Bernie Sanders: My Dem Opponents Want Black, Gay, Female, Latino Candidates “Regardless Of What They Stand For”

Yes Bernie, both parties work for the same masters, but so do you.

That’s why you can never vote for far-left candidates. You think labor laws and housing protections for LGBT — working class LGBT (speaking on his level) is a priority for him? No. It’s 100 on a list of 100.

He is correct.

He is correct r3, but he is also someone who has actually never worked a day in his life.

False, R4.

Fuck this ancient cunt.

#NotADemocrat

It’s true. Read any news about FIRST FEMALE MUSLIM IN CONGRESS! FIRST BISEXUAL SENATOR! FIRST TRANSGENDER REPRESENTATIVE! ANDRE GILLUM! STACEY ABRAMS!

The media never talks policy. There were a lot of fantastic women who won in the midterms, but WHITE women are soooo passé in Congress now.

It’s infantile and so ignorant but here we are.

R7 left “first gay governor” out of his rant. I guess gay governor’s are so passe’.

Kamala is making someone uncomfortable.

He’s not wrong. We do need a broader range of people in the government, but so many people seem to be willing to forgive terrible policy in order to achieve that goal. I mean, look at Kamala Harris’s history.

Remember when Bill Clinton said that people were voting for Barack Obama because he was black? How well did THAT go over? Is this the road Bernie is gonna go down. He's turning into Trump.

This is why the left is dying. It's been broken up into different tribes by identity politics over the last 20 years and now it's eating itself alive. The Dems better figure out what they stand for or this next election is going to be an even bigger shit show than the last one.

Not disagreeing with you R12, but everything you say about the Democrats could apply just as easily to the Republicans.

Thet Senator from Colorado who tore into Ted Cruz yesterday made me stare at the screen and say, "Why isn't this man running?"

True, r13. Maybe we just need a new party.

Dear Bernie,

You will not win against Trumpf, no matter how correct you are. America does not want YOU.

He is wrong. Factually wrong. I thank him for these remarks because they effectively set fire to his platform. Perfect. He needs (along with Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton) to move into an “emeritus” status.

So he'll be the Nake white guy

The only people who say shit like Sanders just said or defend shit like Sanders just said are white males. The belief that who a person is doesn't matter is the quintessential view of those saturated in white male privilege. To them, the default is white, straight, and male therefore they, as white, straight, males, encompass all others and can accurately represent all others. WRONG.

Males don't know what it's like to be male

White people don't know what it's like to be black, or Asian, or Latino.

Straight people don't know what it is like to be gay.

Those things impact world views. Bernie is a fucking tone-deaf piece of shit and so are the white male Bernbros who gulp this shit down with vigor. And, if you're a white gay male and defending this bullshit, you should be ashamed of yourself. It's only because in every day life, the vast majority of gay white males can pass as just plain old white males and benefit from the same privilege because everyone assumes they're straight.

I hope this ends Bernie.

Bernie's telling the truth.

I agree

He thinks he can run this con again. He's not a Democrat and he shouldn't be allowed to run as one. He can be a spoiler but he won't be able to get funds from the DNC and he sure as hell isn't getting any money from real Democrats. Hopefully many who voted for him in 16 won't be stupid enough to do it again. This is life or death for all of us. Regardless of political party or ideology. The Russians and Chinese are working together to bring us to our knees. They have an asset in the W.H. We will be lucky to survive the next two years. The Republicans need to suffer bigly in 2020. Collins, Graham, McConnell especially.

All he is saying is look at the person's policy positions first before their demographic tick marks. He's not wrong but I guess Kamala's got him running scared. What a shitshow this will be. We need an ego reducing raygun on the democratic field of candidates.

R17 is that shit actually real !?

[quote]We need an ego reducing raygun on the democratic field of candidates.

