HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » realmirage » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »

realmirage

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Apr 11, 2016, 08:34 PM
Number of posts: 2,117

Journal Archives

Clock is ticking Bernie supporters

Those who are clear thinking democrats will know Hillary is our nominee and shift support. Those who have gone off the cliff... Meltdown this time tomorrow.

Bernie to supporters: enough with Hillary's emails

Bernie made it very clear that Hillary's emails are a ridiculous distraction that no one cares about, or should care about, and that the differences between them are minor in comparison to how they both differ from republicans.

That was until Bernie started to lose. Then he showed that emotion can easily get the better of him, a bad sign for anyone seeking one of the most stressful jobs in the world.

When faced with defeat in New York, Bernie abandoned his sense of reason and clarity of mind, in order to win at all costs.

Hillary immediately became a hideous monster that must be defeated even if it means taking away the will of the people by swaying superdelegates, regardless of who earned more votes from the people.

This goes beyond any sour grapes Hillary displayed in 08.

This is what led Paul Song to take his cue from Bernie and go nuclear. This is why some supporters of his are here proclaiming a desire to vote for a non-democrat: because their leader abandoned his role as the clear headed revolutionary and gave the ok for everyone to let emotion call the shots.

If Republicans win, it's back to the horrors of the Bush economy, of religion dictating science policy (remember stem cells?), another 50 years of GOP control of the Supreme Court. For starters.

This is what the sour grapes are saying they would prefer.

Tomorrow this thing will be even more over than it already is. But the truth won't matter. After all, we are humans. And humans like winning, and don't mind flipping over a few board games when the loss is imminent in order to avoid the onset of the emotions of defeat.

The Hillary/Bernie "debating" is becoming comical. Welcome to the Itchy and Scratchy show

[link:|

Bernie supporters currently in stage one and two in the 5 stages of grief

As you can see the forums are flooded with angry Bernie supporters who apparently are starting to realize the math, so I thought this would be a good time to list the famous 5 stages of grief:

Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.

Many are still in stage one (Bernie will win!), more are already in stage 2 (Hillary and her supporters are the devil!, and Bernie or bust!), Jeff Weaver knows the math so he has skipped to stage 3 (the superdelegates will ignore the votes of the people and give it to Bernie!)...

I suspect after Hillary wins NY, which the polls still show she will, Bernie supporters will all move up one stage.

Some will never reach stage 5. But most will remember what they used to know (and fairly, many never forgot): that the republicans are the greatest danger to us all. They will remember the many long lines of the jobless in Bush's aftermath, they will remember the Supreme Court is within our grasp for the first time in ages, they will remember that the republicans ARE the protectors of the wealth gap, they will remember that the real enemy is whatever slithers out of the RNC convention with the nomination. When they see that thing, they'll remember that Bernie and Hillary were always on the same side.

Watching the angry Bernie people's denial of the math is a little sad

It reminds me a little of 08 when Hillary kept thinking she could defeat math. And that was actually a closer race than this one. When I see the angry vitriol against Hillary I also imagine the moment they realize math is real and more people have voted for Hillary. Those new to politics haven't ridden this ride yet. They'll learn what it's all about very soon.

The Vatican is anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion

Will Bernie rail against the pope for being a tool of the Vatican establishment and not a true revolutionary? How dare the pope not refute outright the sins of the church and demand sweeping change!!!!!!

Why is going to the Vatican any big deal?

I can't stand how those "holy men" live in a castle and wear fancy clothes, while surrounded by the poor. I like the current pope but he has met with millions of people, should they all be president too? This was an organization that for thousands of years told people that their unbaptized babies were in hell... Who gives a shit about the Vatican?

Hillary's strategy reveals she understands that she already won

You might be wondering why Hillary hasn't been hitting back at Bernie while he goes full negative. The reason is that she knows the math shows she is going to win, the way the math showed it for Obama in 08. Thus, going negative against Bernie will only alienate his voters which she'll need in November. That's why you see her attacking Trump and Cruz lately instead of Bernie: she's acting like the nominee because essentially she already is.

Bernie knows that because of the math he has nothing to lose and may as well pull out all the stops and hope one of his Hail Mary passes works. The unfortunate result of his negative turn is that his supporters have gone on full attack against Hillary supporters, which, right now is irritating to Hillary supporters, but all they need to remember is that this thing is, arguably, already over.

