Hillary reminds the Bernie folks that he wasn't a Democrat until now, and they don't like it.

[RBInMaine]

It seems so many of the Bernie folks LOVE to dish it out, but they have such a hard time taking it. Bernie Sanders TRASHED the Democratic Party for years even to the point of having wanted President Obama primaried. And he goes on and on nowadays about being anti-establishment, and yet he JOINED this "establishment" party. (If he doesn't win the nomination, will he REMAIN a Democrat?) I'm glad Bernie joined the party, and I'm glad he's bringing many other people into the party. And I agree with many of Bernie's views. But the Bernie supporters can't have it both ways. They can't constantly hurl attacks and never expect to be challenged themselves.

How are you forming a real long-term political movement? How are you going to sell such a MASSIVE expansion of government in the general election? How is a European type socialist going to win the American presidency? How are you going to deal with the massive Republican attack campaign that is coming?

Ask these questions, and all too often you get fingers-in-ears diversions and attacks instead of thoughtful answers. Everyone who disagrees on some key issues with Mr. Sanders is "part of the establishment".

Sorry Bernie folks, you can not have it both ways. You don't get to endlessly attack the other candidate yet never be challenged yourselves.

[Duckhunter935]

1. who did he caucus and vote with?

He is more of a Democrat than many that say they are.

[merrily]

4. It's her TURN! She earned the Oval Office by campaigning for other New Democrats and Clintonites!

Hundreds of millions of dollars will not make up for not going down in history as the first woman President.

I don't know why so many selfish Americans who are worried about their kids and their own retirement keep missing all that.

SMH.

[indigoth]

19. Except

There is no "turn". Even for incumbents. Even for Hillary.

[Tanuki]

32. When did she ever say it was "her turn?"

Link, if you please. I have seen several Sanders supporters saying that.

[noiretextatique]

135. i don't think she said it: Jim Messina did

"We want Hillary Clinton to be the next president of the United States. It's her turn and her time. I think she would be the right leader for this country moving forward. We're going to do whatever it takes to make sure she's the president of the United States" Messina told MSNBC host Ronan Farrow, a statement which drew some applause from the crowd.

[MaeScott]

162. She represents the one percent but will throw smalll

crumbs to the other 99%

She has lots of deals waiting in the background starting with TPP

[dchill]

55. Ding, ding. Ding!

EXACTLY!

[nichomachus]

113. He's more of a Democrat than Hillary

Just because you stick a D after your name doesn't make you a Democrat. Look at their history and results. Hillary is to the right of Richard Nixon. Richard Nixon proposed a healthcare plan that is more comprehensive than anything Hillary has suggested -- and the "Democrats" sabotaged it.

[kstewart33]

114. To date, Bernie has raised $1000 for Democratic candidates.

Clinton has raised over $200 million. Not for herself, but for the Democratic party.

That's one significant test of who's the better Democrat, and it's probably why she has the support of so many more super delegates than does Bernie. She's helped party officials and candidates a great deal, and Bernie has barely lifted a finger.

Now it could be that everyone of those candidates are part of the 'corrupt Establishment' but that's difficult to believe.

[JonLeibowitz]

120. First off, that number is not correct

Second, when he appeared at fundraisers for the DSCC the Clinton campaign and their supporters excoriated him for accepting money from big donors.

Not good enough Bernie!!!

[Ferd Berfel]

146. Agree and he's also more of a christian than many that say they are

Which is really interesting for a Jewish guy

[cali]

2. Nah, it's fine. Now where are hilly's transcripts and can you

tell me why she lied about unions endorsing her.

She is.... something.

[tk2kewl]

129. i, for one, admire it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1272603

[CBGLuthier]

3. She reminded them of something they just plain don't give a fuck about.

As if it makes one damned bit of difference to anyone other than Clintonites.

The two party system has things rigged. So yes, an outsider has to come along to restore sanity to the rigged game.

[Amimnoch]

45. And how's he going to do that again?

[CBGLuthier]

61. BY keeping her from being president.

Breaking the cycle of bad choices.

[Amimnoch]

75. ahh, okay. My mistake. I didn't realize we were electing a king this season.

Someone should at the least let Congress know about this change of events.

[noiretextatique]

145. i think meant you Queen

i think some of the anger here is based on Clinton's supposed inevitable, and Sanders' temerity in not just challenging her, but adding a question mark to her inevitability. And then there is the fact that she seems to be running a campaign that is similar to the one she ran in 2008.

[Amimnoch]

147. nice non sequitur and avoidance.

[Ed Suspicious]

74. How does anyone do anything. Life is but a dour trudge toward death.

Nothing is really worth living for. Our only comfort is the certitude of the chill embrace of the moment just beyond our final breath and immediately before the eternal blackness.

[deathrind]

105. Nihilist...

Excellent reply!

Thank you for the Friday morning laugh!

[Amimnoch]

109. Fair enough that there is a lot of uncertainty out there.

With our particular political process, though, there's a lot that can be quantified and given a very reasonable assessment of probability.

For a bill to be a law it takes a majority of Representatives to agree on and vote on the bill. It requires a Senate majority in some cases, and fillibuster proof majority in most cases to get the same bill passed. It then requires the President's approval, or the numbers in congress to override the Veto.

Senator Sanders has a very ambitious list of plans. With only the exception of a couple of his issues that may at least be partially executed through executive order, the vast majority will require a law to be passed by congress.

Despite decades of working directly in Congress, he's been unable to even drum up support of any sitting senators, and only 2 Representatives to endorse his candidacy from his own party.

Add to that, the upcoming 115th congress is not shaping up to be any friendlier to the next POTUS than the existing 114th, whom not only will not support expanded health care, but are continuously trying to kill the ACA as it exists.

The only problem I have with the Sanders revolution is it is only focusing on him, and not where it needs to focus most of all.. Getting Senators and Representatives in office that will make it a reality.

With regards to the November elections, where's the list of Senators that are running that Sanders is throwing his endorsements on? The list of Representatives? Where is the revolution movement to get THOSE candidates elected that will be so absolutely key to making his plan happen?

I've asked a few times already, and have yet to get any kind of answer, but where is the potential roll call vote of the house/senate that will pass these laws? I've got a spreadsheet I keep for myself of all Congressmen who are not up for election in the 115th, and those that are not really being challenged, and those who are in Democratic primary battlegrounds, and General battlegrounds. I have tried my best to come up with a potential roll call that even "might" be able and willing to pass some of Sanders plans, and I just don't see the numbers there. They aren't even close to being a "maybe".

[Dustlawyer]

76. If he were to have run as an Independant they would be screaming that he was pulling a Nader.

He runs as a Democrat and promises to support the winner of the Democratic Primary and yet we still get this crap! He has caucused with the Democrats and his policies have always been Progressive, but that is not enough for some.

His Independence meant that he did not have to be subject to pressure to vote a certain way if he did not believe it was in our best interests. It's no secret that the Democratic Party has fallen in with big money, why be tied to that. I like Bernie just how he has been and you should too, whether you support him or Hillary.

[Hydra]

154. They're only upset because he's gaining ground

The coronation has been delayed. Boo! Hiss! Non-Democrat!

I love how whatever they accuse everyone of fits them best.

[DeadLetterOffice]

94. This, yes. Very much so. n/t

[livetohike]

5. All good points. I have never voted for an Independent and never will.

Sanders* doesn't care about the Democratic Party. He cares about leading some ego stroking revolution where he can relive his past 60's activism. His rhetoric has caused people here to demonize even John Lewis.

