going to happen... just that it could.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)And no, we would not understand. The first woman nominee is forced out and the nomination given to a Sanders? No, never happen.
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Sanders does do better. Back in reality he isn't even a consideration to people that add 1+1=2 and not some wild number like 20.
WhiteTara
(29,703 posts)we can all but call her the nominee. I hope that Sanders means when he says that he wants his supporters to do all they can to defeat Trump, he means, vote for Hillary!
brooklynite
(94,501 posts)Chasstev365
(5,191 posts)How simplistic and childish of you. Keep feeding the flames of resentment and disunity!
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)disunity of BS cheerleaders constantly telling us that we should have coronated BS because he's the more "electable candidate"? Or is your outrage just childishly partisan based?
Chasstev365
(5,191 posts)I have admitted that Hillary has won and is the presumptive nominee. I have said I will supporter her over Trump in November.
What I won't do is think it was foolish to support Bernie in the first place, believe that all his ideas are "left wing fantasy" and stupid, and grovel to the Hillary cheerleaders on this site. Your bellowing "Hillary won" over and over again IS childish and will make Bernie supporters not want to vote in November. Is that your goal?
If the Obama supporters in 2008 had treated Hillary supporters, the way Hillary supporters treat Sanders supporters in 2016, I think President McCain would be finishing his second term. IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT?
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)tear down.
And I didn't say YOU haven't admitted that Secretary Clinton has won ... I asked you if your outrage was partisan based. I'll put it in simpler terms for you ... when you see a BS cheerleader go on and on about how BS should have been nominated because she's the "weaker candidate", is that enough disunity for you to say something to that poster as well ... or is your outrage just partisan based and you only go after Clinton supporters?
Chasstev365
(5,191 posts)Do you agree that we need to start coming together or do you think people on both sides just like to provoke each other?
SFnomad
(3,473 posts)out other posters for bringing disunity is just partisan based? Is it?
Chasstev365
(5,191 posts)SFnomad
(3,473 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)creeksneakers2
(7,473 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Of course, millions of voters disagree. We have our nominee.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)and is a slap in the face towards our nominee Hillary Clinton and all women. Bernie has behaved horribly...and should he have a speech...which I hope he doesn't unless he concedes and endorses...I will not watch nor listen to it.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Why bother to have a primary...just run poll after poll.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Sore losers can accept a loss. She won by millions of votes. Deal with the fact that people prefer her to Bernie Sanders and after listening to part of his 'speech' I can see why. Networks cut away...at that point.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)The correct tense is: "Wouldn't doing everything possible have required installing Bernie . . ."
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)lunamagica
(9,967 posts)to be the candidate, the winner needs to be removed in order to "install" the loser...hmmm.
And no, you are wrong. "doing everything possible" means exactly that. Vote against Trump
jillan
(39,451 posts)This is nothing new.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)He attacked Hillary for months too ...much more successfully...he can't fight Trump while staying in the race.
eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)The only thing he can do is endorse...why would his supporters vote for a candidate he won't endorse? Talk is cheap Sen.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Response to youceyec (Original post)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Everything he can do includes conceding and endorsing...and leaving the field. Why should supporters vote for a candidate he has not endorsed? Get out Bernie and go home...we got this.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)You want to operate at about 54 Percent strength by telling Bernie and his supporters to fuck off?
Good luck with that.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)and his most ardent supporters. We have no choice and enough time has been wasted on Sanders. He can have his vote...still a nominee ....Weaver said so yesterday ...put his name in nomination ....lose and then leave. No speech unless he concedes and endorses before the primary.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)You have no clue what Sanders may or may not do before or after the convention.
He'll likely continue to press for his goals and message -- and represent the people who support him -- while also making it clear that he's not going to try to defeat Clinton's chances in November.
And after the convention -- unless the Democrats adopt your attitude -- I can see him enthusiastically working hard to get as many of his supporters to vote for Clinton as he can.... UNLESS Clinton and the Party Poo Bahs and their minions decide to act like they own the whole place, and no one else matters.
cloudythescribbler
(2,586 posts)... do to defeat Trump and one of those things is to stop condescending/trashing/etc etc Bernie and his base.
