Bernie is the *only* candidate who has been "vetted."

[DanTex]

Contrary to the talking point we keep hearing. There is no "oppo" being dropped on anyone but Sanders. Bernie in particular has been running a positive, issue-based campaign, which is a good thing. Bernie will probably be the nominee, but if he isn't I'd rather not have the GOP be able to point back to the primary and say "even Bernie thinks that _______ is a bad candidate for ______ reason." The only other candidate which has seen any kind of vetting is Bloomberg, with Warren bringing to light some of his comments about women. But that pales in comparison to the smears that have been flying at Bernie.

Let's be clear, though, this isn't because there is no oppo on the other candidates. There is oppo on all candidates, and the GOP will unload, dishonestly, on whoever we nominate. Bernie isn't the only candidate who said some dumb thing a long time ago that can be taken out of context. Trump has already telegraphed some of the attacks he's planning to use on other candidates. It is to the credit of Bernie and the other Dems that they haven't gone to the gutter with that stuff.

Except for against Bernie, where Bloomberg at least, has gone full smear mode, as has the media, and some of the other candidates have disappointingly hopped on for the ride. Why? I'd say a combination of Bernie being the frontrunner and also the establishment and the media generally being against Bernie.

Still, whatever the reason is, Bernie is clearly more vetted than any other candidate. So if nominating a vetted candidate is important to you, Bernie's your top choice.

[samnsara]

1. sorry....

[honest.abe]

2. The he has nothing to worry about being further vetted.

[DanTex]

18. The problem with Dems smearing each other is giving the GOP ammunition.

The whole point is to beat Trump, and giving the GOP clips saying "even this other Dem said _________ about Bernie" is not helpful. The same goes for any other candidate.

[honest.abe]

22. Well its way too late for that kind of sensible talk.

The knives are out all over.

[brush]

36. Trust me. Repugs already have those clips and many more. They're just waiting to release it if...

Sanders gets the Dem nod.

[DanTex]

37. I know. And for other candidates too.

The point is that when Dems attack other Dems, then the GOP can use that to say "see, even Dems think this is bad."

[brush]

42. The oppo on Sanders is exponentially more damaging than on anyone else though.

[PatSeg]

49. If we want to win against Trump in November,

we damn well sure better vet our candidates before they take on Trump. Otherwise, the day after the election, people will be asking, "What the hell were they thinking?"

[TwilightZone]

3. hahahahahaha, no.

[Demsrule86]

4. Are you kidding? This is a tiny bit of what will come...and other candidates don't have this sort

of baggage.

[Perseus]

21. I like Biden, not crazy about him, but I like him. Now, if someone has baggage, that is Biden

Let us support any candidate who wins the nomination, lets prepare do defend him/her, lets beat the creature and the GOP and stop the bickering.

[bucolic_frolic]

5. That is simply total nonsense and totally like Trump's Whining

Really a piece of opinion that has no basis in fact. Nothing but lies in my opinion.

[DanTex]

20. It's true though. Oppo is being dropped on Bernie, and not the others. Bernie's the most vetted.

[bucolic_frolic]

29. It it not true, it is totally comprised of lies

Every candidate has been vetted to a very great degree. Oppo is not vetting, it's a public venting of past positions and candidate personal and professional history.

[quickesst]

38. trump and his gang....

.... risked impeachment and possible prison time to derail Joe Biden's campaign, and you can write this OP with a straight face? They barely mentioned Bernie's name until he became the front runner, and then all I've heard from trump is telling Bernie to hang in there, and not let them take anything away from you. trump is chomping at the bit to take Bernie on.

[ehrnst]

61. +1000.

[quickesst]

62. Thanks ehrnst.

[doxyluv13]

6. He ran in 2016 and the Clinton machine threw everything they had at him.

...so it's preposterous to say he hasn't been vetted.

[Devil Child]

10. This right here N/T

[Fresh_Start]

13. never saw any ad talking about Bernie praising the people shouting yankees must die

so not, bernie wasn't vetted.

[Hav]

15. Nonsense

He was treated like a baby. There was also no need, Hillary won it comfortably.
He wasn't dragged for his fantasies about rape and the kiddie touching stuff.

[honest.abe]

25. Totally not true.

The Clinton campaign was being extremely careful not to come off too strong going after Sanders in fear his hardcore supporters would go apeshit. In the end it didnt matter.. they did go apeshit.

[still_one]

30. +++

[rzemanfl]

31. I will wash socks. You can read this-

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287578577

[brush]

40. You have no idea. Clinton held back on all the damaging oppo on Sanders. The repugs won't though.

[Rorey]

52. Perhaps the Clinton machine did that

But that's NOT saying the Repukes don't have MORE.

Gotta be realistic.

[Codeine]

63. "The Clinton Machine"

Is this FreeRepublic or some shit?!

[Fresh_Start]

7. Bernie told 9th graders that US in vietnam was almost as bad as Hitler

During his 1972 gubernatorial run, Senator Bernie Sanders told high school students that the U.S. had committed acts in its war with Vietnam that were “almost as bad as what Hitler did.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/bernie-sanders-in-1972-told-ninth-graders-the-us-committed-acts-in-vietnam-%E2%80%9Calmost-as-bad-as-what-hitler-did%E2%80%9D/ar-BBZw3H2

should play well in Florida, should play well with the hundreds of thousands of people who lost family members in vietnam.

[HarlanPepper]

14. There is an endless supply of shit like this it seems.

It’ll be the “emails” of 2020 for the media. Probably even better from a ratings standpoint.

[Perseus]

28. How would you categorize the madness in Vietnam?

How many people were killed?

From the USA side more than 50,000

How many Vietnamese died?

Total deaths in the Vietnam War
Not until 1995 did Vietnam release its official estimate of war dead: As many as 2 million civilians on both sides and some 1.1 million North Vietnamese and Viet Cong fighters. The U.S. military has estimated that between 200,000 and 250,000 South Vietnamese soldiers died in the war.

Now WW2, Germany:
The German government reported that its records list 4.3 million dead and missing military personnel. Civilian deaths during the war include air raid deaths, estimates of German civilians killed only by Allied strategic bombing have ranged from around 350,000 to 500,000.

Deaths by Country
===============================================================
Country-------------------------Military Deaths-----------------------Total Civilian & Military Deaths
===============================================================
Soviet Union----------------8,800,000-10,700,000---------------------------24,000,000
United Kingdom-------------------383,600----------------------------------------450,700
United States----------------------416,800----------------------------------------418,500
Yugoslavia-------------------------446,000--------------------------------------1,000,000

More at the link:
[link:https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war|

One was a "Vietnam War", the other was a "World War"

[Fresh_Start]

35. It wasn't an ethnic cleansing

based a fundamentally flawed belief in the superiority of the master race.

[Perseus]

50. Semantics, the results are the same, a lot of innocent people dead...please...

Iraq war...more semantics? Wasn't that a "Crusade" as G. W. Bush put it?

The end result is the same, and the motive is the same too, a lot of innocent people dead, a lot of destruction, a lot of torture, a lot of private interests, a few people making money, a lot of different reasons for going to war.

The justifications change case by case but the process, the madness are exactly the same. You can call it whatever you want, the goal is to destroy and kill, and if let unchecked there would be ethnic cleansing. Isn't that why most of the wars the USA gets engaged in are about? Our superiority as a race?

J has a Lamborghini, K has a Toyota corolla, they both have four wheels, they both take you from point A to point B, yes the cost is higher for the Lamborghini, but at the end of the day they give the owner the same service, besides the vanity side of course.

Call it what you want, come up with the reason that you want, it is all the same, what is not the same is people trying to make differences where there are none to justify an argument.

[Devil Child]

8. I agree. Sen. Sanders has been aggressively vetted by media and party establishment

Since he became a serious and viable primary candidate back in 2016. I’ve been seeing pretty much the same content posted here since 2016 primaries in some capacity when used to criticize Sen. Sanders.

[HarlanPepper]

9. Bahahaha!

The little kid thing today was news to me. So was the orgasms cause cancer bit! Fun little tidbits for the media every day leading up to the election. That’s gonna be great

[George II]

19. It was LACK of orgasms, which might be an even worse comment.

[The_Counsel]

11. I Have a Feeling Adam Schiff Will Have a Slightly Different Opinion on This.

The Lyin' King was impeached because he smeared Biden, who'd been "vetted" since the 1980's.

Mr. Bloomberg is being "vetted" over his money, Stop and Frisk, and his treatment of women in the past, even as we speak.