Funny how this is only needed for the male assholes who can't shut the fuck up with their idiocy. Schultz, Biden, and Sanders...so far. Really, is there something mentally wrong with them all? Is it their ages? Is this the last generation of men who will be acting this way because of how they grew up? It's getting ridiculous.

Bernie is not a top candidate this time, he's going to keep some good issues in the mix while he lasts. Sanders and other weak candidates will fall by the wayside as we go along.

Bear in mind that every single day trolls and shit stirrers will be posting things here and everywhere else that are specifically designed to divide Democrats.

The Democrats are going to fuck it up. Whichever Not-a-white-male they nominate will be the new George McGovern.

[quote]Bear in mind that every single day trolls and shit stirrers will be posting things here and everywhere else that are specifically designed to divide Democrats.

Was this "fake news" from Bernie? If not, then the reaction to it shows that Dems are divided; nothing is "specifically designed to divide Democrats".

The party has moved further to the left, and some centrists are having trouble supporting the latest platforms. The party is dividing. Same on the right. You have "never-Trumpers" who refused to vote for him, and Republican senators and representatives that don't support his positions; just look at the border security bill votes for evidence.

None of this is new. While we've had a two-party system for decades, many people do not support every platform held by a politician from their party. There is nuance in politics and our beliefs. Only recently has this been interpreted as a personal attack: "if you don't agree with me on every single issue, you are a horrible person".

Yes, and only an old white man can deliver something that no old white man has promulgated in the history of our union. Will someone please slip Bernie a sedative?

Hehe

All I ever hear Kamala Harris talking about on the stump is policy proposals and taking on Trump. I've yet to hear her say vote for me because I'm black Asian

This thread is proof that the Bernie bros are truly a bunch of bigots just like Bernie. Scratch a "libertarian" find a right wing nut.

[quote]so many people seem to be willing to forgive terrible policy in order to achieve that goal

There is no politician in America who does not have something terrible in their policy or their past votes and/or careers. None. Even Bernie won't show his taxes and his wife is being investigated for major fraud, he hired Ted Devine and his people hacked the DNC, who he then later sued. He has voted against positive legislation because of something unrelated added to the bill he didn't like, as if doing so will stop the long-standing policy of the House and Senate adding unrelated items to bills all the time.

He's just as bad as all the other politicians. For him to demand purity from any politician at all is laughable.

When you have a gay, black, Jewish, or any other minority representative in government, you increase the government's representation of all citizens. No, we shouldn't just vote in some gay Republican because he's gay, but we don't have to, and Bernie is crazy for acting like that's what's going on.

r23, yep. He was a whore. Liked orgies.

[quote]This thread is proof that the Bernie bros are truly a bunch of bigots just like Bernie.

This is for you, R31:

Let's actually carefully examine what he said:

[quote] Sanders remains a critic of identity politics and a firm believer that issues of race, while important, are not as salient and determinative as those of class. “There are people who are very big into diversity but whose views end up being not particularly sympathetic to working people, whether they’re white or black or Latino,” he said. “My main belief is that we need to bring together a coalition of people—of black and white and Latino and Asian-American and Native-American—around a progressive agenda which is prepared to take on an extraordinarily powerful ruling class in this country. That is my view. Many of my opponents do not hold that view, and they think that all that we need is people who are candidates who are black or white, who are black or Latino or woman or gay, regardless of what they stand for, that the end result is diversity.” He hastened to add that “diversity is enormously important,” but there was a bigger goal: “to change society and create an economy and a government that work for all people.”

“There are people who are very big into diversity but whose views end up being not particularly sympathetic to working people."

He's saying that "many of [his] opponents" don't hold the view that "we need to bring together a coalition of people ... around a progressive agenda which is prepared to take on an extraordinarily powerful ruling class in this country" and that these "opponents" "think that all that we need is people who are candidates who are black or white, who are black or Latino or woman or gay, regardless of what they stand for, that the end result is diversity.”

Is that true?