Big talk and no realistic expectation of winning enough votes to enact them. The people he has served with don't think enough of him to endorse him. Says a lot.

[Duckhunter935]

6. yes is more of a Democrat than

Some of the so called blue dogs I am sure you supported like Joe Lieberman just because he said he was a Democrat

[livetohike]

9. Joe Lieberman was the worst pick by Gore, in my opinion. However, if the choice

is between a Republican and any Democrat (even a DINO), my vote goes to the Democrat.

[uponit7771]

7. +1

[leftupnorth]

13. I don't really care about the Democratic Party either.

I am loyal to ideas, not people, not parties.

If the Democratic Party wants me to start caring about it, then it better start caring about me.

Otherwise they're about as useless as tits on a boar.

[RoccoR5955]

16. When the Party goes against its constituents

I say damn the Party, we need to bring it back to WE THE PEOPLE, not them, the corporations.
The Democratic Party left Bernie when they became the Party of Wall St.
AFAIC, the Party has gone so far to the right, you might as well just call it the RepubliCON Lite party.

[JackRiddler]

8. Would you like to set yourself up as a guard at the polls?

Maybe you can conduct DLC purity tests to prevent people from voting if they're insufficiently Democratic for you. It can be simple, I suppose. You could ask them, "are you now or have you ever been a socialist in your heart?" Or maybe just simply, "are you voting for Clinton?" Anything other than a yes isn't a real Democrat! They're invaders!

[Android3.14]

10. Any links backing this up?

Anyone tearing his or her shirt and wailing, "Oh why oh why did you say that Bernie isn't a Democrat?"

Link? Article?

Sounds to me that you are unhappy that so many Democrats and independents are flocking to Bernie in your state.

No? Nothing? No evidence that Democrats for Bernie are "upset" that Clinton "reminds" people? Then I guess you are just blowing smoke for lack of any inkling of a reason to support Clinton.

The truth is, you cannot articulate a solid argument why Clinton is a better Democrat than Sanders, and Bernie supporters can easily show that Sanders is more of a Democrat by action and words than Clinton ever was.

By the way, where are those transcripts from when your "Democrat" was gushing all over Goldman Sachs? Was she promoting Democratic Party values then?

[Live and Learn]

11. So what? I'm guessing you may be the next to trash the party once Bernie wins.

And more power to you, free speech and all.

[leftupnorth]

12. Bernie is a real democrat - small d was intentional.

Most Democrats these days are just plutocrats.

Bernie is a real democrat. Sorry if that hurts the corporocrats feelings.

They should have thought of that before they sold out. Oh well.

[Vinca]

14. After reading so many posts about Bernie not being a Democrat and how horrible it is,

I wish he had run as a third party candidate. I would still have supported him. Of course, he wouldn't have won and neither would Hillary win. Unfortunately, our system of government is based upon 2 parties. Bernie had a clear choice: run as a Democrat or gift the presidency to a Republican. Hillary and her supporters seem to forget that fact. He did you a favor and if she wins the general election, it's only because a third party candidate didn't split the vote.

[sarge43]

15. Hillary Clinton was a Republican once. You all seem fine with that. n/t

[nc4bo]

17. ..and still retains much of that ideology and for some, that's a deal breaker whether to

Support her candidacy .........or not.

[sarge43]

26. Sanders didn't leave the Democratic Party. It left him when it started shifting right.

Many of us share that realization which is one of the reasons many of us support him.

[BlueMTexpat]

44. Hillary Clinton has officially

been a Democrat at least since 1972 and has worked tirelessly for Democratic causes since then. As all too many wish to ignore, many 1960s Republicans were actually quite liberal. Hillary left that party for good when it nominated Richard Nixon for President in 1968.

Bernie has consistently dissed the Democratic Party throughout his career and refused to join it until 2015. Yes, he has consistently stood for some of the most important ideals of the Democratic Party, But he never chose to work within the party itself until he decided to run for President, effectively giving Hillary the primary challenge that he wanted President Obama to have in 2008.

So when you continue to "dis" Hillary for having worked for GOPer candidates in her youth, albeit being loyal to the Democratic Party from at least 1972 on, you can perhaps understand why we who are long-time Democrats find your support of a VERY recent convert whose effective repudiation of Democrats, not simply in his youth, but throughout his political career, to be a double standard.

And when you continue to dis the Party and its rules, while Bernie effectively uses the party to advance his candidacy, we find it the ultimate hypocrisy.

[Gore1FL]

48. Bernie Sanders acts and votes like a Democrat.

I prefer that to the someone who is a Democrat by label.

[BlueMTexpat]

89. Fair enough, but please

see my post below.

[Amimnoch]

58. Absolutely fine.

Let's see..

We have one candidate who, in their Teens, was briefly Republican more than half a century ago.

You have another who joined in months ago for the sole purpose of political expediency.

Hmmm, there's a hard one.

In my own estimation, neither is more or less qualified to run as our candidate with this particular regard.

Burnie has only joined the party recently for the sole purpose of running for President, but he HAS caucused and worked with Democrats, and Democratic party causes for Decades. He has earned his place to run in the campaign.

Hillary did support the Republican party almost half a century ago, briefly, in her very early years, but she has spend the rest of that half a century dedicated to the Democratic Party, as a Democrat. She has earned her place to run in the campaign.

[Duckhunter935]

60. and he has always voted and

And caucused with the Democrats. She me when he was ever a Republican like Hillary.

[seaglass]

163. Well of course "always" is not true, he has also voted with Republicans. In fact he voted with

Republicans last month on the Rand Paul Audit the Fed bill.

I believe there is a post on DU about how frequently he voted with Republicans on immigration.

He may have also voted with Republicans on gun control.

I personally don't care that he is running in the Democratic primary but let's not pretend he was a Democrat at any time before he decided to run for President. He gets to say what he is and he never said he was a member of the Democratic party.

[Duckhunter935]

165. you sure liked his votes when he helped

In filibusters, oh the hypocrisy

[seaglass]

166. Why don't you admit that you made a false statement instead of the off-topic personal attack?

I know it's hard.

[Duckhunter935]

167. yep I should have said as I said before

He has caucused with the Democratic party since he has been in Congress. He has been a critical vote in keeping a democratic majority of the Senate and a key vote in many filibusters. He has never been a member of the the Republican party like Hillary. I hope that is more accurate for you.

[seaglass]

168. All you had to do was correct your false statement. It is true of course that Bernie voted and

caucused with Dems as he more often agreed with them over the Repubs. He would have been out on his ass if he didn't vote with the Dems.

[LeFleur1]

159. A Republican?

Was she? And did she join the Democratic party when she ran for President? Did she join the party when she realized she would have to do it to if she wanted a chance to be elected to the Senate? .

Hillary has always been an activist. She went along with her Dad, a Republican, for a few years as a kid until she got older and saw how things were. She never joined either party because it would be to her advantage. I think she joined the party in the 60s. She believed in what they were doing.
A little study on this subject wouldn't hurt.

I don't understand the angst when it is stated that Bernie wasn't a Democrat until he decided to run for President. It's true.