Of course, if some crazy thing were to happen, like she was arrested (which anyone who follows the facts knows won't happen) that would cause Hillary to lose the big primaries coming up, Bernie has a chance. But those are fantasies right now.

This thing is playing out to its slow end. Be patient. In the end, as they say on Always Sunny, reason will prevail.

Jane Sanders: Bernie and I Will Vote Hillary if We Have To


In a candid interview with Tim Teeman, a straight-shooting Jane Sanders talks superdelegates, her husband’s temperament, the need for party unity, and missing her family.

Jane Sanders and her husband Bernie will support Hillary Clinton if the latter beats Bernie Sanders in the Democratic presidential nomination race.

Mrs. Sanders, in an interview with The Daily Beast on Wednesday, said they would hope Bernie’s supporters would follow their lead.

Conversely, if Bernie Sanders secured the nomination, Mrs. Sanders said she hoped Clinton and her supporters would support him.

In a wide-ranging, candid interview, Mrs. Sanders also said the superdelegate system—currently weighted significantly in Clinton’s favor—was unfair, yet predicted that she is hopeful that a number of those superdelegates, and their thousands of votes, could be convinced to switch their support from Clinton to her husband.

The Daily Beast spoke to Mrs. Sanders with just hours to go before Bernie Sanders’ rally in New York’s Washington Square, and just a week until New York Democrats pick a primary winner.

“I know Donald Trump has complained about the system,” Mrs. Sanders said. “We're not going to complain about it. We knew the rules going in. We don't like the rules. We don't think it’s good for democracy. I think it’s crazy that in New York anybody who wanted to vote for Bernie had to make a change last October to say they were in the Democratic Party. Anybody who is independent cannot vote.”

Mrs. Sanders said her husband’s campaign was “trying to reinvigorate the party and we are. We are bringing many, many more people in across the country and yet in New York they’re slamming the door on those people. They can’t have a voice. That seems counterproductive to what the Democratic Party wants to accomplish in terms of winning not just the presidency, but to win governors’ seats and seats in the House and Senate.”

She dismissed Clinton campaign claims that Bernie’s camp was attempting to ‘rig’ the election by ‘flipping’ the votes of superdelegates. “How could we be rigging it? We’re not in charge of anything,” she said, laughing.

“Superdelegates, first off, I think, are silly. They're 30 percent of the vote that a candidate needs to become the nominee. How fair is that? I am a voter. I have one vote, yet you’re a superdelegate and count for thousands and thousands of votes. That doesn't make any sense at all. ‘One person, one vote’ is what democracy is supposed to be about.”

The ‘rigging’ claims did not “make sense,” Mrs. Sanders said.

“In 2008, many superdelegates had signed up for Hillary Clinton, very early, before Barack Obama.”

The same was true this year, though this time the opponent was Bernie Sanders, she said.

“In the end in 2008, the superdelegates moved to Barack Obama. This year, the superdelegates have not been counted yet, their votes have not been cast. Some are saying now they support Hillary Clinton. About half.

“If the superdelegates are using their judgment, my hope is that they are looking at what is happening in this race—that he [Bernie Sanders] has won eight of the nine most recent races, that he has far better polling numbers against all the Republicans, that he can get not just Democrats but Independents.

“Even in his last Senate race, 25 percent of Republicans in our state voted for him—and we can do that nationally as well. He’s in a much better position to be the Democratic Party candidate. Superdelegates will make up their minds. It has nothing to do with rigging, but it could happen just like it happened in 2008.”
Get The Beast In Your Inbox!
Daily DigestStart and finish your day with the smartest, sharpest takes from The Daily Beast
Cheat SheetA speedy, smart summary of news and must-reads from The Daily Beast and across the Web
By clicking "Subscribe," you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

On the more rancorous exchanges between the Sanders and Clinton campaigns, Mrs. Sanders said, “I think if you compare it to the Republicans it’s nothing. I think it’s been difficult for us to have distortions of the record, when really what we want to focus on is a clear choice between the two candidates.”

For Mrs. Sanders, “there is a stark difference” between her husband and Hillary Clinton, “in a number of areas. That’s what we should be talking about, that's good for democracy, that's what people need to hear.”

When asked if she ever advised her husband to moderate his tone, Mrs. Sanders said he was being criticized over a statement he made in response to the Clinton strategy to “disqualify and defeat” him, “and worry about uniting the party later.”