Bernie has ALWAYS said he would support the Democratic ticket. He has also pulled many of his punches in the campaign, all the protestations about how hard he has been on Hillary notwithstanding. As of March 16, it was obvious to HRC and surrogates and her active supporters that her nomination was overwhelmingly likely, even if not inevitable, and no later than that there was ALL THE MORE REASON NOT to urge Bernie to drop out or tone it down or shut up or whatever. That and all the trashing and condescension to Bernie and his base ('better late than never' is an illustration of condescension, even if not consciously on the part of the speaker). Every effort needs to be made by surrogates and supporters of HRC to avoid all this kind of stuff that might reduce the chances of maximum support in the general against Trump
I am a Bernie supporter since day 1 of his candidacy who wanted to see him run -- and in the primaries as a Democrat -- even before he declared. I also support Bernie's clear position that he would not (all kinds of desire to the contrary coming from various quarters) bolt or otherwise do anything that would sabotage the chances of defeating Trump in November. Now that Hillary is the presumptive nominee (barring some kind of special crisis, eg w/the nonsense of emailgate, noting that nonsense can have serious consequences, as it did with Bill Clinton's impeachment in the 90s) I am concerned to see the highest percentage possible of Bernie's base unite behind Hillary in November to stop a very dangerous possible occupant of the White House. It is painfully OBVIOUS that all the trashing and careless condescension towards Bernie and his base runs contrary to that goal, as it has for several months now. If Hillary can get, say close to 90% of Bernie's voters and backers to support her, vs, say, less than 70%, the difference could be millions of votes, which in turn could be decisive
I would add that many of the changes and possible changes in the platform suggested by Bernie and backers would NOT cost Hillary any 'swing' votes and would help her chances; the zero sum game approach assumed in much of the MSM and HRC's supporters and surrogates is simply wrong
I have other ideas -- eg a MASSIVE focus on whatever internet chatter from jihadists there has been and is celebrating Trump and the possibility of his becoming president, something MASSIVELY SLIGHTED in the MSM -- on how to defeat Trump.
Personally, I would want unsure Bernie voters, especially in swing states, to stay active and vocal of their concerns on DU, so they can be won over, and then hopefully win over some of their colleagues, but apparently that isn't the policy
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)jonestonesusa
(880 posts)Clinton was always the favorite in this race and now she's the presumptive nominee. But there is no Democratic ticket at this time - no convention vote, no vice presidential candidate.
I'll rephrase a delegate math line that I heard so many times - why don't you people understand that there is no Democratic ticket until the Democratic convention?? Especially when Clinton failed to win a majority of pledged delegates in the primary season, despite running for president since 1992??
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)No other candidate has ever had to do so...(all men) but she has to...I didn't understand at first...it took mansplaining and finger wagging from Bernie...
jonestonesusa
(880 posts)in true Hillsplaining fashion - ignore policy differences and basic election rules whenever it's convenient, since it's all about gender.
Rock on.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Obama won by a very small margin of delegates...and lost the popular vote...but there was a chorus of demands for Hillary to step aside...and she should have. she did it with grace and really helped him win. But this year she has been treated like shit/ no man has had to wait until the convention to be considered legitimate...and it is really too bad in 2016...a self - declared progressive like Bernie would act like this.
cloudythescribbler
(2,586 posts)the point is to WIN OVER my fellow supporters of Bernie for the general election. A trumped-up charge of sexism (which has nothing to do with the issue) only tends to ALIENATE Bernie supporters whose votes are needed in November
There is ABSOLUTELY no rush to 'supporting the Democratic ticket' (even before any VP nominee has been put forward. What is important is NOT when Bernie does so but, when he does so and on to November, how successful the Democrats are in winning over the Bernie base, many of whom will NOT go along with him and vote for Hillary in the general. Of course, the main concern here is in the swing states in the general; if Bernie voters in Idaho or here in MA want to vote for Jill Stein, that doesn't worry me as it doesn't change the outcome of anything.
Bernie has reasons that have nothing to do with gender to pursue the course he is pursuing, with the longer view of building up the (relatively) progressive-left wing of the Democratic Party for after November, getting some key concessions in the platform (note as I said that MUCH that is pursued would NOT tend to cost Hillary any cumulatively significant votes in the general). There was lots of bitterness in 08 and PUMAs and so forth, but we Obama supporters didn't provide the kind of ammunition for their rejection that is being put forward insistently here, almost as if folk were glad to alienate as many Bernie Sanders supporters as possible and then blame them for a Trump victory in November.