[sarge43]

160. Clinton is opportunist. She does whatever it takes to advance Clinton

If it's pleasing Daddy, being fashionably activist at a fashionably activist university, tacking her name on popular causes, mouthing support for the rage du jour, sucking up for money because money is power and my personal favorite, modifying her accent and phrasing to con the locals. I'm surprised she didn't do "wicked good" when she was in New Hampshire.

As for the angst, you'll have to ask Clinton supporters about that. They're the ones having the melt down.

Sanders has been true to his beliefs all his life. Clinton is a wind sock; she's only true to herself. Deal with it.

[Sienna86]

18. Bernie is more of a Democrat that most who claim the label

That's why I like his values

[hobbit709]

20. Another day, another version of red baiting.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

126. Hey, it is a day job. Gotta make a living, eh?

[beedle]

21. So Bernie has to promise

to shrink government until he can drown it in a bathtub; Support trickle down economics; Before you will consider him a true 'Democratic Party" member?

Maybe he should also denounce the civil rights act as well?

I think you're confusing the Republican & Democratic party (I fully expect you're going to start calling them the 'Democrat Party".

[Fuddnik]

22. Nice try......NOT.

[Javaman]

23. that's all you got?

oh boo hoo for us Bernie supporters. I feel a pearl clutching episode coming on!

get over yourself. your sauce so very weak that it's completely transparent.

[cherokeeprogressive]

24. Being a Democrat is more than a check mark on a fucking piece of paper.

Bernie measures up in every other way.

Get over it.

[BlueMTexpat]

83. Actually, in the two-party

structure we are afflicted with, a check mark does matter. Frankly, I prefer European-style parliamentary democracy, where one knows where a party stands even when that party has to form a majority coalition to accomplish its agenda, which means compromise.

But in the US Congressional system, it is the number of Ds or Rs that determine which party holds majority status. It is the D or R party structure that helps elect Congresspersons, Senators, Governors, and politicians at local and state levels.

It is interesting to read about the history of third parties in the US. Most have been very short-lived or were subsumed into either the D or the R party. Here's a quick Wiki overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_party_(United_States) Bernie actually belonged to a different third party before he decided to style himself an Independent. His first party went bankrupt. Independent as a party label works well for a small rural state like Vermont.

But it would not have worked for him to run for President as an Independent. "Independent" is a label of many meanings. Ross Perot ran as an Independent, primarily because he could self-finance his run. But Ross Perot and Bernie Sanders have much less in common than Bernie has with the Democratic Party. The thing is, one really doesn't know what one is getting or where a hypothetically Independent President would actually receive his/her support when there is a two-party system in Congress.

Throughout US history, the parties have even flip-flopped on policies and agendas, so that today's parties can seem unrecognizable to at least some of their historical precedents. For example, the largely Democratic white South from the 1860s to the Reagan Era was primarily due to Lincoln's Republican Party, the Civil War and the Emancipation Proclamation. That was reinforced by the New Deal policies of FDR which helped everyone, including systemically impoverished areas in the South and Midwest.

But the New Deal never explicitly addressed racial issues, even though it did improve the lot of AAs in areas other than the South by helping with economics generally and caused AAs to begin to look to the Dems. It was the successful Civil Rights movements of the 1960s, along with LBJ's enactment of civil rights and poverty legislation that began to address those so that many remaining Republican AAs switched to became majority Dem voters today. It was at that point that the South began to rethink its allegiance to the Democratic Party. The so-called "Reagan Democrats" became the core of today's GOP and things really began running off the rails with that party with the rise of RW evangelical movements and the corporatist ideas of economists like Milton Friedman and his Chicago Boys. Today's GOP looks little like the party of Reagan, nothing like the party of Eisenhower, or for that matter, nothing whatsoever like the Republican Party that elected Jeannette Rankin as the first US Congresswoman ever.

Anyway, the bottom line for me is that I cannot put my full trust in someone who has not respected and worked within my political party structure during his career, rather than working with it simply when it suited his purpose. If he manages to win the majority of caucuses/primaries and becomes the Dem nominee, I will support him wholeheartedly against any Republican.

But I will always have deep reservations about his motives.

[rpannier]

102. Good post. But I disagree on your time frame

I would argue that the south began to rethink its allegiance to the Democratic Party in 1948 when their delegates walked out of the convention after Humphrey submitted a Minority Report wanting Civil Rights added to the Party platform. It passed, even with President Truman opposing it. The delegations from the South walked out, the States' Rights candidate took 4 southern states. According to the American Presidency Project out of the 214,980 votes cast in Alabama Thurmond took 171,443 votes (97.4%), Dewey got 40,930 and Truman was barely noticeable.

It is true that in '52 much of the South voted for the Democratic nominee, though Tennessee, Florida, Virginia and Texas all liked Ike both times.
In '60 Mississippi began its march away from the Democratic Party by voting majority the other Democratic Party ticket of Byrd/Thurmond. Byrd also received 6 delegate votes from Alabama and 1 in Oklahoma even though Kennedy won Alabama and Oklahoma went for Nixon

By '64 the core of the South (Alabama, Georgia, SC, LA, Miss) voted Republican, while Tennessee jumped back to the Party.

The rest is history.
The 60's could be easily argued as the tipping point. But, I would argue that the late 40's, with '48 being the point where the ball got rolling, is when we began to lose the South

'48 also saw extremely high turn outs of African Americans in major cities in states like Illinois and Ohio that tipped the scales toward Truman

[BlueMTexpat]

103. OK, my brush was too broad.

I stand corrected.

But my basic point was that the parties - and their supporters - have flip-flopped over the years. If I were a couple of hundred years old, as a woman I would have found the Republican Party from the late 19th century to the New Deal more receptive to women's progress.

Anyway, thanks for your post as well.

[Shadowflash]

25. yawn

[riversedge]

27. Yes, this don't pick on me from the Bernie fans last night was laughable.

[CanonRay]

28. Actually, that doesn't bother me a bit.

He was more of a Democrat than Jim Webb ever was.

[yourout]

29. He was a better Democrat without the name then Hillary ever was...

With it.

[dchill]

101. He still is.

[Generic Other]

30. I am a Democrat because a bunch of people stand

just right of me who I can tolerate better than those who stand way out in right field.

[karynnj]

31. and I remember how happy the Clinton people were when Bernie said he would run in the primary as a D

and promised NOT to run in the GE as an independent. That was when his ceiling was thought to be maybe 10 percent by generous estimates.

The Clinton people, considering him a weak opponent, but fearing the impact of a third party candidate, were very happy then that he was running as a Democrat. He has followed every rule doing so. The only problem the Clinton people have is they now fear that even if he loses, the contrast emphasizes some of Clinton ' s negatives.

Not tto mention, she clearly has the lion's share of party support, far greater name recognition, more advocates in the media. Not to diminish Sanders, but could part of the problem be her own weaknesses, either as a person or candidate? Think about it, either Sanders is a phenomenal candidate or she has problems for him to have gotten to a point where he is as big a threat as he is.

One take away from yesterday's event, was that Bernie genuinely does respect the people who ask him questions. Hillary was cold to any not pandering to her.

[klook]

99. Exactly.

Thank you for this brief interlude of logic and rational analysis.

[left-of-center2012]

33. One's a Democrat. One's a Wall Street shill.

just sayin'

[delrem]

34. Yah, it doesn't surprise me that Hillary would argue this.

It seems so inconsequential, but it it's a kind of filler.

I'm a bit more interested in her other arguments against Sanders.

Like the argument that Clinton, Stein and Albright just offered.

[GreatGazoo]

35. Labels are way down the list of what people vote for

As they should be. The era of big brands is over. The era of transparency is here.

Sanders actions tell us everything we need to know about him, as do HRC's.

[workinclasszero]

36. “My own feeling is that the Democratic Party is ideologically bankrupt.” Bernie Sanders

“We have to ask ourselves, ‘Why should we work within the Democratic Party if we don’t agree with anything the Democratic Party says?’”

“I am not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal Democrat,”

In that summer’s issue of Vermont Affairs magazine, he called the Democratic Party “ideologically bankrupt,” then added: “They have no ideology. Their ideology is opportunism.”

Still, he stressed: “I am not a Democrat, period.”

In an op-ed in the New York Times in January 1989, he called the Democratic and Republican parties “tweedle-dee” and “tweedle-dum,” both adhering in his estimation to an “ideology of greed and vulgarity.”

At the Socialist Scholars Conference in New York City in April 1990, he asked, “Why should we work within the Democratic Party..?” He said at the gathering he was running for Congress that year again as an independent because it would be “hypocritical” of him to run as a Democrat considering the kinds of things he had said about the party.

Can Bernie Sanders Win the Love of a Party He Scorns?
The long, troubled history of Bernie Sanders and the 'ideologically bankrupt' party whose White House nod he now seeks.
By MICHAEL KRUSE and MANU RAJU August 10, 2015

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181

[Shadowflash]

40. Yup.

he called the Democratic Party “ideologically bankrupt,” then added: “They have no ideology. Their ideology is opportunism.”


Yup. And the party's standard bearer, HRC, has come out to say that healthcare is NOT a right for every American and has said that single payer healthcare is something not worth pursuing. Her campaign surrogates have said that higher education is not a right for all people and that people like them can have it because they are rich enough to.

I'd have to say he was pretty spot on.

[DeadLetterOffice]

96. Well said. n/t

[noiretextatique]

127. the party IS ideologically bankrupt

and has been since clinton1 and the DLC started co-opting rw issues, like welfare reform. clinton supporters don't seem to care about that. why do you think he, a democratic socialist independent, is doing so well with democrats? are all of us not "real democrats" too?

[My Good Babushka]

37. It doesn't bother me, what label he chooses to run under

If the two-party system weren't strangling the election process, we would have more options, and we should have more options. Traditional democrats and republicans have failed on the most important issues to me. Climate change, stopping open-ended wars and weapons proliferation, and labor issues. If neither of them will tackle any meaningful work, then it's time to broaden our options.

[Thinkingabout]

38. We have seen many times where Hillary was a Goldwater girl as a teenager.

Thom Hartmann was a Goldwater boy. Hillary has been a Democrat since she was able to vote.

[blackspade]

39. Yawn.

This is the same recycled bullshit from several months ago all rolled into a not so new meme.
All of the above 'questions' have been answered multiple times.

[FlaGranny]

41. I find it very hard

to care what Bernie's party was. It is completely understandable to me that he was not registered as a Democrat. Why in the world should I care what party he was in? What I care about is his commitment to the same things I care about. Also understandable why he switched to the Democratic party. How else would he have a chance? Making it a 3-way contest would have elected a Republican for sure. He is smart enough to realize that. I've had enough of "moderate Republican Democrats." Clinton is, and always has been, to the right of Obama and Obama is more conservative than I would prefer.

[Cryptoad]

42. Not a Democrat then or now!

Seems not to be much of anything,,,, 26 years in Congress and only averaged sponsoring 4 bill per year. [Congress.gov]

[FrostyAusty]

78. Riiiiiiight.

At least he wasn't responsible for destabilizing TWO countries, taking corporate money from the Wall street bozos whose greed nearly destroyed the economy, promoting the 1994 crime bill.... I could go on and on.

I have voted for democrats my entire life but, it was never because the (D) or (R) next to the persons name, but the ideas they represent. Bernie has spent his life fighting for equality for all people while at the same time never compromising his integrity or his moral values. That is why I support him, that is what I thought the democratic party was supposed to be about. Now there is too much corruption, and too many people are eager to silence others who opinions differ from that of the hierarchy.

So I say to you label us, label Bernie whatever the fuck you want. We know what he stands for, we know how he actually is beholden to us, the people not they, the corporate elite. If, and I say this with a pinch of salt.. If Hillary is the nominee you will need US to come out and vote for her, simple as that. While I might be able to bite the bullet and vote for her, there are many others who won't, countless others who will leave the democratic process as well because they feel there is no one left to represent them. That is what the Hillary fans need to worry about... Some of us are still willing to vote for her if we have to, but the constant narcissism and dismissive attitude by both her and supporters certainly do her no favors at all.

[JackInGreen]

92. +1

you'll get crickets from the person you're responding to, shame too.

[DUbeornot2be]

43. Or...

...if we're playing these games it could jusf as easily be charged that Clinton only became a democrat after being a young political activist with aspirations who found her political horse to latch onto to carry her towards that career of power and fame so she switched her allegiance for political expediency... I mean it IS being argued that being Bill's wife somehow gives her eight years pertinent experience... Just like Laura Bush has eight years experience...

Damn I feel dirty...

[Gore1FL]

46. Goldwater girl says what, now? nt

[DUbeornot2be]

52. Yes...

...hillary switched her allegiance to Democrat so she could still espouse the corporate ideals as a walmart attorney, but get all the benefits of being called a demo...

Yes, why did she switch if her leaning was still corporate? Political expediency?

isn't dirty politics fun!

[Odin2005]

47. The only people who care about Sander's party identification are political junkies who...

...treat political parties as if they were sports teams, or people have been inside the beltway bubble too long.

[Hydra]

155. The call to party loyalty is pretty transparent

"You have to vote for me! I have a D after my name!"

"...You have anything else to offer?"

"Nope!"

[tk2kewl]

49. i, for one, admire the fact that he was never associated with either party

and lament the fact that there was no other way for him to get his ideas on the national stage than to join the club

and i am exceedingly grateful that he is exposing the democratic party establishment for their abandonment of ordinary citizens.

[Jester Messiah]

50. So?

[Nanjeanne]

51. Hillary reminds me of everything I have come to dislike about Dem Party.

[DUbeornot2be]

59. ^^^^^^^ This!

I would hope our first woman President was one who hadn't sold out the ideals of the democratic party along the way...

Madame Clinton indeed...

[cantbeserious]

53. Predictably Spreading Establishment FUD - Meme Number 127

eom

[CentralMass]

54. We could care less.

[djean111]

56. Whatever Bernie is, officially - I am voting for him.

You seem a lot more peevish, it seems to me, because Bernie's supporters won't do as you order and support Hillary, than Bernie's supporters are because Hillary took a cheap shot. Bernie was invited to run as a Democrat. Get over it, would be my advice.

[Duckhunter935]

62. he is more of a Democrat than Hillary

[djean111]

65. Absolutely.

Whatever happens, I think the DNC is in for an upheaval. Long overdue.

[libtodeath]

57. I guess other then the label FDR wasnt a Democratic President either if that is the case.

[Duckhunter935]

64. yep

[bigbrother05]

63. He was enough of a Democrat for Harry Reid to make him a committee chair

[DUbeornot2be]

68. How...

...can Hillary attack such a fine Democratic leader as Harry Reid?

