General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSernie Banders: A Thought Experiment
Let's think this through, together.
What is the Democratic coalition? Democratic politicians and party members, and other politicians and other voters who will often vote Democratic or support Democratic policies.
What would one do if they wanted to weaken the Democratic coalition?
If I wanted to weaken the Democratic coalition, I would want to drive wedges between the different groups.
What would one do if they wanted to strengthen the Democratic coalition?
If I wanted to strengthen the Democratic coalition, I would want to emphasize what the different groups have in common, and how they can work together towards common goals.
Tom Perez, the head of the DNC, is someone who has an interest in strengthening the Democratic coalition. He seems to be doing this by bringing different members of the Democratic coalition together and working with them, emphasizing their common interests, and using different parts of the Democratic coalition to excite and unite the different members of the Democratic coalition.
Personally, as someone who wants to strengthen the Democratic coalition, I welcome all members of the Democratic coalition, whether they are Democratic party members or not, to work together with us towards common goals. I personally am a Democrat, but I love that there are other people who, even though they are not Democrats, work with the party to further goals that help all Americans.
Now, if one wanted to weaken the Democratic coalition, how might one drive a wedge between the different parts of the Democratic coalition?
Well, for example, let's posit the existence of a really popular politician who isn't a Democrat, but who is part of the Democratic coalition. Let's further assume that this politician is the most popular politician in the country right now.
If I wanted to weaken the Democratic coalition, I would want to drive a wedge between the Democratic party, and this very popular politician. Let's call this politician Sernie Banders, for the sake of this wildly fantastic thought experiment.
How might one do that?
You might, for example, compile lists of every criticism that Sernie Banders ever made about the Democratic party. You might, for example, go on and on and on (and on and on and on and on) about how Sernie Banders is not a member of the Democratic party, and imply he should be hated and not trusted because of that. As if it mattered.
You might, for example, find constructive criticism from that politician, advising the Democratic party not to be harlots for the Wall Street banks, and cast that as criticism (heaven forfend!) of the Democratic party, and emphasize that the Democratic party and this politician should never work together.
You might, for example, keep a nearly constant stream of chatter up with negative stories about Sernie Banders.
If you wanted to weaken the Democratic coalition, you would be afraid of the most popular politician in the country working together with the Democratic party to achieve common goals. You would be pants-peeingly, underwear-poopingly, afraid of that.
Fortunately, this is all just a thought experiment, and nothing like this is happening in the communities of the Democratic coalition. In those communities, we recognize allies and work together toward common goals. And we welcome the allegiance of allies from any and all other parties.
In the world of the thought experiment, though, the stuck pigs squeal the loudest.
treestar
(82,383 posts)but working against us and saying we are not good enough and need to be remade in his image.
And his very unfortunate run with our infrastructure caused the division. Should have just let it be O'Malley vs. Hillary. Unwittingly, Bernie is part of the disaster we have today.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Because I'm talking about Sernie Banders, the most popular politician in my thought experiment.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Obama probably is.
Autocorrect made it so I could not type "Sernie."
nolabels
(13,133 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)thought experiment. If we are to assume he was the most popular, maybe he would have won the primary. And the election. That's the result of that thought experiment. Maybe you needed another name for him as you are obviously referencing Bernie, in spite of your initial switching.
StubbornThings
(259 posts)Bernie is easily the most popular active politician.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)are Pence and Orange Disaster.
lapucelle
(18,040 posts)doesn't know enough about Jon Ossoff's progressive bona fides to endorse him over a Republican opponent in an important special election, but who is solidly behind Tom Perriello who has an anti-choice and pro-NRA voting record.
He picked his battle. As of now, he won't be fighting a Republican in a special election for a Congressional seat. He'll be fighting another Democrat in a party primary for a gubernatorial nomination.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)than other politicians, and especially the DNC, which doesn't have a great overall record of endorsing Democratic candidates in fights they consider hopeless.
lapucelle
(18,040 posts)to be a thought experiment with flaws in its experimental design. It assumes the truth of it's own conclusion by ignoring the alternative explanation that the person actively driving the wedge is responsible for the consequent.
lapucelle
(18,040 posts)The DNC doesn't endorse or not endorse. That's not one of its functions. (And the DNC is not a politician; it's an organization.) What's this apocryphal record you reference?
http://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.democrats.org/Downloads/DNC_Charter__Bylaws_9.17.15.pdf#page=1&zoom=160,-4,797
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)A more precise word for what I meant is supporting, rather than endorsing. Thank you!
lapucelle
(18,040 posts)in a general election who the DNC didn't support?
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)but just recently the support for that guy who almost upset the GOP in Kansas got very little support from the DNC.
And the similar stories of the Democratic machinery not helping out candidates in areas they think unwinnable is widely known.
It's one of the reasons that Dean's 50 state strategy was a change from what had come before.
George II
(67,782 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)DU doesn't exist in my thought experiment.
And in the real world, DUers recognize valuable allies of the Democratic coalition
George II
(67,782 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)I'm running thought experiments. Try to keep up.
George II
(67,782 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)I feed on it
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)panader0
(25,816 posts)'we are not good enough and need to be remade in his image".
Oh wait, he never said that. Alternative facts.
Face it, the Democratic party has lost Senate seats, House seats, Governors, etc. during the disaster of Wasserman-Shultz. Bernie is only stating the obvious.
"If the Democratic party is going to succeed, and I want it to succeed, it need to open the door to Independents." Bernie quote. The Independents are now in the majority.
Disrespect the most prominent Independent at the risk of our party.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and how we need to change. Both parties try for the Independent votes. Why open the door to them? Some of them are right wingers, at least half, most likely.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)talking about what we should do and how we need to change? why, no one ever does that to the Democratic party.
treestar
(82,383 posts)No. That's why they win. Quit the introspection and perfectionism and go out and win. If the Democratic party is not perfect for Bernie, he could have not run in it. And his followers claims he was cheated, etc., are wishful thinking. Same that bernie is "most popular" as he had a bit of trouble getting enough voters to win.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)I see Republicans talking about how the Democrats need to change and what to do.
I see Democrats talking about how the Republicans need to change and what to do.
I see centrists talking about what the "far left" needs to do and how to change.
I see fundamentalists talking about what feminists need to do and how to change.
It's the great American pastime!
It's also called politics.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Donald of Orange is kind of their equivalent. He doesn't put down the Republican party and claim it should change. You don't hear their factions complain that they aren't getting enough attention from the RNC - they just get in there and spread the disinformation and win.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Have you ever been to a Republican chat site? There are factions of Republicans, and they all tell each other what to do and how to change. It's human nature.
KPN
(15,587 posts)Think about that a moment -- not as criticism but from the standpoint of do you share similar views and political priorities/positions? If so, you are good enough -- so why sweat it? If not, then Bernie has a point and I stand with him as Democrat. We need to get back to traditional democratic party principles. The party's economic positions ushered in during the DLC hay-day have not worked -- at least they don't seem to have regarding where the Party stands in terms of legislators and executive officers nationwide, or from the standpoint of young people in America today.
Some of us have done really well financially over the past 30 years -- I've done well and have no complaints. But we've left a lot of people behind.
berksdem
(594 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)include lying about Sernie Banders, and saying that he thinks Trump voters are better than Clinton voters.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)The Democratic party gave him the position heading Democratic party outreach. It's a national platform.
The Democratic party had to do that because he can be used as a wedge by outside forces (Republicans/Russians/Greens).
So we are are stuck with him. And that would be fine because he has fans and apparently wants to go around talking to groups and be on tv interviews.
But please stop gas lighting us.
We are addressing Sanders' actual rhetoric. I personally more or less kept my mouth shut until fairly recently.
But Sanders just keeps it up.
He isn't just an Independent Senator.
HE IS HEAD OF DEMOCRATIC PARTY OUTREACH.
And he can't control his own rhetoric so that it doesn't negatively reflect on the Democratic party.
That is frustrating.
I am not a troll, a bot, or bashing Sanders.
I JUST WANT HIM TO STOP USING NEGATIVE RHETORIC WHEN SPEAKING ABOUT THE PARTY HE HEADS OUTREACH FOR.
That is entirely reasonable
JustAnotherGen
(31,686 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)In the theoretical universe, the head of the DNC, who might know more about what is good for the Democratic coalition than some people who post on chat groups, thinks that working with most popular politician Sernie Banders is a really excellent way to strengthen the coalition. And I think that's a reasonable and constructive strategy.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)I JUST WANT HIM TO STOP USING NEGATIVE RHETORIC WHEN SPEAKING ABOUT THE PARTY HE HEADS OUTREACH FOR.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,349 posts)In spades!