Neither now nor in the past has Bernie been unduly or unusually harsh w/Hillary, quite the contrary; the notion that she is being held to stricter standards of legitimacy because of her gender is simply nonsense -- and it only serves to alienate needed Sanderistas from electing her in the fall
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Why should the first woman presidential nominee be treated so disrespectfully by a finger-wagging Sanders and his supporters? AS for the woman card...deal me in. It is about time! I am thrilled to see a woman about to win the highest office and won't allow Sanders to steal my joy.
cloudythescribbler
(2,586 posts)The point here is to win the general. You cite the interest in "truth". But really we are talking about tact and political strategy. Even if you think someone is sexist (I think you are wrong and I am very happy about the prospect of a woman as president, even though we are talking about a neoliberal, which I oppose.
You just can't get away from calling Bernie "finger-wagging" and so forth. I don't know if you remember how Obama supporters treated Hillary & her base once the primary voting was over, but there was A LOT that we resented from the campaign. But there was no use in bringing it up at that point -- the point was to win against McCain, who has recently tried to blame the Orlando Massacre on Pres Obama, then pseudo walked it back by saying he blamed Obama's policies but not the man.
There are ALWAYS negative feeling about a candidate you just ran against. There are still ill feelings being expressed about Hillary (tho on this site not for long). But at this point, my focus is on (a) pursuing Bernie Sanders' political agenda for the platform and the Party to and thru the Convention and (b) building a base for the future of the (relatively) left wing of the Democratic Party along with the central goal up to November of keeping Trump out of the White House (as well as Democratic races for Congress). But I see no purpose for my agenda right now of attacking Hillary personally (eg 'finger-wagging') no matter how I feel.
It is often a good time for what you term "truth", but not automatically and not always. Even if I agreed with your condemnation of Bernie as sexist and pedantic, which I don't, I still disagree on strategic grounds
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Concede and endorse or go home.
cloudythescribbler
(2,586 posts)On may issues, like banning closed primaries, there might be a LOT of Hillary supporters (the NY Times endorsed Hillary and also opposes closed primaries, eg) who would join with Bernie. These are mostly issues that would NOT cost the Dems votes in the general, although some disputed plank issues might.
As someone who supported Bernie since day 1 and URGENTLY does NOT want to see Trump in the White House (radicals like me are at real risk from people like that in power) I see NOTHING to gain by telling Bernie to 'concede' and shut up or go home.
This ONLY tends to alienate Bernie's base
It's almost as if the goal were NOT to win in November, but to set the stage for blaming Bernie and his base for Hillary's defeat in November if indeed Trump wins
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... I guess that would be too much to ask for him to actually acknowledge directly that she is our nominee.
Oh well, I guess passive "support" by using the negative phrase of "defeating Trump" is better than no support at all. (But behaving that way certainly can be viewed as pouting or being petty.)
Still, all things considered, I guess this is a move in the right direction ... even if it's one that's made grudgingly.
leeroysphitz
(10,462 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)This is why I say don't give Bernie anything...he can't deliver his voters so why bother? Put the stuff in the platform that is agreed upon by all..but please send West packing...no more deals with Bernie.
leeroysphitz
(10,462 posts)I can't speak for all Sanders supporters but I just care more about policy than the cult of personality.
cloudythescribbler
(2,586 posts)leeroysphitz
(10,462 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Concede and endorse is good enough...short of that...he needs to leave the field.
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)Soon it won't matter. I was an Obama supporter from the get go...although I never disliked Sec. Clinton. Obama is nothing like Bernie.
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)If nothing else, the convention will happen and it will be over. I'm sure Bernie will endorse HRC at some point.
If it doesn't matter, then at least HRC folks will stop whining about him.
Demsrule86
(68,543 posts)the first woman presidential nominee...how the rules somehow don't apply to her. She has to wait until the convention to be declared legitimate...and all the mansplaining and finger wagging is getting old.
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)Really, its not about Hillary being a woman, although I do understand and appreciate the significance of her accomplishment.
There will be plenty of opportunity to celebrate -- especially when she becomes president. The real prize for women.