[HooptieWagon]

66. And Hillary campaigned for Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller.

bff with Henry Kissinger. President of Young Republicans in college. Millions made giving speeches to Wall St. Willing to put abortion on the negotiating table.

This is not recognizable as a Democrat to me.

[Iggo]

67. He's been a Dem for less than a year, and he's already a better Dem than Clinton will ever be.

Yeah, not bothered one bit.

[Perogie]

69. It doesn't matter what party

It only matters what character the person has.

[liberal N proud]

70. Bernie folks throw tantrums when you talk about Bernie that way

But they love to criticize Hillary.

[Cobalt Violet]

71. How are you going sell our nominee being indicted?

Bernie has caucused with Dems for decades. He didn't trash the party. The party TRASHED itself by becoming the Republican Light Party and by letting the Third Way Whores run it into the ground.

[Bjornsdotter]

72. I love that he is not a Democrat

Then again, I'm one of those Scandinavian types who have lived with the unicorns and know that they exist.

[nyabingi]

73. Bernie was right to bash the Democratic Party

because the party sold out on its bedrock principles with the Clinton's rise to power.

The true base of the party was insulted, alienated and pushed aside to cozy up to donors who traditionally gave only to Republicans and what we see happening with Bernie Sanders is the true base reasserting its power and trying to reclaim what it really means to be a Democrat.

This is a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party, make no mistake about it. In my opinion, all of the pro-corporate, pro-war, almost-Republican Democrats need to be purged from the party altogether so that they can help bring the Republican Party back from the edges of outright fascism.

What you and other supporters of Hillary don't want to admit is that the conservative Democratic message is not popular among the people you are counting on. Don't think that all of the people Bernie is bringing in are going to vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination either. She's not an inspiring person, she's untrustworthy, and she's dislike by a majority of Americans, Democrat and Republican.

[Scalded Nun]

77. You need to get on the payroll

carrying all that water should be worth at least minimum wage.

[DrBulldog]

79. Hillary gets attacked because of HER many documented actions ...

... that are contrary to the general welfare of the American people.

Her attacks on Bernie are nothing but slime based on nothing.

[snort]

80. Goldwater! Whoot!

Right?

[MoonRiver]

142. In high school.

[Hydra]

156. Same logo

Lack of imagination, or subtle hint?

[Orsino]

81. Challenged?

DC has already settled that. He's a true enough Scotsman to have been in all the Dem debates.

I suppose we were due for another attempt at resurrecting this talking point.

[hoosierlib]

82. The Democratic political establishment are now corporatists

And its why they have been the vites of working class whites for the past 30 years.

Bernie is challenging them and asking for the people to take back the party to where we were 60 years ago...

[jalan48]

84. That line will only encourage more Ralph Naders.

To turn it into an exclusive club based on membership and not on ideas is a big mistake.

[Depaysement]

85. Another variant of the usual corporate Dem spin

They took his votes when he voted with the Dems in Congress. They admitted him to the caucus. Now he isn't good enough.

They're glad he joined the party and brought those new voters in. But they really don't care about who those new voters want.

Sound familiar? Yes, they only want his voters to vote for who they want and they only want you to vote for who they want.

Other than that the new voters and you - can basically go to hell.

Oh, and by the way, many of Bernie's voters, including me, have devoted considerable time, money and effort to helping Democratic candidates in the past. Many of us have been precinct captains, party committee women and men, candidates, campaign managers and so on. As longtime Democrats, we resent the implication that the candidate we support is not worthy of the nomination because he ran without a D after his name. Indeed, the more I hear of this argument, the less I am inclined to help or even cast a vote for Camp Weathervane if it wins the nomination.

[erlewyne]

86. Hillary is a blue dog.

She became a democrat to suit her fancy $$$$$$$$

She must like Trump because she makes him look better everyday.

And I can't have it both ways ... I had to vote for Gore.

Gore ... Lieberman ... Hillary ... coincidences????

[desmiller]

128. also...

She flips more times than an Iowan coin.

[DrBulldog]

87. Do you remember who threw the FIRST punch?

But she didn't know her opponent would slug her back big-time . . .

[dpatbrown]

88. Trashing the Dems

Long, long overdue. Going back to the 60s, ALWAYS too many Dems acting like the GOP. The last straw for me was many Dems joining Bush to invade another country, setting in place the Middle East today. That's when I became an Independent.

For Clinton, how can she earn any respect when she is seen by so many people as being dishonest?

[Hiraeth]

90. NOT GOOD ENOUGH, BERNIE !!

[azurnoir]

91. sorry but the DSCC didn't contribute to his Senate campaign for nothing

they at least knew where his heart was

[Tarc]

93. The most amusing part of the Sanders' run is the claim to be an "outsider"

when he has been in Washington for 25 years.

[noiretextatique]

133. NO he doesn't...the media claims that

google is your friend. both sanders and clinton are insiders, but he is atypical. he is not filthy rich, for one thing. nor has he been sucking up to wall street for 30 years. a recent article stated sanders is a left-leaning moderate reformer insider, and clinton is a status quo center right insider. i think that's accurate.

[Autumn]

95. Who is this Bernie supporter who needs be reminded Bernie wasn't a Democrat until now?

I seriously doubt they give a fuck and most take pride in that.

[monicaangela]

97. Could this possibly

have something to do with this: The American system is commonly called a "two-party system" because there have historically been only two major political parties with candidates competing for offices (especially in federal elections). The first two political parties had their origins in the debate over the ratification of the Constitution--the Federalists and Antifederalists. Today, the Republican and Democratic Parties dominate electoral politics. Almost every federal or state-level elected official in the United States is either a Republican or Democrat. In fact, in the United States Congress, there is only one member in the House of Representatives that is not a Republican or a Democrat--Rep. Bernie Sanders of Vermont is an Independent. Every other House member and Senator belongs to either the Democratic or Republican Party.

The American two-party system is the result of the way elections are structured in the United States. Representatives in the Congress and in state legislatures are elected to in single-member districts where the individual with the most votes wins. Because only one party's candidate can win in each district, there is a strong incentive for political competitors to organize themselves into two competing "teams" or parties. By doing so, party members and their candidates maximize their chances of winning elections. (In some countries where there are multi-member districts, parties that win smaller percentages of the vote can often win legislative representation. Consequently, in such systems, there is an incentive to form smaller "third" parties.) Other features of the American system of elections, such as campaign finance rules, the electoral college and rules giving party candidates ballot access further solidify the two-party system in the United States.

The same features of the American system that have encouraged a two-party system also serve to discourage the emergence of third parties. When third parties have emerged in American political history, their successes have been short-lived. In most cases, the issues or ideas championed by third parties have been "stolen" by the candidates of one of the two major parties. Sometimes the issue position taken by the third party is even incorporated into the platform of one of the existing parties. By doing so, the existing party generally wins the support of the voters that had been the support base of the third party. With no unique issues to stand on and depleted voter support, third parties generally fade away.

http://www.thisnation.com/question/042.html

We all know the system is rigged, and if we know it I'm sure Bernie Sanders and any other candidate that would want to run for the office of President knows it as well. You almost have to run under the banner of one of the two major parties, otherwise you're labeled a spoiler, or your platform is conveniently stolen by the opposition. I find it irritating to say the least that a person that has caucused with the democratic party for 25 years is all of a sudden considered a usurper by those who with a straight face try to paint him as someone who is not a part of the party. The hypocrisy of attempting to label a person as a Johnny come lately because that person understands how the political system works is despicable, that is why Hillary Clinton was booed in the Town Hall last night when she tried to do so.