They're ALL being "vetted." The question is "how do each respond?"

[DanTex]

27. The GOP has tried to smear Biden with the Ukraine stuff, yes. Not the Dems though.

None of the Dems have touched that. Which is to their credit, Dems shouldn't be pushing smears against other Dems, even in the name of "vetting." And if any Dem had decided to try to bring up the Ukraine bullshit against Biden, I'd be the first to call them out, just like I do when people try to smear Bernie by taking 50-year old videos out of context or calling him "communist."

[The_Counsel]

43. My Point Is They're ALL Being "Vetted" in Some Way or Another.

The O/P suggests that Bernie is the ONLY one being vetted, which just isn't true.

When all the other candidates pounded on Biden, then piled on, because he was the perceived front runner, no one seemed to have a problem with it. Same for Warren. Same for Bloomberg. Now that Bernie is the front runner, and is being vetted, his supporters now would have us believe it's a cardinal sin.

Maybe y'all are right, but where was this opinion when it was a candidate not named "Bernie Sanders" getting vetted with nonsense? Just sayin'....

[beerandjesus]

12. Been a while since anyone's talked about Biden fast-tracking Clarence Thomas, hasn't it?

There was talk about Anita Hill early on, but you scratch the surface and it's even worse: He shit on Anita Hill in order replace Thurgood Marshall, an American hero and icon, with Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court. He shit on Anita Hill in order to fill the Supreme Court's "black seat" with an unqualified hack, in a racist parody of affirmative action.

There's some "vetting" I'd like to hear people talking about......

[oasis]

44. The Hill/Thomas lead balloon needs plenty more air. Keep on pumping.

[bucolic_frolic]

16. That's a paranoid pity party that divides Democrats and delights Trump and Putin

[Sloumeau]

17. That you would assert that Senator Bernie Sanders has in any way been more vetted than...

former Vice President Joe Biden is amazing.

[blue-wave]

23. Ha! Thanks for the laugh!

If you think Bernie has been thoroughly vetted, try going through the vetting Joe Biden has experienced and surviving and thriving like Joe. Bernie ain't seen nothing yet. Wait till it really begins.

[George II]

24. The Onion.

[bucolic_frolic]

32. Really! This type of OP broadside to goad and infuriate truth is not serving the party well

No amount of truth will change his opinion. Maybe it's from Russia?

[dalton99a]

55. FYI The Onion is 100% Bernie Bro:

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/magazine/2020/02/23/the-onion-bernie-sanders-2020-satire-politics-democrats-116620
How ‘The Onion’ Went Full-On Bernie Bro

[grossproffit]

26. Did April 1st come early? Hey, I see you're not "undecided" anymore.

[Arkansas Granny]

33. Bernie has never been vetted by the right wing slime machine.

[LanternWaste]

34. What data set and objective measure are you using to reach that conclusion?

Or (I and find this more likely...) is it just another allegation lacking any real evidence to support it on its own... you k'now, just sayin' stuff again and clickin' your heels together three times in the hope your wish becomes non-fiction.

"Still, whatever the reason, you've clearly failed top support your premise in any meaningful or substantive way.."

Again.

[beastie boy]

39. If Bernie gets to decide what "vetting" means, you may have a point.

But something tells me no dictionary publisher will rush to change their definition of the word based on what bernie says...

[awesomerwb1]

41. The ****only**** candidate to have been vetted

Absolutely!!! Without a doubt!!!! No one else has been """vetted""" yet.

We don't even know who the other candidates are!!!!

[beachbumbob]

45. you are kidding me right? Wait until the photos of bernie marching with

socialist worker party hits the TV as well as his connection with the Marxist Party in early 1980s. None of this has been run on the airwaves at all by any democratic opponent but we know RNC is chomping at the bit

[Perseus]

53. Can you please provide a link?

The picture attributed to Bernie marching with Fidel Castro was taken in 1959, Bernie was graduating from high school in 1959. Are we on a similar path here with the picture you speak of?

Give us a link, support your argument please.

[Perseus]

59. Hmmm, as always, a big statement not followed by proof.

That is what it has come to, even here at DU and I never thought it would happen here, but...

Big statements, big accusations without proofs, and sometimes written in upper-case...How sad, really.

[MineralMan]

46. What a Great Piece of Satirical Writing!

[bunny planet]

47. Here's some more vetting for Bloomie

https://mobile.twitter.com/CANCEL_SAM/status/1232097629380710400

[nolabear]

48. You do realize Joe was VP, right?

[Perseus]

51. And your point is?

[nolabear]

56. Considerable vetting.

[OhZone]

54. *NOT

[grantcart]

57. This wins the award for most delusional post of the year

Subjects not covered

1) The cost of Sanders massive transfer of wealth

2) The claim that we need a massive revolution in health care to catch up with Canada when in fact federal funds account for 70% of medical spending and the US is now 60% (VA, Medicare, Medicaid, Obama care subsidies) and by adding a public option we would be at Canada's level.

3) That Sanders family outstanding record of diverting funds to their children and gross mismanagement. Mrs Sanders as President of a private college diverted funds to her daughter to add woodworking to a liberal arts college, made ill advised property purchases and drove a healthy private college into bankruptcy. Sen Sanders set up the Sanders Institute and raised millions with almost no activity associated with "think tanks". Family members were put on the payroll including his step son who has no academic credentials and whose most significant job was an entry level clerk at a snow boarding shop. This some how qualified him for a six figure salary as CEO. No significant grants or work done the Sanders Institute closed in disgrace as all contributors declined to continue.

4) The lack of support among his colleagues in the Senate and elected officials in Vermont.

5) Sanders dismal record of being the main architect of a single piece of legislation in his decades in Congress and his practice of adding his name as co sponsor to other legislation that already has overwhelming support.

6) Sanders misunderstanding of the PPP

7) Sanders long history of patronizing and reckless attacks against the Democratic Party including his bitterness at not being given a major role during Obama era Senate leadership and his attempt to pay back with a primary challenge to embarrass Obama

But let's just leave it with the greatest one occurring in real time

An elderly man who appears not to be in good health who will be on his 80s during his Presidency and just had a heart attack and he is refusing to disclose his entire medical record.

Even the most loyal Sanders devotee has to agree that what is held secret cannot be vetted, right?

So obviously he is keeping back something that is really really damaging. What is Sanders afraid of and why won't he release his health records like all DEMOCRATIC Presidential candidates.

Sanders is the least vetted candidate to reach front runner status. Mist of the other candidates have avoided asking tough questions, that will change.

We know Sanders response will be "unfair, unfair, unfair" because if he loses a state, an argument or the nomination it can only be because it's unfair.

That is the issue that is the least vetted issue on Sanders: how someone so embittered, constantly asserting he has never made an improper act or vote, someone who is always playing the victim, always attacking his "team mates" could be considered as a person to unite the party or lead the country.

[Gothmog]

58. There is a ton of oppo out there but sanders but sanders has not really been vetted yet

I am very worried about down ballot races. sanders is a very weak candidate and would be easy for trump to destroy. In addition to the well written 101 page memorandum with oppo on sanders with a 1000 pages of backup from the Clinton campaign trump has his own oppo file on sanders that would destroy such a weak and divisive candidate like sanders.

Link to tweet

trump had a two foot thick book of oppo research on Sanders http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

They ignored the fact that Sanders had not yet faced a real campaign against him. Clinton was in the delicate position of dealing with a large portion of voters who treated Sanders more like the Messiah than just another candidate. She was playing the long game—attacking Sanders strongly enough to win, but gently enough to avoid alienating his supporters. Given her overwhelming support from communities of color—for example, about 70 percent of African-American voters cast their ballot for her—Clinton had a firewall that would be difficult for Sanders to breach....

So what would have happened when Sanders hit a real opponent, someone who did not care about alienating the young college voters in his base? I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers....

The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.) In other words, the belief that Sanders would have walked into the White House based on polls taken before anyone really attacked him is a delusion built on a scaffolding of political ignorance.

sanders was such a weak primary candidate that the Clinton campaign did not use its oppo but trump would have fun destroying such a weak candidate like sanders

I will vote for the nominee of the party but I fear that the nomination of sanders will lead to a Speaker Kevin McCarthy

[ehrnst]

60. Lol. The umbrage and cries of "smears!!!" whenever something that is unfamiliar to some supporters

is evidence that Sanders has not been thoroughly vetted.

You're welcome.