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)beginning about 30 seconds into the video, "Sernie Banders" in his own words:
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)When has the Democratic Party ever CLOSED its doors to anyone who wanted to join? If the (so-called) Independents want to join the party, nobody is stopping them. When has the Democratic Party ever CLOSED its doors to working people and young people?
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)If I take the liberty to try to interpret his words, that Democrats have to loudly and smartly address the economic concerns that so many people have. These may include people who are not complete social liberals, unfortunately for them, but who understand at their core that the system is screwing them economically.
You, and i, and the GOP and the Democratic politicians all know who is doing the screwing (hint: rich feudalists and fascists ), but the GOP just yells about brown people, and the Democrats largely offer no narrative.
I want those people, who may not feel at home in the Democratic party in its entirety, to vote as part of the Democratic coalition, because it is in their best interests and the best interests of all of us.
And that is the end of my attempted Sanders -channeling.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Gosh darn it
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Respect from Sanders, in the form of refraining from saying negative things about the party while promoting his own ideas, is not asking for too much here. The fact that he can't seem to extend some courtesy and respect to the party helping him further his own agenda does not reflect well on him.
I also deeply worry that the party is taking its base for granted by capitulating to Sanders and white working class voters. There has to be a better balance, and it has to start with Sanders at this point. He was the loser in the primary--he has to earn my support and vote, not demand it while insulting me.
yodermon
(6,143 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Who held the caucus together?
That would be Pelosi. And when Sanders was on tv talking about the health care bill he threw in a totally gratuitous insult by calling the Democrats "feeble". Pelosi's handling of that health care bill was MASTERFUL AND STRONG AND NOT FEEBLE>
So your polls address absolutely nothing of substance.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)coalition. And there are others!
yodermon
(6,143 posts)and the then take it up with *them*. It's "The DNC's unity tour", remember?
DNC is trying to have their Berniebro cake and eat it too. We'll see how/if it works out.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)members of the Democratic coalition, is say that people who support working with popular members of that coalition consider those members to be "gods" or "godlike", if they enjoy working with them. That kind of strawmanning would be something someone would do if they wanted to weaken the Democratic coalition.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)as he serves as head of Democratic party outreach are "driving a wedge" is gas lighting. It's insulting.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)I don't think it means what you think it means.
lapucelle
(18,040 posts)"Gaslighting is a form of manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual."
She's using the term correctly.
brush
(53,475 posts)Not rocket science.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)who knows more about strengthening the democratic coalition, do you suppose. You, or the head of the DNC?
brush
(53,475 posts)Head of outreach for the party should not keep saying negative things about the party.
Positive statements you'd think would flow from the head of outreach about Jon Ossoff instead of the head of outreach saying he doesn't know if Ossoff is a progressive.
Again, not rocket science.
yodermon
(6,143 posts)"I do not consider myself a Democrat" but here I am with the Democrats.
And he's doing so *with* approval of DNC and Perez. Hell it's a "DNC UNITY tour"!!!
It's almost like he's trying to form a coalition, and revive the "50 -state strategy".
Oh wait, that looks like "outreach". sorry.
brush
(53,475 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 20, 2017, 01:51 PM - Edit history (1)
The word "oxymoron" comes to mind.
Outreaching to alt-lefties and O voters who voted for trump while on the other hand dissing the party base (women) by backing a pro-lifer and sowing doubt as to Jon Ossoff's progressive bona fides. Ossoff is backed by John Lewis, btw, a Dem and African American icon.
As I said, you get no where by backing an anti-abortion mayoral candidate in Nebraska while not outreaching to a strong Dem candidate in a red-ass district in Georgia.
WTF?
Why is Sanders always in the middle of these contradictions, especially now when as head of outreach staying positive about the party and its candidates should be paramount.
FSogol
(45,360 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)strengthen the Democratic coalition
FSogol
(45,360 posts)politics. Shouting down Democrats and the DNC as part of a Sanders personality cult isn't helping. Is Sanders the left's version of Sun Myung Moon? Should we expect the Bern-Unification Church to appear?
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)that Sernie Banders is a god or godlike. Because that would not help the theoretical Democratic coaltion of my thought experiment.
Also, I'm not sure who is shouting down Democrats. Certainly not anyone in my post.
FSogol
(45,360 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)There was a lot of editorializing by the writer, but really, pull a Sanders quote from that article that is anything at all objectionable.
You've got nothing.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)kstewart33
(6,551 posts)Well, if we want to strengthen the Democratic party, that would be a good thing to do. But Bernie has not. His response is that he doesn't know if Ossoff is a progressive. So no fundraising and no campaigning for Ossoff.
But Bernie has endorsed Omaha mayoral candidate and former state senator Heath Mello, whom Sanders will campaign with Thursday. That's today.
Is Mello a progressive? Don't think so. For starters, let's consider, from an article in The Washington Post:
The signs are that Bernie is a difficult guy to work with. If he wouldn't endorse Ossoff, he could have kept quiet. But off, he goes questioning Ossoff's credentials. Like that's something Ossoff needs a few days before the election.
But silence is something a Democrat would do. And that's the problem with Bernie. He's not only not a Democrat, he's willing to damage the party if he's ticked about something. Which is what Bernie does. A lot.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)So am I. We have similar goals.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)Our difference is that IMHO, Bernie is not the guy to do it.
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)in other words his own agenda. The GOP is already using this...
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)And it happens so rarely.
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)kstewart33
(6,551 posts)Consider Bernie's record in Congress. His reputation is someone who is rather difficult to work with. Because he's so convinced that he's right all of the time. Best example that I can think of is his opposition to Amber Alert legislation because of some technicality. Compromise comes very rarely.
Uniting the party including Bernie supporters is going to require some compromising. On both sides. But Bernie just isn't amenable to doing that. He's also prickly. I think he holds grudges far too long. He's carries a whole lot of them in his pocket against Hillary. And that doesn't help him or anyone else, except the Repubs.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)What a monster.
No wonder people are telling lies about him.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)kydo
(2,679 posts)Sick of the purists.
Sick of the haters.
Sick of seeing someone who does not want to be a dem talked about so often on a dem message board.
Sick of the bickering.
Totally sick of all the threads.
Its distracting from the real issues.
It distracts us from the real enemy.
Sanders is not the enemy.
But he is not our answer either.
The enemy is Orange man and his russian street gang.
Arguing about Sanders doesn't stop the orange man from destroying the world. It just makes it easier for it to do so.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)See? You and I agree.
kydo
(2,679 posts)I said I was sick of hearing about him. Need a break from him for a while.
You know like when you put a song you like on repeat and after a few hours of listening to the same song you get tired of it and turn it off. It doesn't mean you hate and despise that song forever now. No, as the song plays later on the radio and you sing and dance along with it, like it was one of your most favorite song of all time. Forgetting you were so sick of the song just that morning.
That's where I am with Bernie.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)of the patterns of postings.
Skittles
(152,967 posts)I don't hate the man, but I too know he is NOT the answer
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Sernie Bandera is just a welcome addition to the Democratic coalition.
Skittles
(152,967 posts)ALRIGHTY THEN
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)The Democratic coalition is made up of more than just Democrats.
After that, the rest of your experiment gives you a false positive.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)sorry, what is the false premise?
I know you are not going to say that the Democratic coalition consists _only_ of the Democratic party politicians and members. Because that way of thinking would shrink and weaken the Democratic coalition. I know that isn't what you are interested in.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)You will continue this charade of attempted appeasement of anti-establishment, white male voters who threw their lot in with Trump and somehow are seen to be reasonable enough to join the "Democratic coalition" (of mainly women and minorities, who they think have stolen everything from them).
Not buying your thought experiment. You can't just think in one direction.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Sernie Banders is, in fact, a transgender mixed race homosexual, who grew up on the wrong side of the tracks.
I don't know why someone would try to pit members of the Democratic coalition, like men and women, and white people and people of color, against each other. That wouldn't strengthen the Democratic coalition!
JusticeForAll
(1,222 posts)erm...hypothetically that is.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)to have a popular politician who is supposed to be working with the Democratic party to achieve common goals repeatedly say severely negative things about the Democratic party.
He could also strongly support his own acolytes and ignore other Democrats who are also working to achieve common goals.
My I also point out that a leader in the democratic coalition should be held to a far higher standard then average slubs.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)people who want to weaken the Democratic coalition would emphasize only the negative things that imaginary politician Sernie Banders says, and not the areas of common interest and policy.
Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)is by itself a method to weaken the Democratic coalition...and less excusable since as a leader he should be held to a higher standard than its just Sernie being Sernie.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)FLAG!!! 10 YARD PENALTY!!
You're not following the REWELS!!!
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Again, this repeatedly asserted here, and never demonstrated.
Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)Sen. Bernie Sanders was asked what he thinks the party stands for. Youre asking a good question, and I cant give you a definitive answer. Certainly there are some people in the Democratic Party who want to maintain the status quo. They would rather go down with the Titanic so long as they have first-class seats, Sanders said.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Is that really what has you in such a twist about this? Because it is both boilerplate Sanders and very mild criticism. And both obviously true and important.
Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)and it's foolish, selfish and counterproductive
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Sorry, now you are just arguing nonsense.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)There didn't seem to be any repercussion for that.
Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)called progressives fucking retarded for contemplating primary challenges against conservative Democrats.
Even a bad democrat is better than a good republican.
And primarying an incumbent who probably has 80% chance of holding his seat in order to have a 20% chance of installing a progressive in the community, makes no sense.
Let me know when he runs for national office if it doesn't have reprecussions.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Some people are trashing Sanders for supporting conservative Democrats because they are not ideologically pure.
Which side of that issue do you come down on?
Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)I have criticized him for not supporting democrats and lobbing bombs at the party
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)people better get on the same page as to why Sanders is to be marginalized.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)But to the argument he made, that assumes that a progressive Democrat couldn't win. It's conventional inside-the-beltway thinking, the kind of thinking that surrenders control of how an issue is discussed to Frank Lutz and the GOP.
Let me know when he runs for national office if it doesn't have reprecussions.
There weren't any repercussions in the Obama White House. Not like when the Republicans demanded the removal of people from office. It seems like establishment Democratic politicians are more dismissive of concerns on the left, and much more responsive to concerns from Republicans and conservatives.
emulatorloo
(43,982 posts)who was being courted by Obama to vote for the ACA.
The group was in favor of ACA, so yeah it would be counterproductive to run an ad against him at that time.
He was talking about the ad.
Group ran a blog that was great, Marci Wheeler was one of the writers.
Does not excuse the words he used. They were deplorable. I think I remember he apologized.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)I paraphrase it as: "I'm sorry if my straight-talking offended the fee-fees of you lil' snowflakes." He didn't apologize for what he said.
As far as the context:
weekly strategy session featuring liberal groups and White House aides.
Some attendees said they were planning to air ads attacking
conservative Democrats who were balking at Mr. Obama's health-care
overhaul.
"F-ing retarded," Mr. Emanuel scolded the group, according to
several participants. He warned them not to alienate lawmakers whose
votes would be needed on health care and other top legislative items.
The antipathy reflects deep dissatisfaction on the Democratic left
with Mr. Obama's first year in office, and represents a fracturing of
the relationship between the president and the political base that
mobilized to elect him. A little more than one year ago, Mr. Obama's
victory led some to predict an era of Democratic dominance.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2010/01/26/chief-staff-draws-fire-left-obama-falters
-Emphasis is mine.
The Democratic Leadership seems much more worried about offending conservatives than accomplishing meaningful change. Unlike Trump, I know that Healthcare agreements are hard to accomplish. However, giving up positions and bargaining chips before you get started seems stupid or spineless at best, corrupt and conniving at worst. If I loved the Heritage Foundation, I'd vote for Republicans.
emulatorloo
(43,982 posts)That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)I wonder what that experiment would look like...
Orrex
(63,086 posts)Damn you!
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)tblue37
(64,982 posts)Progressive dog
(6,862 posts)My thought experiment would not be about giving control of the party to part time Democrats.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)but it's good to be really fearful of it.
Progressive dog
(6,862 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Iggo
(47,489 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)How about here?
If you wanted to weaken the Democratic coalition, you would be afraid of the most popular politician in the country working together with the Democratic party to achieve common goals. You would be pants-peeingly, underwear-poopingly, afraid of that.
(emphasis mine)
Where in the world do you get that Sanders is the "most popular politician in the country"? Sources? Links? Anything?
And what's with the obsession with the supposed "fear" of Sanders? Nobody is afraid of him; lots of us don't like him.
Good lord.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)About how Bernie was the most popular politician while McConnell was the least the other day.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Very welcome
mopinko
(69,806 posts)but imho, his appointment is pure pandering.
he is more than welcome, but i dont see how he gets a leadership position.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)if I'm not mistaken....