[malthaussen]

98. Does a label matter?

George Wallace was a Democrat. Do we really need to multiply examples of why a label is inconsequential?

-- Mal

[angrychair]

100. Spare me the righteous indignation

Bernie Sanders was in the House for 10 years before she became a Senator. He has been a Senator longer than she was.

He as been a member of Congress for 25 years and has caucused with the Democratic Party every one of those years.

He is the co-founder of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

He has been a stalwart ally and friend of the Democratic Party and is now a member of the Democratic Party.

This type of "purity test" coming from a former Republican is ripe with hypocrisy.

[VulgarPoet]

104. I frankly don't give a damn.

In my eyes, he's doing what's necessary-- do I find it slightly distasteful, yes, but he wouldn't have the same swell of support if he ran from outside. And if he ran from outside, y'all Weathervanes would be bitching that he's running as a spoiler. Y'all can't have it both ways either.

At least this way, some things can change. But from where I sit, voting for wars, voting for privacy violating, Big Brother shit like the Patriot Act, like SOPA, like the TTP, lying, conniving, accepting Wall Street dollars to fuck Main Street-- that is no more Democratic Party than Sanders is.

A real long-term political movement needs people. We'll see who's willing to walk their talk if that time comes. I don't know how he'll sell his government ideas or how a European socialist will make it, but we're going to try. As for the Republican attack machine, Bernie's a classy enough guy to pull off defense without stooping to the nasty Republican/Third-Way style of attacking that has come to define modern politics-- and even if he can't field them, he's got more than enough people ready to walk by him. Us, not me. Sure, I don't have all the answers, but it's better than nothing but doubt-- which I would have were it only Clinton running.

Y'all can't have it both ways either.

[eggplant]

106. Wow, that's all you got?

Seriously?

- Bernie Sanders TRASHED the Democratic Party for years even to the point of having wanted President Obama primaried.
The Vermont independent is not running for president, but he says it’s time “that people start asking the president some hard questions about why he said one thing during his previous campaign, and is doing another thing today on Social Security, on Medicare.”
http://www.thenation.com/article/bernie-sanders-talks-primary-challenge-obama-good-idea-our-democracy-and-democratic-part/
Social Security and Medicare are core issue for Bernie, and have always been. Hell, I was pissed he didn't do anything about Gitmo. We are allowed to disapprove of our leaders, after all.

- And he goes on and on nowadays about being anti-establishment, and yet he JOINED this "establishment" party.
He has consistently caucused with the Dems, as our side of the aisle is the side that is LESS about screwing over working people. But he's always been against corporatism. And this means it makes sense for him to have run for his seat as an Independent. In a national election, however, we really only have two parties (unlike, say, Vermont). So what exactly is wrong with trying to drag our side a little bit further to the left, back to where we once were?

- (If he doesn't win the nomination, will he REMAIN a Democrat?)
My guess is that he'll remain an independent and continue to caucus with us. Why do you care what he does if he loses the nomination?

- I'm glad Bernie joined the party, and I'm glad he's bringing many other people into the party. And I agree with many of Bernie's views.
Bullshit. Complete and utter bullshit. Otherwise you would have never written this OP. Own it. Yours is a hit piece, pure and simple.

- But the Bernie supporters can't have it both ways. They can't constantly hurl attacks and never expect to be challenged themselves.
Quite the strawman argument. Bernie is running on the idea that The People, especially the ones in our party, aren't being represented. His policies are the policies of the (previously) voiceless. If speaking up for what is right is now "hurling attacks", then you have a thin skin. Every candidate comes with overly fervent supporters -- they are easy to find. But the *substance* of his campaign isn't about hurling attacks. It is about telling the truth to power.

- How are you forming a real long-term political movement?
We are RECLAIMING our movement. We are changing how the game is played. Whether Bernie wins the nomination or not, nobody can say that he hasn't made a huge difference already. It's not like he just showed up on the scene.

- How are you going to sell such a MASSIVE expansion of government in the general election?
What massive expansion? You mean allowing the rest of us to partake of a healthcare system that is firmly in place, makes life easier for both workers and employers, and saves everyone money? Frankly, I don't see the problem.

- How is a European type socialist going to win the American presidency?
Ask FDR. Four times.

- How are you going to deal with the massive Republican attack campaign that is coming?
The same way that EVERY dem candidate has. Do you think that the Rs only hate Bernie and love all of our other candidates? We will deal with the Rs the same way we will win the primary. By taking the election to the VOTERS, and motivating them to go to the polls. Are you actually trying to suggest that ANY Bernie supporter could be swayed by crap hurled from the clown car?

- Ask these questions, and all too often you get fingers-in-ears diversions and attacks instead of thoughtful answers. Everyone who disagrees on some key issues with Mr. Sanders is "part of the establishment".
More strawman bullshit. I've provided you thoughtful answers.

- Sorry Bernie folks, you can not have it both ways. You don't get to endlessly attack the other candidate yet never be challenged yourselves.
Amazing how I've responded to everything you wrote here, yet was able to do it without attacking the other candidate.

Have a nice day.

[DeadLetterOffice]

110. Nicely done. n/t

[quickesst]

107. Bernie only adopted the democratic label...

... as a means to an end. He knew he didn't stand a snowball's chance in hell by running as an independent even though his supporters are supposed to believe it's the man and not the label that gets people elected. If he was that great, his supporters should have encouraged him to run as an Independent instead of joining "the establishment".

[Arazi]

108. Who cares? Do you have some links demonstrating people hate that?

[EndElectoral]

111. Love to reply to your questions

1. How are you forming a real long-term political movement?


Bernie's support has been from the grass roots of the party. Plus he has ignited the youth who feel disenfranchised from the Establishment DNC policies. He doesn't rely on Super PACS or is compromised by huge corporate donations or exorbitant fees from corporate donors. He is not anyone's shill, but his own. He's bringing people into the party. He's trying to push the party further left as it used to be more towards an FDR New Deal platform, than further right towards a Clintonian Kissinger platform. I truly believe that an HRC nomination will leave Bernie supporters apathetic towards the GE. Whether that should happen is not the point, it most likely will disintegrating a portion of the Democratic Party.

2 How are you going to sell such a MASSIVE expansion of government in the general election?

It's already happening. Not only is Bernie more popular among Republicans now than Clinton, Clinton for whatever reason ignites furor from Republicans. They simply don't like her, and her nomination energizes the Republican party. Any Democrat is going to meet resistance from today's Republican Party, and that it why it is critical, as Clinton stated, we elect a Democratic congress. We've already seen a massive expansion of government without a Socialist. A Socialist didn't lead to all this debt. However the bulk of the expansion has gone to foreign wars, and corporate giveaways. People like Medicare. Why not expand it to Medicare for All? Younger people paying premiums would help sustain the viability of the Medicare program (rather than two separate governmental programs - ACA and Medicare), and help insure that administrative costs are controlled, rather than the costs and profits gathered by the private insurance firms and pharmaceutical industries. In short, when it is framed as a MASSIVE expansion of government you do Bernie's intentions an injustice. Rather it should be framed as one that is providing cost effective services that actually help people, and then people get on board.

How is a European type socialist going to win the American presidency? How are you going to deal with the massive Republican attack campaign that is coming?

Again the framing of a a "European type socialist" is Republican talk. In today's world FDR would be called a European type socialist for his solutions, Kennedy and Johnson's fight for Medicare and Medicaid would be called a European type socialist approach to the problem of health care. Our system is ripe with socialist solutions from the military to the post office to police forces to retirement. When one tries to equate Castro or Stalin or Chavez to Bernie Sanders it is insulting and manipulates what the benefits of socialistic solutions can be. I really think this is more a "fear" based issue that wants to put things in the context of the old Cold War than in a real one where socialist solutions to problems are working in Europe and have worked here as well.

I get you prefer Clinton. Her approach is one of incrementalism, and continual evolving on the issues trying to find acceptable balances. I believe she even refers to it as the grown up way. Bernie is about something different. He is calling for a political revolution. If you are an advocate of incrementalism you will never be for Bernie. He has big ideas and is a tiger in terms of fighting for them. A perfect example is the minimum wage discussion. For Clinton she's balancing a $12 proposal, an incremental approach, and the idea that it is a bottom with States having the right to raise it beyond that knowing full well that Governors from Republican states will never allow that to happen. Bernie wants to fight to get people out of poverty now. His bottom line is $15, and I'm sure he'd have no objection of governors wanted to raise it higher. I'm not a fan of incrementalism with Republicans as they see it as weakness. Proposals always get watered down or defeated. Obama has tried this approach, with them and they have no respect for the man.

Sorry, I'm ready for the kind of revolution Bernie is advocating. Of course FDR has always been one of my favorite Presidents rather than Reagan.

[MohRokTah]

112. She hasn't even challenged him on the WORST stuff in his closet.

You know, the stuff that if you post it on DU it is hidden by a jury in seconds.

[AgingAmerican]

115. STUFF!!

Bring out the STUFF!!!

[MohRokTah]

117. Nope, Sanders supporters hide all of this stuff immediately.

It's been posted numerous times, but Sanders supporters always pack a jury and hide it.

Just go back through the history. You'll find this stuff from the 60s and 70s that will destroy him in the GE. It simply cannot be posted on DU and survive the pro-Sanders juries here.

[AgingAmerican]

118. All this amazing STUFF!

With insults and things to get it HIDDEN!!

STUFF from the sixties and seventies!

STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF! STUFF!

[MohRokTah]

119. Nope, no insults. IT is hidden because it makes Sanders look bad.

His own writings.

His past memberships and actions.

IT all gets hidden because it's the truth and makes Sanders look bad.

But there's no way to hide it once the Republicans start pushing it, and push it they will.

Hillary is too nice to bring out the nastiness in Sanders' background, but rest assured, the Republicans will and when they do, they will win 49 states next November.

[noiretextatique]

136. then why can't you post this damning STUFF?

hmmm?

[MohRokTah]

137. Because I don't want a hide.

It's been posted here, numerous times, and Sanders supporters ALWAYS hide it.

[noiretextatique]

140. you do know the jury system is random, right?

Last edited Fri Feb 19, 2016, 03:01 PM - Edit history (1)

did it ever occur to that this 'damning stuff' is hidden for a reason, other than the highly improbable paranoid musings of Clinton supporters, like yourself? it was probably for the same reason other posts are hidden. a post with inaccurate information was hidden last night. coincidentally, it was posted by a Clinton supporter. and i am sure Sanders' posts with inaccurate information are hidden also. unfortunately, some react to accurate information about Clinton in this same way, as inaccurate information.

[MohRokTah]

143. A random system that has 85% of potential jurors who will vote to hide

ANYTHING that is remotely negative about Sanders is hardly random at all.

[noiretextatique]

144. not true at all...the Hillary Clinton Group is an example.

sorry...i don't buy it. no amount of screaming will convince me. from the group:

WOW! Bernie’s Sierra Blanca Bill: ‘Blatant Environmental Injustice
Why Bernie Sanders Is In Deep Trouble In South Carolina
Truth-O-Meter Says "TRUE" Sanders'bill rushed through to Dump Nuke Waste on Poor Latino Communitiies

if what you others claim is true, why are these posts here?

[noiretextatique]

131. LMAO...and not ONE example of this STUFF

[noiretextatique]

130. no matter how many times it is posted, it is still just opinion and speculation

there is no proof, because there is no way to prove it. the jury system is random, so in order for these claims to be valid, the person who would have to know who's on the jury, to successfully target someone. how can that possibly happen when the jury is randomly selected? some claim that 85% of DU is pro-Bernie, the odds of this alleged conspriracy increases. perhaps that is true. but that would still mean that 85% of DU is out to get you, and that 85% of DU is baised against Hillary supporters, and in on the plot. Frankly: it is paranoid and ridiculous. that goes for all who make the accusation...on both sides.

[Arazi]

132. Lol! Pro Clinton Pac desperate to make Sanders look bad

Pro-Clinton PAC desperate to make Sanders look bad


Source: New York Post

Team Clinton launched a harsh attack Thursday on what it called Bernie Sanders’ “troubling history of campaign shenanigans” — but the supposed offenses were so minor that any dirty trickster would find them laughable.

One charge leveled by Correct the Record, a super PAC headed by Hillary Clinton’s longtime crony David Brock, found something nefarious about the clothing seniors were pictured wearing in the Vermont senator’s campaign literature. “Bernie Sanders’ campaign distributed mailers in Iowa that included a photo of AARP members wearing shirts with the slogan of the group’s Social Security campaign,” the PAC said in a news release, suggesting Sanders was falsely implying the AARP had endorsed him.

The PAC also accused Sanders of shady campaigning — a decade ago. “Sanders was accused of ‘running so-called “push polls,” a tactic considered deceptive in which a partisan caller, masquerading as an independent pollster, asks a potential voter leading questions with the intention of spreading negative information about an opponent,’?” the release said, quoting a US News & World Report article from Tuesday.

Push polls are a common tactic used by many campaigns — including Clinton’s in Nevada this month.

Read more: http://nypost.com/2016/02/19/pro-clinton-pac-is-desperately-trying-to-pick-on-sanders/

[noiretextatique]

134. typical clinton

baffle 'em with bullsit.

[AtomicKitten]

164. She accused Obama of cheating and dirty tricks too.

It's the Rove tactic of accusing your opponent of what ypu are doing. Maybe she's banking on the false accusations throwing people off the scent, but in effect it calls attention to just how desparate she is and how low in the gutter she is prepared to go.

[noiretextatique]

116. This blame game is childish and petty

Last edited Fri Feb 19, 2016, 01:35 PM - Edit history (1)

You post bitter, angry screeds attacking Sanders and his supporters, then you claim:

Sorry Bernie folks, you can not have it both ways. You don't get to endlessly attack the other candidate yet never be challenged yourselves.

You don't seem to take challenges too well yourself, so perhaps you should heed your own advice. The fantasy that Hillary and her Hillary supporters are being relentlessly and unfairly attacked for no reason is pure fiction. The truth is evident in your post: YOU are doing exactly what you claim others are doing to you.

Clinton supporter's are not innocent victims: you are participants. It works both ways: Sanders' supporter are participants too. But there are several Clinton supporters like yourself, who do this on a regular basis. And I can name names. You can't keep claiming you are a victim when are constantly in attack mode yourself.

A lot of people here do not like your candidate, for very good reasons, and are very vocal about it: I am one of them. That is not going to change. It seems you, and others need to find a better way to manage your emotions, given that reality. No amount of scolding or blaming is going to change my mind about Clinton. And neither is playing the victim. The real victim here is the truth: your candidate is not inspiring...she just isn't. We've had enough peas.

[NurseJackie]

139. This is nonsense ...

You don't seem to take challenges too well yourself, so perhaps you should heed your own advice.

... what many people overlook (ignore? misunderstand?) is that in general Hillary supporters care less about the criticisms that are hurled in her direction, and more that criticisms of Bernie are regularly hidden and locked. It's in this regard that Bernie's fans shouldn't be allowed to "have it both ways".

The truth is evident in your post: YOU are doing exactly what you claim others are doing to you.

No, this is false. We are NOT able to do "exactly" what we accuse others of doing. Mathematically speaking, with regard to the ratio at this web site, Hillary supporters are in a minority, and that's also reflected in the ratio of the random jury selection. Skinner himself has confirmed this.

You can't keep claiming you are a victim when are constantly in attack mode yourself.

Of course we can. It has nothing to do with the words that are said, or the accusations that are hurled... but everything to do with how even the most mild and politely worded criticisms of Bernie are regularly hidden (even when cited from mainstream sources), and the most venomous screeds of Hillary are permitted to stay (even when cited from RW sites).

Attack away! Have at it! However, ysing your majority on this site to prevent criticisms of Bernie, to hide posts, and punish those who dare to criticize is the problem.

As I and others have noted, Skinner himself acknowledges this imbalance in how the jury system is being manipulated, and he's written that steps will be taken in the future to fix (or minimize) this problem. Until then, enjoy! It won't last too much longer.




Go, Hillary! We love you!




Note to Jury: No candidate or candidate's supporters were attacked or smeared in this post. This post contains my personal opinions and observations regarding the makeup of this site, the weaknesses of the current jury system (confirmed by Skinner, not me) along with my statements that disagree with and challenge the assertions from the previous poster. The alerter may disagree with me, and may not like my "tone", and may feel that this post has "no value", but the fact remains that no rules were broken in this post.

[noiretextatique]

141. if DU had not de-evolved into a cesspool of victimhood

the OP would have been deleted as the bizarre, angry attack it IS. there IS NO JUSTIFICATION for THIS...PERIOD. There is no justification when Clinton supporters do it, and no justification when Sanders' supporters do it...period. I am sick of all the pity parties, baseless accusations, and paranoid (or purposeful) conspiracy theories. the OP hasn't tried to defend this, so why are you? We ALL need to stop!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

121. Translattion: Vote for the Lesser of Two Evils candidate because Bernie's a SOCIALIST!!!

[bunnies]

122. Most of us dont give a flying fuck what letter is after his name.

Just so you know.

[flamingdem]

123. Aw c'mon Bernie didn't trash the dems, he was rightly critical of the deal to continue the Bush tax

cuts and put himself on the line doing a filibuster. I didn't like how critical he was at the time but it wasn't personal against Obama it was in fact the right moral and ethical reaction.

[whatchamacallit]

124. I honestly don't care

This whole "who's a real democrat?" issue is idiotic. I'm a registered democrat, but I'll always vote policy and character.

[asuhornets]

125. n/t

[bahrbearian]

138. Hillary should primary Sander's in 2020

[Hydra]

157. Ha!

Think her donors would pony up one more time if she messes this one up royally?

[mahina]

148. He voted with my Senators Akaka and Inouye on every important vote.

Every time we needed him, he was right there by our side.

Unlike some.

[Ron Green]

149. Hey "RBInMaine." I'm calling you out on your hit-and-run posting.

If you're going to post dubious assertions (that Sanders supporters don't understand and accept that he didn't have a "D" beside his name until recently), then stick around to defend them. In this case, the rebuttal of many Democrats is that his candidacy may be able to save a party from its own corruption.

But my point is that you post anonymously and then run away. That's double cowardice.

[dana_b]

150. actually I don't mind it but I am an independent

and only registered as a Dem in order to be able to vote for him.

So I remember him sending me all of these questionnaires about my thoughts, beliefs, desires (I've been supporting him for about 8 years now) and when he announced, it finally snapped that he was gathering info on not only what is important to me, but as to whether or not he would have a chance to win. He became a Dem in order NOT to hand the Presidency to a Republican. I think he wanted to run for a while. But if he ran as an independent, he would have taken a lot of votes away from the Democratic candidate (Hillary) and handed it all over to the Repubs. So many people now detest Nadar because they think he got us W (I think it was the Supreme Court but I digress). Bernie didn't want to be that guy. So the best thing was to run as a Dem.

When I found out that he was running, I was so excited and happy, I nearly cried. If I could have picked ANY politician to be President, it would have been Bernie. I never thought that it would really happen. So yeah, I'm perfectly fine with him running as a Dem!

And lets face it, even for people who don't like it, you have to admit that it has pulled the discussion towards the left and maybe (if Hillary wins the nomination), just MAYBE Clinton will be a more progressive President.

Regarding: How are you forming a real long-term political movement
- We have to
1) vote for as progressive as possible congressional people. Most likely Dems.

2) not get lazy after the elections and think that it's all up to Bernie now. No - it's up to us and we need to keep
talking, having meetings and getting involved in local politics. I am moving soon and plan on getting involved in the
local progressive movements.

- How are you going to sell such a MASSIVE expansion of government in the general election?
Honestly, Bernie has it on his website. How to pay for it. I guess just reiterate what he says. I would love to hear
more from objective economists.

- How is a European type socialist going to win the American presidency?
The more people hear from Bernie, the more they are flocking to him. I don't think his brand of Democratic
Socialism is as scary as people think. It makes SENSE!! We are not talking about Russia or communism. We are
talking about things that can be done and that are happening in most other western countries. Who doesn't want
help with either school, or healthcare, more family leave, a secure retirement plan, etc.?

-How are you going to deal with the massive Republican attack campaign that is coming?
Just keep telling the truth and quoting Bernie to them. They can be nasty and call him a communist, a dreamer, big
spender, and that's fine. A lot of it is true! BUT it can work. He is not going to convince most of them, but some will
get it. Thankfully Bernie doesn't have a lot of political baggage. Maybe personally they will drag him through the mud
(the kibbutz, when he was part of socialist clubs, his first wife, blah, ) but all PEOPLE have some personal baggage.

"Everyone who disagrees on some key issues with Mr. Sanders is "part of the establishment"
Nah, I don't believe that. I think most people are normal, everyday people.

[stone space]

151. I'm not, either, but I Caucus with the Democrats here in Iowa.

It's really not much of an issue here.

[Kip Humphrey]

152. I LOVE the fact that Bernie Sanders was an Independent for most of his political career! He's

beholding to NO ONE, and is uniquely positioned to address and reform our widely corrupt system.

Reason#1 why I am voting for Bernie Sanders.

[jopacaco]

153. Since you're from Maine too

Where has the Democratic Party been for many of our recent Maine candidates? These were people who won the Democratic primary and been totally abandoned by the party for one reason or another. It works both ways, when a Democratic candidate wins the Democratic primary they should be supported.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

158. Bring a fair argument and there's no problem, just good and healthy argument.

That's how these things work.

The rest is just pre-game taunting.

[Ken Burch]

161. Because it doesn't matter.

The only people who have an issue with it are people who don't want the party to be progressive.