Do MANY of his (presumably Democratic) opponents don't believe in bringing together a coalition of people around a progressive agenda to "take on" what he identifies as "an extraordinarily powerful ruling class in this country"?

Do these "many" "opponents" think that "ALL" we need is "candidates who are black or white, who are black or Latino or woman or gay, regardless of what they stand for"?

I don't think so.

I don't think that "many" of his opponents believe that "all we need" is diversity among our candidates, "regardless of what they stand for."

Precision of language matters.

There might be a factually correct and useful argument about candidate diversity and class struggle out there, but he doesn't seem have the precision of language to make it.

The actual interview article.

Imagine the shit Putin has on Bernie. If tRump is Putin's butt boy, Bernie is even worse.

[quote]This is why the left is dying. It's been broken up into different tribes by identity politics over the last 20 years and now it's eating itself alive.

So help me understand this: you've been in a coma for the past two years and you slept through the 2018 election?

[quote]He's not wrong

Yes, he is. It was stupid and it was wrong.

The white boys who still love Bernie are so similar to the white boys who love Trump.

Personally, I'm fine with what Bernie said because the more he keeps sticking his foot in his mouth, the sooner we can be rid of him and focus our attention on the serious candidates.

His whole word salad quoted in R35 was clearly aimed at Barack Obama and Kamala Harris while being deathly afraid of calling out names. He’s saying that Barack was just a black face for the Dem corporatist establishment, and that Kamala will soon inherit his mantle.

He doesn't understand incremental change. We're not getting to an American NHS in one administration.

R41 You've posted on this thread how many times? We already know that you're Kamala bot. Go outside for some fresh air and clear your brain.

[QUOTE]You've posted on this thread how many times?

Once. The post you quoted. Now twice with this one.

Schultz shouldn't be included in that r24. He's running on a very different platform. He's running as a moderate centrist. It's all the progressives that are going to cannibalize each other, which is just what the republicans did in the primary and how we ended up with Trump.

I love how the same Sanders stans on Twitter who yell 24/7 about identity politics being wrong ALSO complain incessantly about how "BernieBro" is "sexist and racist and erases Bernie's women and PoC supporters."

Bernie Sanders does not look like a president. Optics matter, especially in America. People want someone who looks presidential. Our three last presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama, even Hillary! They all looked like presidents.

Bernie doesn't past the test. He needs to just stay in the Senate.

[quote]He's running on a very different platform. He's running as a moderate centrist.

No, he's running as a radical libertarian. There is nothing "moderate" nor "centrist" about his views.

Did he switch party affiliation to Democrat yet?

Then you obviously haven't actually listened to his platform, r48. He's very much a centrist.

He doesn't have a platform, R50. I've listened to his interviews. He's very much a radical libertarian.

Thank you, r51. All I heard was vote for me because I am rich and don't want to pay more taxes. And if I don't get my way I will shit on your party. Literally.

Ah, I understand. His centrist platform has you guys running scared because it speaks to a larger group. Please carry on with the denigrating and the lies.

It's never a good sign when the hired gun has to splain why you are running, vouche for your character, and come up with an actual plan to govern. Howard "I'm the money" Shultz. That's his platform.

[quote]All I heard was vote for me because I am rich and don't want to pay more taxes.

Don't forget that we can't afford the safety net, so we have to gut it to pay down the debt.

Sanders is correct.

[quote]His centrist platform has you guys running scared because it speaks to a larger group.

He has no "centrist platform," which is why you can't actually explain what his platform is. The two issues he's ranted about the most, billionaire taxation and health care, are both supported by the majority of Americans. The "larger group."

[quote] Please carry on with the denigrating and the lies.

Do let us know when you can find a single "lie" that any of us have told. We don't need to "denigrate" Schultz, as he's doing a great job all by himself.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will unveil a plan Thursday to dramatically expand the federal estate tax on the wealthy, including a new 77 percent rate on billionaires’ estates, as leading Democratic politicians push new taxes on the richest Americans to combat inequality.

Sanders’s bill, the “For the 99.8% Act,” would tax the estates of the 0.2 percent of Americans who inherit more than $3.5 million, while the rest of the country “would not see their taxes go up by one penny under this plan,” according to aides to the Vermont senator, who is considering a 2020 presidential bid.

The monster being POTUS is partially this prick's fault. Fuck him and all misogynist assholes!

It's long past time we reopened the discussion of taxes on the wealthy. For nearly 40 years, the mantra has been reduction of taxes, which is why we have the debt that we do. We can quibble about the amounts, about whether we focus on corporate taxes, personal income taxes, taxes on wealth, taxes on capital gains, estate taxes, etc., but I think we're finally, as a country, getting that continuing to cut taxes as we have hasn't giving us anything other than massive debt and massive redistribution of wealth upward.

The Republican solution, of gutting Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security won't solve our debt problem and will once again increase the wealth and income disparity.

Sanders is like Trump. He's just another entitled, rich, crusty old white man who whines a lot.

Democrats need acsolid proposal on delivering health care reform, a comprehensive proposal on immigration and border security, how to renew environmental protection, an approach to foreign policy, instituting tax fairness, education, and middle class income enhancements. Certain Interest groups and the media become overly consumed with identity politics, that they are selling personalities and characterizations and not rallying around some fresh, but practical, ideas that a broad spectrum of the party can fully embrace.

Sanders, Harris, Warren, Gillibrand, etc. can espouse free stuff all they want and maybe some of it would make good policy:. but they need to be forthright about the costs and how such is paid, and who pays it.

I can't imagine seasoned politicians like Biden, Bloomberg, McAuliffe,Sherrod Brown, Hickenlooper (ok, older white guys, but HRC was similar) not at least offering some math and cost projections. All Bernie Sanders could say is that Wall Street will pay; and he has gotten away with this vagueness far too long. Gender, age, and ethnicity should never be barriers, but they need not be substitutes for policies, ideas, broad appeal, confidence, and governing competence.

[quote]Imagine the shit Putin has on Bernie. If tRump is Putin's butt boy, Bernie is even worse.

Imagine two years into the Trump Presidency thinking that Trump's agenda is a reflection of Vladimir Putin's evil plans to secure our borders and grow our economy.

I will say, I have friends who voted for Bernie in 2016 primaries mostly because he was Jewish.

The sword cuts both ways.

He's right about this, that there's lots of virtue signaling going on in the democratic and progressive camps.

Of course it has nothing to do with why I support Kamala. Because she's black and Indian? Nope.

[quote]That’s why you can never vote for far-left candidates.

"Far left" is neo-fascist speak. American "far leftists," according to these Breitbart types, are not much different from European centrist party politicians. They are not even as far to the left, usually, as European Social Democrats.

It's really so ridiculous. When they start talking about nationalizing businesses or a one-party state, get back to us.

"Those" Breitbart types? YOU'RE the one using alt-right dogwhistles like "virtue signaling."

Fuck Bernie.

He needs to shut his spit hole and take up knitting.

What we need to do is end pass thru entities. No more LLCs, s corps, partnerships. Everything is a corporation and is taxed art 40%.

These fuckers write off or carryback losses anyway. Ain't like they pay shit.

You would see that on Bernie's taxes, too, but he won't release them. Just like the flip side of the vile coin dump.

[quote]"Those" Breitbart types? YOU'RE the one using alt-right dogwhistles like "virtue signaling."

Nope, only the SJWs object to the term SJW. Many of us old style liberals detest them and their bullshit, which is a boat anchor around the neck of progressivism in America.

I wish he would shut up. He's right, he's wrong....who fucking cares? He's unelectable and needs to be gone forever.

I'm a left leaning liberal, the kind of person he would like to vote for him, and I hate him. Good job, fool, at alienating your base.

Go Kamala!

I’m a black woman who enthusiastically supported him in the primaries and worked my butt for Hillary in the general. But right now, I’m pretty much over dude and the Trotskyites that still fuel his stardom. He cannot be this dense. How do you respond to people who have complained that you’re tone deaf to racial and gender nuances? Well, mock the criticism and reinforce your myopic, class-centric worldview.

fuck off Bernie you dried up old white man you are not needed

go use some Just For Men

He’s been in Congress for decades & what the hell has he accomplished?

Old straight white men = status quo. They’re the reason why we are in the mess we are in

"My Dem Opponents....."

Key word: Opponents

Conclusion: Goodbye, divisive whore, and thank you for the fish.

IF the Democrats let him anywhere near the primaries, they are idiots. I will back a petition in his home state to condemn these recent attacks on fellow Democrats in the midst of a Constitutional crisis. I am fucking done with this fucking son of a bitch.

[quote]This is for you, [R31]:

The bill that Bernie supported?

You all know that he is talking about Kamala here, aren't you.

God, this guy it totally repulsive. He was trying to appeal to Christian conservatives in 2016 by getting an audience with the pope. He used uber bigot Linda Sarsour during his campaign to appeal to black and brown people. His spokes person Symone Sanders was a racist opinionated cunt who clearly hated white people.

I said this before, one person among the democratic contenders during the primaries needs to take on Sanders and expose him for the fraud he is. Hillary treated him with kid gloves. This can't be the strategy in 2020.

He lost the minority vote in 2016. His constituency is white misogynistic males. Around 15% of his primary voters ended up voting for Trump.

R62, you obviously haven't been paying any attention to Warren for the last 20 years if you think she doesn't have the math and hasn't been talking about the math of taxes and wealth forever.

Never voting for him in a Dem primary anyway.

Apropos of nothing, I'm sure, but the former friend of mine who went so crazy at the thought of HRC as president that he turned into a rabid BernieBro was suspended from Twitter yesterday for threatening Kamala in a tweet. When I went to look at the thread, there were no less than 12 missing tweets from now-suspended BernieBros.

They most definitely are scared of her.

[quote]You all know that he is talking about Kamala here, aren't you.

Actually I think he's talking more about Booker. Kamala is obviously an extremely smart and capable person. Booker is the one who gets shit about being superficial.

More to the point, though, I don't think he's even talking about any individual candidate in his defensive responses. I think he's referring more to the SJWs who criticize his candidacy because he's part of "The Patriarchy" and an old white male. You know exactly the sort of criticism I mean. What he's saying is, those people just want a "trans lesbian of color" because of identity politics, not because the TLOC is qualified.

And you know he's right. We have people on the left who are every bit as preposterous as people on the right.

Well, not quite AS bad, but getting there!

Bernie is only running to plump out his bank account. People like him can never have too much money, even when they are already very rich and very old.

I don't like him either and I think he's the reason Trump is president. But even a stopped clock tells the time correctly twice a day.

[quote]We have people on the left who are every bit as preposterous as people on the right.

The difference is that Democrats marginalize their nutcases; Republicans elect theirs.

How old is this geezer anyway??

[quote]The difference is that Democrats marginalize their nutcases; Republicans elect theirs.

I agree, but for how much longer? The nutcases lately have been dragging down the realists (see, eg, 2016). If they are powerful enough to do that -- vote for Stein instead of Killary, and then brag about it on Instagram -- when do the nuts become the norm and not the exception?

The nutcases didn't really have an impact in 2016. The race was so close, settled by so few votes, that you could easily claim a dozen different factors as to why Trump won. Democrats gained seats in both the House and Senate in 2016, even if it wasn't quite enough to retake either chamber in that election.

As for the nutcases today, I'm not seeing them have a huge impact. A feature like Medicare for All is a popular position, for example, not a "nutcase" one. Democrats in 2020 will likely run again on things like health care, taxation, opportunity, etc., that did them so much good in 2018. About all you can really point to is AOC and I doubt she's doing much harm, if any.

So I guess my question to you is who are you worried about?

Sanders alone had a big enough impact to make Hillary lose. The Sanders to Trump voters in key swing states outweighed Trump's winning margin.

What a racist thing to say.

[quote]The nutcases didn't really have an impact in 2016.

They do seem to have, though. Trump won by something like 80,000 votes when you analyze how the swing states were thrown to him. Stein, and Johnson thanks to the lefties who voted for him because he is a pothead or whatever stupid reason, got more votes than that.

^^^I mean he got more votes in those same swing states, by the way.

[quote]What a racist thing to say.

I agree, it's disgusting!

Shut up, Bernie. You’re past your expiration date.

He has something of a point, there are SOME people who do care about optics more than substance.

But like MOST of his fellow Boomers in politics, he doesn't seem to understand the concept of the graceful exit and assuming emeritus status

He’s right. But replace “gay” with trans. Gays are at the very very bottom of the pyramid these days. Demi’s could care less about gays at this point in time.

*dems

R90, not all of those votes would have gone to Clinton. And there were other factors that were of far more importance in that race. You're going to have to come up with something more than that to show why we should all be afraid.

Thank you for one of the dumbest statements on this thread, R95, one that is conspicuously proved wrong by the past 50 years of evidence.

He’s Totally right. Real societal change requires a focus on progressive taxation, basic human benefits policies like universal health care and basic income, and affordable education. Intersectionality around low income and wealth is ignored. Race and gender and sexual orientation are core human rights values but they are being used to split the 99% from the shared experience of economic exploitation that is destroying society.

We need a real Fuck the Rich campaign. For the first time in decades this country is starting to have a real conversation about income inequality and the stranglehold the rich have on our politics. Maybe it will be Bernie, maybe it will be somebody else, but a full on Fuck the Rich campaign is long overdue. It's even cropping up at Davos

And now Sanders is criticizing the US for recognizing the opposition in Venezuela, comparing it to the US involvement in other overthrows in Latin America, such as Allende (with his Khmer Rouge pals) and Brazil (courtesy of Robert Kennedy). He obviously wants to turn the US into another Maduro Venezuela.

Maduro sucks and his "government" sucks, but everyone should be at least a little leery of another American crusade to "save" a country. We just ain't that generous or giving, particularly under Trump, who never gives a shit about anyone but himself or anything but his money. And no, it's just stupid to say he wants to turn the US into Venezuela.

Time to move to Florida and collect your Social Security Gramps...go skedaddle.

I can’t believe people are pissed about this. Elites like Hillary use identity politics to play you like fiddles. Love Bernie!

Porn star Cherie DeVille, who share's Bernie Sanders 2016 views, has seen her campaign for the 2020 Democratic Presidential nomination fizzle. She blames Stormy.

oh, what a sad little burn that was r103. What a sad little person you are.

If he has an issue with the policies of Harris, Booker, Warren or any of the other non white het males, then he should say what they are. He should be specific. He's basically saying don't trusts those women and minorities they aren't real progressives like me. I think he has enjoyed being the lone voice of the left. I think he's threatened by all these other people and other perspectives.

He is saying, correctly, that what you actually stand for is more important than the color of your skin or your ethnicity or your gender or your sexual orientation. First and foremost, Fuck the Rich. That is job one in this campaign. Once you do that, we can discuss the rest. But yes, we need the dreaded Class Warfare before we get to anything else.

If Bernie is so concerned, maybe he should be in the Democrat party and not just use it when he needs it.

[quote]The party has moved further to the left, and some centrists are having trouble supporting the latest platforms.

I don't think that "some centrists are having trouble supporting the latest platforms", but I do think that "some centrists" are worried that Sanders, who had a lot to do with Trump winning in 2016, may cause another spoiler in 2020. In my opinion, that's a legitimate worry. Democrats must win in 2020. The alternative is to horrifying to contemplate.