I guess it's truly an alternate universe....
I call your flag, and raise you a hostile post.
George II
(67,782 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)That Sernie Banders is the most popular politician in the thought experiment.
George II
(67,782 posts).....
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)That more suit your style.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and the rest of the thought experiment would be moot.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Can Prince still be alive??
Can we eliminate mosquitos?
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Sadly. They are needed for the virtual frogs.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)BainsBane
(53,003 posts)To weaken it?
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)is weakening.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Rather than just stating it as a fact, would be an enormous help. And remember, it has to be constantly. That means if I find any quotes of Sanders praising Democrats or the Democratic party, you have to admit you are lying about him. Shall we play Find The Quote?
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)because citizens are the bane of democracy. Only when we are silenced can order be restored.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)In his case, your question begs the question (and note I'm actually using that phrase correctly for once! ) DOES Sanders really keep putting down the Democratic party? Or do people here just keep saying that he does, and cherry picking his comments and not seeing the bigger overall picture, which includes Sanders pushing his thumbs into both of Trump's eyes and pushing, hard?
It is something to ruminate on, certainly.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)What is the problem, exactly? Are those very mild statements really what you are getting so worked up about?
There's no there there, and you keep proving it.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)such statements might seem mild. Too mild.
And the other link?
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)There's nothing controversial in the other link either.
Your position is made of smoke and mirrors.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)There is the evidence that you have ignored. How do you think NSF would respond if you ignored evidence in science as you do for politics?
And I find it fascinating that you think unity hinges on silencing citizens who post on a message board. I understand your goal is to enforce absolute deference toward Bernie. It's not going to happen. This is just one reason why: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8953867
So quit pretending the concern is "unity." It's utterly transparent.
You are just going to have to face that fact that people are going to continue to think independently, and that not everyone subsumes their entire political consciousness around one man's career. I will continue to place citizens before the political elite, regardless of how "popular" they are.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)I hope that works out for you.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)You are insisting that being a Democrat REQUIRES accepting without question Bernie and everything Bernie says. First you say there isn't evidence that he has criticized Democrats. Then you claim that my providing it is a "wedge." Refuting what you believe is a "wedge." Evidence is a "wedge" because it challenges what you FEEL.
If you want to find unity, focus on issues rather than enforcing fealty toward Bernie. Because seriously, there is something seriously wrong when the only thing people care about is one man. No one is stopping you from admiring him. What I'm saying is quit trying to insist everyone revere him and focus on something that actually matters, like some of the issues that you care about.
There is something else here. This notion that citizens must remain silent in the face of a man deemed too great to be criticized is not in keeping with democracy. If you and others are going to continue to insist that we must do so, you will not find common cause with anyone who values anything apart from great men. Perhaps that's how you prefer it. Perhaps you want a more authoritarian government, where the rule of men replaces the rule of laws. We are quickly heading in that direction with Trump, and it's disconcerting to see tendencies to place a great man above citizens on the other side of the political spectrum. If you focused on some of the issues that Bernie champions rather than the man himself, you could begin to build the unity you claim to care about. That we see so little discussion of those issues speaks volumes.
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)I certainly am not. But I don't think that lying about him and his political goals are good activities for anyone to engage in, Democrat or not.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)And given your repeated refusal to consider any evidence, why should I trust your pronouncements of what constitute lies or truth?
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Trump voters were better than people who had backed Clinton.
That was a total lie, for example. When I asked them to show me where Sanders had said that, they produced an article that said nothing of the sort.
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.
Your mileage may vary, of course.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)It's not a lie. He has repeatedly talked about how the Democratic Party owes white male Trump voters this and that. He has made them a priority. He has repeatedly insisted Trump voters weren't motivated by race, despite polling data that shows otherwise. Meanwhile, he has AGAIN endorsed a pro-life candidate. He has made his priorities clear through his statements and his actions, and they don't extent to me or the rest of the Democratic base, which is comprised largely of people of color and single women.
Calling people who make those points liars is exactly the sort of vitriol that makes your call for coming together in the other thread unbelievable.
The kind of thing you're talking about is your anger at being exposed to people who aren't like you, who because of race, gender, or class are aware of the kind of language politicians use to dismiss their rights and their interests. Many black voters have observed it. Many Latinos have observed it, and so have I. Not everyone is born white, male and middle-class. They experience the world differently form you. Those experiences are not lies. Moreover, I don't believe there is anything accidental about Sanders' use of those tropes. He has very clear political priorities, and they do not include me.
treestar
(82,383 posts)and he puts down the Democrats, that will have a very good effect. Due to his popularity, more people will disdain the Democrats.
BainsBane
(53,003 posts)and we are told popularity means he must be right. By that extension, the Kardashians and Biebers of this world also have the answers. I disagree. I have never been one to concern myself with popularity. I didn't do so in high school. I sure as hell am not going to start now.
beastie boy
(9,063 posts)and he so doesn't pick and choose which members of the Democratic coalition deserve the support of the most popular politician in the country and which don't!
This would, indeed, keep the Democratic coalition in your hypothetical scenario very strong!
Unfortunately, this is just a thought experiment...
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)Including Sernie Banders, and every member of the Democratic party leadership, pick and choose which races and candidates they will shower their support and personal time on. It may vary with other constraints of their schedule, strategy, and even their personal preference.
I don't know why Sernie Banders' behavior should be judged differently from the other, far more numerous, members of the Democratic coalition.
In the thought experiment.
beastie boy
(9,063 posts)... for it, but should any other member of the coalition express resentment of Sernie's capricious choices, it's bad for the coalition. Because those who, in your hypothetical scenario, choose to not support Sernie, do the same thing Sernie does. This completes the circle of your argument.
Boy, am I glad we are talking hypotheticals here!
Heartstrings
(7,349 posts)Coming together to defeat the ultimate enemy is looking highly unlikely.
We should be welcoming any support from anyone for our resistance...but nooooo!
Just keep railing about things said....meanwhile our chances of bringing the repubs to their knees diminishes.
Focus people, on the ultimate target! And it's not Sernie...
Skittles
(152,967 posts)but it's getting very tiresome, long posts from KNOWN DUers telling everyone to goose-step
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)And clearly meant to divide us.
Gary 50
(381 posts)I've been reading several threads about Bernie here on DU recently and something which never comes up is the origin of this intense Bernie hatred. There's the silly "he's not really a Democrat" criticism, the equally ridiculous "he keeps saying unkind things about the party" and my favorite "he's an egomaniac and everything is always about Bernie, Bernie Bernie", when in fact he never mentions himself and is always laser focused on his message. So, as a leading force for progressives why is he hated here on a website for liberals? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)All three criticisms are either without merit or negligible.
Who would want Democrats to hate a popular progressive? It is a question to be pondeted.
CousinIT
(9,151 posts)I wonder if/how many on DU are here for that purpose. This was one of the biggest tactics Russia used against Dems during 2016 election ie: cause division and infighting amongst Dem coalitions - Sanders and Clinton. Are they still at it?
Both Hillary and Bernie did/would do stuff I disagree with. As for him slamming her in the primary - IT WAS A PRIMARY. The different candidates are SUPPOSED to fight and distinguish themselves from one another. Pfft.
I'm not interested in purity tests, re-fighting whatever happened in 2016 primaries. We don't have TIME FOR THAT and we CANNOT AFFORD IT.
BUILDING A COALITION is what Perez and Sanders are trying to do and it's the right thing to do. Is it perfect? NO.
WHAT is in this life? NOTHING.
I wish people would stop letting their idea of PERFECT destroy a coalition of what's RIGHT and BENEFICIAL to the party going forward. EYES ON THE BIG PICTURE, please.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Gothmog
(144,005 posts)Link to tweet
?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fnews%2Fthe-fix%2Fwp%2F2017%2F04%2F20%2Fbernie-sanderss-strange-behavior%2F
Link to tweet
?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fnews%2Fthe-fix%2Fwp%2F2017%2F04%2F20%2Fbernie-sanderss-strange-behavior%2F
ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)SirBrockington
(259 posts)Back to after the primaries ended and those who weren't
a part of furthering the Democratic Party were allowed to go to JPR or other places voluntarily or not. Why keep bringing this stuff here.
SirBrockington
(259 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)that would be great.
Chevy
(1,063 posts)in the walnuts and telling me I'm weak and useless. It worked out well.
Chevy
(1,063 posts)attacking Democrats while defending an Independent on an Democratic site. Irony or bad comedy.
Trumpocalypse
(6,143 posts)ProfessorPlum
(11,252 posts)I am one, after all.
what's a though experiment.