Mrs. Sanders was referring to an unnamed top Clinton advisor’s battle plan, as conveyed to CNN last week.

“Then we watched surrogate after surrogate and Secretary Clinton herself on the air attempting to disqualify him, which means to make [him seem] unqualified,” Mrs. Sanders said.

She said that her husband, in response, “had said ‘Let’s talk about the issues’ about what makes somebody unqualified.

“His attempt may not have been as articulate as we might have preferred, but his attempt was to turn the page to say, ‘Let’s look at trade: Secretary Clinton is pro-free trade, pro-NAFTA, pro permanent trade relations with China, and pro-TPP [the Trans-Pacific Partnership], until the very end, after it was too late.’”

Her husband, she added, had noted that Clinton had voted in favor of the Iraq War, having seen the same information that had led Bernie Sanders to vote against it.

Mrs. Sanders said, “Secretary Clinton has a regime change policy that was borne out of Libya. Bernie does not believe in regime change policy. He was trying to say, ‘OK, if you’re looking at who’s qualified, lets look at the qualifications you’re looking for as a voter.’ I think the media has made more of it than either candidate.”

This reporter asked Mrs. Sanders if she were concerned that voters in both the Clinton and Sanders camps were so partisan they would not vote for the other Democratic candidate in a general election. She replied that “they [Democrat voters] were feeling annoyed at both sides. If Bernie wins, hopefully Secretary Clinton’s supporters will support him, and if she wins we hope our supporters will support her. It’s nowhere near as rancorous as it was between Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton back then.”

Would her husband support Clinton if she became the candidate?

“I think both of them will support the other,” said Mrs. Sanders.

Her husband’s temperament has also come under scrutiny. When asked if she had ever advised him to “take it down a notch,” Mrs. Sanders said, “No, no, no.”

“I think everybody has seemed annoyed at times,” she added. “I remember Secretary Clinton looking quite angry. I think we’re talking about important issues that affect people’s lives. 25 percent of our children in America live in poverty. Yeah, that’s something to be angry about. Climate change is real, and the fossil fuel industry is pouring tons and tons of money into campaign contributions. That's something to be angry about.

“You look: 18,500 people in the South Bronx last week. Nobody was worried about his temperament. They were wild about his ideas he was bringing forth and saying, ‘We are with you, we are going to work for the same ideas.’”

When asked if her husband’s success had surprised them both—given that early consensus seemed to favor a smooth coronation for Clinton—Mrs. Sanders replied: “We knew that his ideas were mainstream American ideas. If he had a fair hearing we knew they would resonate. We were surprised at how fervently they have been embraced by young voters, and how many people who are disenfranchised voters: people who had given up on the system are coming back.

“It has been humbling and quite an honor to have that kind of support and encouragement and commitment to the future. So I think we were surprised to that. We were more intellectually thinking they would resonate. We didn’t realize emotionally how much they would resonate both for people and for us.”

For Mrs. Sanders personally, the campaign has proven “exhilarating and wonderful in terms of meeting so many people around the country, and learning about specific issues”—she cited “Latinos,” “immigration,” and “Native Americans”—but also in terms of understanding and hearing that the general issues that Bernie Sanders raises are, she said, issues of concern for all Americans.

“They want a government of the people, by the people and for the people. They want a government that recognizes that at the center of policy should be a concern for Americans’ quality of life, and their ability to live life in security and dignity by just working hard and getting a fair shake.”

Had the campaign bought her more or less turmoil than she had expected?

“I wouldn't say turmoil,” Mrs. Sanders replied. “I would say it’s hard to be away from the kids and the grandkids as much, but it’s an honor to be able to be part of this. And it’s been very invigorating for me to see the support, interest, and commitment to transform this country to what we all want it to be ideally, and people are willing to do the work and support Bernie in that endeavor. It’s wonderful.”

I asked Mrs. Sanders if she had thought about the possibility of living in the White House.

“I haven’t, you know,” she said. “I mean, I’m more focused on what we could do if he gets into the White House.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/13/jane-sanders-we-would-vote-hillary-but-the-superdelegate-system-sucks.html

Bernie on voting for candidates who don't agree with him on all issues

After 4 years of Bush, Sanders said the following:

"Not only am I going to vote for John Kerry, I am going to run around this country and do everything I can to dissuade people from voting for Ralph Nader...I am going to do everything I can, while I have differences with John Kerry, to make sure that he is elected."

- Bernie Sanders 2004
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »