Brace Yourself Sanders Supporters, It's Going to Get Ugly.

[ArtTownsend]

...this (comments from Sanders campaign about Warren) is an entirely manufactured scandal that no one should treat as anything other than what it is: typical campaign politics. But it does signify a shift that’s already happening. Now that even Bret Stephens is recognizing Sanders has a chance to run away with the nomination, and with only weeks to go, Sanders’s opponents are belatedly taking aim at him.

After a spate of stories about Obama and his circle’s potential plans to stop Sanders from winning dropped, right on cue, Jim Messina — Obama’s 2012 campaign manager who has been busy the last eight years racking up an impressive losing record of election campaigns — told Politico Sanders would lose to Trump. Biden and Sanders are increasingly firing shots at each other. And even James O’Keefe is planning to drop some misleadingly edited bullshit about the guy he’s scared could beat Trump.

The 2020 election is not about which candidate is the politest, which candidate says the nicest things about their opponents, or which candidate most closely adheres to the made-up campaign rules in place since 2016 that say you can never draw any contrast between yourself and other candidates. It’s about which candidate is the most committed to fighting for universal health care, most determined to save the world from climate change, has the most far-reaching vision for turning around decades of disastrous US foreign policy, and, of course, is best positioned to beat Trump.

As the weeks and months roll by, it’s only going to get worse. Cut through the noise and remember what’s at stake.

https://jacobinmag.com/2020/01/2020-democratic-primary-sanders-warren-campaign

[getagrip_already]

1. some would say it's about character

But I digress.

Carry on.

[ArtTownsend]

4. Character...and principles.

Thanks for recognizing a few of Senator Sanders's positive attributes.

[getagrip_already]

28. just remember the parable about

The higher a monkey climbs..

Can I say monkey on DU? I don't want to be insensitive to monkeys or their affinity to nudity in high places.

I very much regret any aspersion cast because of the reference.

[ehrnst]

69. Well, again, there's history.

[sheshe2]

76. History repeats.

[ehrnst]

80. Don't it tho.

[sheshe2]

85. Like clockwork.

[sheshe2]

90. This.

This just devastates you, Brightman and Bocelli. Beautiful and such a tribute:

In November 1996, Andrea and Sarah Brightman were invited to perform the duet 'Time To Say Goodbye (Con Te Partirò)' at the farewell contest of the German World Light-Heavyweight boxing champion, Henry Maske. A national hero held in unrivaled esteem, he is known for his love of selecting entrance themes to his bouts. Sarah Brightman, the internationally renowned soprano and friend of Henry Maske heard 'Con Te Partirò' in a restaurant while dining with her friends. Entranced by the singer and the song, Brightman made contact with Andrea. Andrea and Brightman re-recorded 'Con Te Partirò' as the duet 'Time To Say Goodbye' with members of the London Symphony Orchestra.

This live version is from Brightman's first full concert recording, "Sarah Brightman: In Concert", from London's Royal Albert Hall with the London Symphony Orchestra under the direction of Paul Bateman. Guest artists include Andrew Lloyd Webber, Adam Clark and Andrea Bocelli. The concert was released to video in 1998.
The concert was directed by David Mallet.

The Angels sing.

[ehrnst]

92. ...

[emmaverybo]

108. Angels, yes. Thank you.

[sheshe2]

111. You are welcome, emma.

[Kahuna7]

15. I'm stocking up on popcorn. Teams Biden and Pete must be loving...

this cat fight.

[msongs]

2. it will get as ugly as bernie wants to get nt

[sheshe2]

78. Yes.

[LongtimeAZDem]

88. Exactly +1

[wryter2000]

112. That about sums it up

[SmallDonor]

3. Wait till he pulls even in the polls next month, then it will really hit the fan!

If you been watching Sanders trajectory and Bidens drop in the polls since Nov. you can see where this is heading in the next month or so!

[Thekaspervote]

21. Biden has lead since he entered the race... if you have a crystal ball please explain how!!

[ehrnst]

70. Magical thinking. It always works!

Oh wait...

[trueblue2007]

135. pulls even in the polls next month......Ha hahahahahahah!!! Nah, won't ever happen.

[Uncle Joe]

5. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread ArtTownsend.

[calguy]

6. Sorry, but I only vote for Democrats.

[ArtTownsend]

7. Hypothetical: Sanders is the Democratic nominee against Trump.

Your vote?

[Demsrule86]

10. We have all said...we would...not this again.

It is Sanders supporters like Cenk...(worth less than a Cent) who say they won't vote for the nominee.

[ArtTownsend]

12. So who is more electable? The candidate whom everyone would rally behind to beat Trump?

Or the ones for whom a not-insignificant number of people would stay home because their candidate didn't get nominated?

Turnout...

[getagrip_already]

30. sounds like...

Nice race you have here, be a shame if anything happened to it.

[PAMod]

102. Not just "sounds like"

It’s what happened last time.

[ehrnst]

116. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

Also known as "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...."

[ehrnst]

39. One for whom supporters actually "turn out" at the polls in not-insignificant numbers, for a start.

Last edited Mon Jan 13, 2020, 07:58 PM - Edit history (1)

All the claims of "momentum" and "electibility" in the world by one's supporters doesn't make up for fewer actual numbers supporters than one's opponent when it comes time to vote.

[stopdiggin]

52. DU folks will uniformly support the Democratic candidate, and VOTE.

however -- there are a lot of voters out there that are not NEARLY as committed to the party, the candidate, or voting.

See where this is heading ..?

[Fresh_Start]

72. surely you can't imagine Bernie as the candidate everyone will rally behind

because he is not it

[wnylib]

96. Besides electability, there is effectiveness.

Once in office, who will have the ability to form alliances in Congress, get nominees approved, get bills passed, and work well with intel agencies and foreign policy advisors?

Who will best be able to straighten out the mess created by Trump? Who will be able to stand up to and function well against the inevitable onslaught from Republucans that will begin immediately after the election, before the inauguration?

[ehrnst]

114. Certainly no one who assumes that they are the smartest person in any room

and that everyone else just needs to shut up and do what to only real progressive ever says to do.

[58Sunliner]

104. Well that sounds exactly like extortion.

Unfortunately I've already seen this in 2016. It's ugly, and undemocratic.

[ehrnst]

115. Doesn't it tho?

[LongtimeAZDem]

105. And the threats begin once again

[justhanginon]

40. Sounds like Cenk has been devalued down to his real worth.

[ChubbyStar]

43. Welcome back!

[Demsrule86]

51. A typo but so so so appropriate, I think I will leave it.

That is what the guy is worth.

[justhanginon]

63. .....

[Zeus69]

48. 50 Cent

[sheshe2]

113. A pretty penny that you save for a rainy day.

[ehrnst]

60. Your turn: Biden is the Democratic Nominee against Trump

Your vote?

[ArtTownsend]

62. Biden.

[ehrnst]

65. That's good. You'll vote for the candidate that has the largest number of Democrats

voting for them to win the Democratic primary.

Certainly, that will be the candidate that gets the support of the vast majority of Democratic voters, the ones that voted for Hillary.

And of course the choice of Women of color, who are the most reliable voter base of the Democratic party.

You might want to brace yourself for disappointment.

[calguy]

130. Hypothetical, yes I'll vote for the Democratic nominee

[CentralMass]

23. I put people who preemptively say they wont vote for the potential nominee of the party on ignore.

Last edited Mon Jan 13, 2020, 10:11 PM - Edit history (1)

[stonecutter357]

38. test , put me on full ignore thanks !

[ehrnst]

53. Will it hurt? Is that why you're "warning" them?

[LongtimeAZDem]

89. Saying that is a violation of the TOS

[Bummfuzzle]

26. +1

[TheFarseer]

82. Serious question

Do you ever try to convince Republicans to cross over and vote Democrat? If so, what is your argument? They’d be voting for the wrong letter from their standpoint. Or do you just generally avoid Republicans?

[LongtimeAZDem]

91. I know a lot of moderate republicans who despise Trump; they could, possibly, vote for

a Democrat who has a track record of working with the other side.

They will almost certainly not vote for a socialist who calls for "revolution"

[Demsrule86]

8. Is that an excuse for what some think is bad behavior from Sanders in terms of violating his

promise to not attack other candidates? It doesn't surprise me that new polls are not in his favor.

[ArtTownsend]

9. "bad behavior from Sanders"

irony

[Demsrule86]

11. He thinks if his staff says shit about other candidates, it is not on him...but he is wrong...he is

in charge of his own campaign...and we look to it to see if he can run an effective White House and be a good president.

[ArtTownsend]

16. The candidate in your signature has outright insulted young people.

Just saying.

[ehrnst]

33. And yes, it's getting ugly....

And you were complaining about "bad faith attacks" on another thread...





We could talk about a candidate that slapped women of color in the face recently, to a very white crowd, via a staffer.

Just saying...

[Demsrule86]

46. Not true...just saying...and Sanders supported

Heath Mello which I considered a slap in the face as a woman...that guy sponsored bills that took away abortion rights in Nebraska.

[Thekaspervote]

24. Yes.. bad behavior!! From his attack dogs.. who do you think told them to go negative Santa clause

[ehrnst]

42. If you say so.

[TidalWave46]

13. I don't think anyone is going to get in the mud with Sanders and his team.

They have that property all to themselves.

[Thekaspervote]

18. HA!! Oh so true!!

[ChubbyStar]

29. I see that you deleted your last OP

Getting in the mud and all that? Not that you were, of course not, but you didn't hang with your OP did you?

[TidalWave46]

32. After I posted it I thought it would get hidden.

There is one person running who cannot be vetting.

Nothing about that op was in the mud. At all. It was one hundred percent factual.

Getting in the mud, in my opinion, would be like when the Sanders campaign compared Bidens healthcare proposal to the 9-11 terrorist attack. I haven't seen any other campaign come even close to something like that yet it has been a constant from the Sanders campaign.

I just emailed that op to you, word for word. I don't mind if you read it over and over again. Post it as well. It is a gift.

[ChubbyStar]

41. Sorry, no, we are talking about your post...nice volley that was was hilarious!

[TidalWave46]

47. First you make it all about some other op.

Now it is about some post.

My response covered both of them directly. Anywhere else you want to move?

[TidalWave46]

64. That is how I do it.

I take credit for my own actions. I don't blame them on my top surrogates.

Don’t let them get you down about checking profiles and maintaining spreadsheets. They just don’t get organization and commitment.

[ritapria]

14. The Political Grifters and their media allies that work for the "Greens" Party

are peeing in their pants, worried their gravy train will be soon be over …. The consultants , the think tankers, the guys with no work jobs serving on corporate boards ...They will have to find honest work - if Bernie wins the nomination and is elected President .. They won't go down easily ...Let the Slander Begin ….We know it's coming

[Demsrule86]

20. The Greens? Sander hired Stein voters.

[ehrnst]

44. BOOM.

[greatauntoftriplets]

56. Salad is good for you!

Is that what they mean by "greens"?

[Thekaspervote]

17. sanders actually is doing very poorly, with the AA voters and in general

Sanders got 40% of Democratic Primary vote in '16, he's running half that this time. Even if he got 100% of Warren's support, he'd still be behind his '16 vote total. thehill.com

If that isn’t enough new polls out today show Biden leading in IA and NH!

This isn’t bashing... just the facts!! The numbers aren’t there for sanders

[Demsrule86]

27. What a great post! It is the math.

[ehrnst]

22. Jacobin has little room to call anyone else's coverage of Democratic POTUS candidates "ugly"

or innacurate.

[Bummfuzzle]

25. On par with Sanders accusing Biden he was cutting SS?

[StrictlyRockers]

37. Biden has consistently for decades attempted to cut or freeze SS.

Are you unaware of this fact?

[ehrnst]

49. It helps to back up one's claims with links.

Otherwise, one's claims might not be taken seriously.

I'm sure you have them, so please share.

[ehrnst]

74. One lonely link. From the Intercept, no less....

and they don't include links either.

They equate the Democratic Party with the GOP. What a great citation!

Certainly much, much easier than actually researching something on one's own doesn't it?

[sheshe2]

100. ++++

[TwilightZone]

31. If you want to discuss ugly tactics, perhaps you should talk to David Sirota or Nina Turner.

To date, they're responsible for most of the attacks against other candidates in the race.

[brooklynite]

34. "Aux Barricades!!!"

[ehrnst]

117. .....

[NJCher]

35. Bernie has said he did not tell Warren that a woman can't win

he's already made a statement.

[ehrnst]

50. And Warren told people that he did to people just after he said it.

[NJCher]

54. so I guess we're at a draw

lie detector tests, anyone?

[Bummfuzzle]

59. We do know he said it about identity politics. He has been telling us that for a while.

[ehrnst]

67. Not really a draw.

I think it has more to do with who has more to lose by being honest, and who has more to gain by lying.

[NJCher]

73. Bernie doesn't lie

His strongest advantage is his ethos, which is based on decades of behavior that most politicians cannot even come close to emulating.

He's never even been caught plagiarizing. Do you know who has? Do a little research. Most people don't know about this.

Regardless, it is more likely what happened is that Warren misunderstood or misheard what he said. I don't really think of Warren as a liar, either. However, being a communications teacher, I know that communications mistakes are very common.

[ehrnst]

77. Ok.

https://www.politifact.com/vermont/statements/2019/dec/20/bernie-sanders/bernie-sanders-wrong-twice-claim-about-defense-bud/

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/09/politics/fact-check-bernie-sanders-health-care-spending/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/05/bernie-sanderss-false-claim-that-he-has-released-his-full-federal-tax-returns/

And this:

April 15, 2015

“I am one of the exceptions," he said. "I am not going to start a super PAC. I’m not going to go around the country talking to millionaires. Now I'm saving my time because they wouldn't give me any money anyhow and that's fine."

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senator-bernie-sanders-calls-hillary-clinton-foundation-money/story?id=30687863

October 14, 2015

Mr. Sanders was cheered at a fancy campaign fund-raiser at the Hollywood home of Syd Leibovitch, a high-end real estate agent, and his wife, Linda, on Wednesday night.

Tickets for the event sold for a minimum of $250. Those who spent the maximum, $2,700, or who raised $10,000, were invited to a “pre-event reception,” according to the invitation.

The 14 co-hosts included Cindy Asner, the former wife of the actor Ed Asner, the actress Mimi Kennedy, and Benjamin W. Decker, whose website notes that he was once called the “legendary Hollywood P.R. maven” by Forbes magazine, and used to produce “celebrity-driven red-carpet movie premieres.”
...........................................
It was the ninth such event of his campaign, his aides said, according to the pool report.
................................

As Mr. Sanders began speaking to the guests, he joked that the Leibovitch house was a “proletariat” home, and told them, “The truth is there are many people in this country who have money but also believe in social justice.”

Michael Briggs, a spokesman for Mr. Sanders, insisted the Leibovitch event was “not particularly high-dollar,” and said there was no contradiction between such a fund-raiser and the candidate’s campaign-finance oratory about not “sitting around in small rooms talking to very wealthy people.”

https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-has-fund-raiser-at-fancy-hollywood-home/

[SaschaHM]

103. I'm old enough to remember when Bernie was going to be a registered Democrat. nt

[ehrnst]

107. He's only ever been a D during a primary, either for a Senate run or a POTUS run

Never as a Senator. He's always an "I" when voting or serving as an elected official.

[NJCher]

132. Your argument/newspaper stories do not cut it

Your mistake is assuming that in public discourse a person has to be absolutely precise. That is not the case. It is only the case for scientific or formal academic presentation. I will amend Bernie's statements to be absolutely precise (he is under no obligation to be that precise) so you and others can see what I mean.

Bernie said: "I have voted against all of Trump's military budgets."
You are trying to say that because he missed one vote, this statement makes him a liar.

For Bernie to be truthful in your eyes, he could say "I have voted against all of Trump's military budgets except for one where I missed the vote and so therefore there is no record for that one vote."

However, if he went into this amount of detail, eyes would glaze over. For written presentation he should put an asterisk noting he was not present for one vote. For oral presentation, he need not explain to that degree.

You are doing what's known as splitting hairs. Here, from the Oxford Learner's Dictionary, is the definition, and it is what you are doing: " the act of giving too much importance to small and unimportant differences in an argument." Another source: "If someone splits hairs, they argue about very small details or find very small differences between things which are really very similar."

Your second mistake is assuming that in oral discourse one must be absolutely precise. There is no such obligation in that mode or channel of communication.

------------------
In your second example, about per capita health care spending, here is what Bernie said: "we still spend twice as much per capita on health care than any other country."

To make Bernie 100% correct, he would have to amend his statement to the following: "we still spend twice as much per capita on health care than 98% of other countries."

Urm....that's not exactly what I would call a "whopper."

Do you really think there is a significant difference in those statements? Bernie could actually use the second statement, the one I have rephrased, and have the same impact.

Again, hair splitting.

Your argument is made even weaker when one considers that Bernie made no reference to the countries in the OECD. There are 195-196 countries in the world to which he probably referred.

-------------
Tax return. I couldn't get to the Washington Post because of the firewall, so I searched for other forms of this article and I found this:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0416/fact_checker040516.php3

Having read it, you are again splitting hairs to be able to call him a liar. He released 2014 because they had not yet done 2016. What is wrong with the following?

There is one entry from 2014 available for Sanders on the Tax History Project website: a Form 1040 (a summary of his federal income tax return) and a one-page Vermont state income tax return. The campaign referred to this entry when we inquired about Sanders's claim.

Sanders and his wife reported a total income of $205,617 in 2014. The vast majority came from his Senate salary ($156,441 after contributions to savings and health insurance). They paid $27,653 in federal income tax and $7,903 in Vermont in 2014.

The couple received another $46,213 in Social Security benefits, and $39,281 of it was taxable.

Let me break the news to you gently: anybody who has been in Congress as long as Bernie has and who is reporting these pitifully small amounts is not hiding anything. He is operating in a culture (the Congress) where half its members are millionaires.

I just looked at my 1040 and what was on the pages behind it. For the life of me, I could not see any place on that return where one could hide something embarrassing. Go look at your own and tell me differently if you can.

I'm seeing a pattern in your record of his "lies." Your examples are misrepresentations themselves. I wouldn't exactly call them "lies," but they stretch the boundaries of credulity. No serious person who reads them with a critical eye is going to walk away from your examples and think that Bernie is a liar.

I'd tackle your last one but it is obvious it's the same-old same-old as what you've tried to promote as a "lie" and it won't measure up to the standard. Waste of my time.

[ehrnst]

136. Goalposts moved. Gotcha.

Some politicians "make mistakes" or are "imprecise" while the others are "liars."

[NJCher]

138. goalposts weren't moved

You just were not aware of what is considered correct in public speaking and writing. You were uninformed (we do teach this in college--usually in public speaking) but maybe you weren't listening that day.

You need to check a few college texts and they will support my position. Then you need to publicly apologize to Bernie for trying to make him out as a liar.

You can even do a simple internet search and it will support my position. Do you know the correct search terms?

[ehrnst]

143. Yes, they were.

You are the one who is "uniformed," and rather piqued about being called out on it, clearly.

Also, you yourself need to publicly apologize for calling Warren a liar, even though I don't think you were being malicious.

Just perhaps applying some different standards to Senator Sanders than any other candidate, and being emotional about the idea of Senator Sanders making a "communications mistake."

You go first.

[ehrnst]

109. ...

[NJCher]

125. I'll read your material

as soon as I'm off work.

[sheshe2]

128. Warren confimed that he did.

I am sure you would not disbelieve her word on it.

[NJCher]

133. see my post 73

Warren is not immune to a communications misunderstanding.

None of us are.

For Bernie to have said that, he would contradict decades of promoting equality. Not likely.

[ehrnst]

137. Senator Sanders is not immune to being mistaken about something he said or did.

As we've seen:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=420801

For Warren to have lied about Bernie would contradict the praise she has had for him and his issues.

[NJCher]

139. I'll take decade upon decade of credibility on Bernie's part

over your post which contains distortions. In all fairness, you probably just don't know. I don't really think you're malicious, but an apology is in order.

[ehrnst]

140. In all fairness, you no know more than I do. So when you're ready,

I'll take that apology.

My post is thoroughly cited, and are Bernie and his staff's own words, from journalistic sources.

If you think that's "distortion" take it up with Senator Sanders. If you find it unsettling, take it up with Senator Sanders.

[NJCher]

141. actually, I do

but I'm not going to wave my credentials around.

So tell me about your career in public speaking, English, academic writing, journalism, etc. Something tells me you'll be "waiving" my request.

[ehrnst]

142. Because of course you're not going to. But you expect others to, or simply accept that your

credentials are more "waveable," so so speak. No, it doesn't work that way.

If you want your opinion to be shored up by "credentials" then you wave them. You don't tell others to produce their resume, or simply grant you the deference of authority you demand. If you want a LinkedIn pissing contest, go there, not a discussion board with an alias.

Still waiting for that apology, BTW.

And do let us know what the sources that I cited have to say about their "distortions."



I'll take the far greater respect and regard that her peers have for her, and her greater progressive accomplishments in a much shorter career as evidence for her credibility. Also, because she is being a grownup.

“I thought a woman could win; he disagreed,” she said, adding: “I have no interest in discussing this private meeting any further because Bernie and I have far more in common than our differences on punditry.”

[StrictlyRockers]

36. Fascinating

yup

[stonecutter357]

45. Disgusting OP !

It's Sanders Supporters making it Ugly !

[The Valley Below]

55. Irony is dead.

[ehrnst]

68. Indeed. (nt)

[betsuni]

120. Irony, reality, history, the meaning of words.

Dead or not feeling well at all.

[jalan48]

57. The Health Insurance Industry is not happy! If Bernie gets his way they won't be able to make

money off of our sick and suffering fellow citizens. It's Un-American!

[Hav]

58. Jacobin, the Sanders propaganda outlet,

should be seen on the same level as Fox News when it comes to the truth.

There is no one as ugly and dishonest in their tactics as the attack dogs of the Sanders campaign, it's not even close.
After all the shit they pull, they now fear that someone could return the favor against Sanders?

[Submariner]

66. You're fooling yourself to think a 79 year old man who just had his 1st heart attack

is going to beat the GOP who has turned the word socialist into a dirty word. Trump would have every cardiologist in the country predicting Sanders next heart attack. It's not a good GOTV model.

[vsrazdem]

75. OMFG. I can't wait until this primary is over!!!

[dhol82]

126. May I hope you will vote for whomever the Dem candidate is?

[vsrazdem]

129. Absolutely, and It can't come too soon for me. I already sick of all the infighting, it's like a

bunch of toddlers

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

79. Preemptive whining?

[underthematrix]

81. May I recommend a soothing intellectual balm

Read or listen to Jon Meacham's The Soul of America. It will keep you calm, focused and hopeful.

[janterry]

83. I like Bernie

I'll vote for the most progressive candidate who has a chance of winning. Bernie, Warren. Either one is fine by me.

[SaschaHM]

84. Bernie called HRC unqualified in 2016.

His supporters cheered "Lock her up" at his rallies.

Prominent surrogates dog whistled the fact that Hillary was winning the black vote by saying she wouldn't be winning if her voters were informed or if the "old confederacy" weren't allowed to vote.

Super Delegates were left threatening messages.

Nina Turner led a walkout of the DNC on behalf of Jill Stein.

His delegates booed the mention of Hillary's named during the convention.

David Sirota was attacking Beto relentlessly while doing under the table work for Sanders.

Briahna Gray tweeted that John Lewis would throw cats under the bus on behalf of the DNC and still got hired.

Warren has been hounded since 2016 because she wouldn't endorse the guy.

It's been ugly and it's gotten even uglier.

Thank god people are willing to fight back.

[Kurt V.]

86. well , this thread is....lively.

[JoeOtterbein]

87. We know. We remember 2016 and Hillary thanked Bernie for dismissing the fake "emails"...

...controversy.

And when Bernie lost, we proved our Dem confides by working to elect Hillary in the GE.

This year Hillary will work to elect Bernie in the 2020 GE!

[relayerbob]

93. I reiterate

I don't tolerate people trying to make themselves look good by making others (especially their teammates) look bad. Not in sports, not in music, not in business, not in my employees and not in my personal life. I sure the hell am not going to tolerate it in politicians. It's a sign that they are petty, weak and incapable of leadership.

[beastie boy]

94. No, the 2020 election is not about being polite.

It's about distributing talking points to volunteers to make sure they call Warren "elitist".

And it's about getting your totally unbiased, absolutely measured, incredibly accurate and devoid of any spin quotes from Jacobin.

[bucolic_frolic]

95. What's at stake is defeating Donald Trump

or whoever the Republican nominee is. Nothing more or less. If that fails, all else is lost.

[Autumn]

97. It already is. Open lies and people spewing pure unfounded garbage accusations .

Their fear reeks of flop sweat. Fuck em.

[relayerbob]

99. And this attitude is why ...

Sanders is not on my short list

[Autumn]

101. I don't care where he is on your list. I know where he is on mine.

[relayerbob]

106. Of course you don't care

That's the whole point. That arrogance is why Trump is in the White House right now

[Autumn]

122. Not even close. But nice try. Arrogance had nothing to do with Trump in the White House.

There are a dozen reasons why the Orange Ass got elected. Arrogance on the voters behalf had nothing to do with it. Nada, nothing. As for being arrogant ? You might look in a mirror. Try to discuss the candidate not the supporters.
Good luck with your endeavors.

[relayerbob]

131. Yawn. Same as it ever was

I'll vote for the actual progressive in the race

[zentrum]

98. The forces that will do anything

.....to defeat a real economic progressive. They are coming. Tragic, really.

[sellitman]

110. Gee this place can sure cheer you up real fast.

I hope people here can drop their prejudices in time for the main show. It will be a bigger shit show than this one by a mile.

[Evolve Dammit]

119. Seriously. This crap will ensure 45 another 4 years toward our demise. It's rabid.

[totodeinhere]

118. I'm not worried about it. Bernie will handle it with grace. n/t

[dhol82]

127. As much grace as he had in 2016?

Which was grudging at best.

[randr]

121. Nothing we want, zero, will happen

if we don't beat Trump. A single minded, unified effort needs to be waged.
Beat Trump and take the Senate all else will come our way

[NurseJackie]

123. Jacobin...

[UniteFightBack]

124. The 2020 election is about beating dotard dump. That's mentioned last. And LOL 'run away

with the nomination'. Yeah OK.

[Lordquinton]

134. This thread is filled with examples

Right on cue.

[ehrnst]

144. The irony... (nt)