^^ too horrifying

[quote]He’s Totally right... Race and gender and sexual orientation are core human rights values

The only party that cares about race and gender equality, about gay rights is the democratic party.

Just to keep Sanders' comment in context with reality The Clintons are active in Haiti and Puerto Rico long after the news ignored the catastrophes that happened there. They give almost 3 times more to charity percentage wise of their income compared to Sanders.

Blacks, women and gays overwhelmingly vote for democratic candidates.

Also ...

Remember that time when Bernie Sanders was appeasing the deplorables

[quote]The party has moved further to the left

This seems to have become an article of faith but when challenged to deliver examples, the two most commonly listed, tax the wealthy and health care for everyone, are positions that are shared by a majority of the population. By definition, these are centrist positions.

So how, precisely, has the party "moved further to the left?"

um, it's the Democratic Party. Democrat party is kind of a tell, r109

I've never quite understood the Bernie hate on DL or the notion that it was Sanders and his college-aged minions who somehow beat Hillary rather than Trump and the Deplorables. Seizing on the Stein/stay-at-home voters in Wisconsin and other tight races seems like a real reach--there's a strong argument that many of the would have voted for a third party candidate or stayed home even if Sanders had never run.

It seems self-defeating to point your guns at people who are more likely to be on your side than at the millions of people in WI, PA etc, who actually voted for Donald Trump, or even the sizable number of those Trump voters who had previously voted for Obama.

And yet there seems to be far more anger on DL at the "Berniebros" than at the "Depolorables"

The BernieBros pretended to be on our side, with the deplorables it's clear they never were. Bernie is the enemy within, the one that betrayed his own party, the backstabber.

When are you people going to realize you are playing the Russian hands? Why should we fight them? They will fight each other! Keep instigating infighting. This is going to work again.

That was my thought exactly R118 (I'm R116)

I don't get people like R117.

The vast majority of people who voted for Bernie Sanders in the primaries voted for Hillary in the general election.

Yes there were a few who stamped their feet and said they'd never vote for her, but focusing on those few rather than (a) the vast majority who voted for Clinton and (b) the far larger numbers of former Obama voters who then voted for Trump seems to be playing right into the hands of the Russians.

But to read political threads on Datalounge, you'd think that Sanders and millions of Millennial Misogynists were out there with MAGA hats on beating up brave Hillary voters and driving little old Republican ladies to the polls to vote for Trump.

Also, other than actually daring to challenge Mrs. Clinton how exactly is Bernie a "backstabber" R117?

I seem to recall that he campaigned for her in the months leading up to the election.

Given how unlikely a candidate he was, it seems that there was a sizable mass of (mostly young) voters who did not connect with Clinton and were looking for someone/anyone other than her to support.

But in the end, most all of them returned to the fold and voted for Hillary.

people are doing everything they can to suppress actual progressives. some are paid to do it, some are just assholes that cannot imagine doing anything other than worshiping the Rich. Either way, Fuck Them. They are useless, and the world will pass them by, very shortly.

R119 Bernie and his bros were working overtime to create constant distraction and divisiveness, providing soundbites for the opposition well after the primaries. Yes, they deserve to be ostracized from the Dem party! Go start you own fucking party! Call it Bernie's New Communist Party for all I care!

He's such a whiny asshole. Very like Trump in that regard. Fuck him.

[quote] Bernie and his bros were working overtime to create constant distraction and divisiveness, providing soundbites for the opposition well after the primaries.

Can you provide any actual examples of this R122?

Because here's a clip of Sanders campaigning for Hillary in Iowa in October 2016

For R122

some were. most weren't r122. Most became Hillary voters in the General, like every sane person. But who cares at this point. Vote Progressive, Vote Democrat, Vote for the actual needs of actual Americans!

And another for R122 of Hillary and Bernie on stage together.

Via that Russian troll site ABC News!

Here's a look at how the Bernie fans voted

Bernie is an ASSHOLE. All the Bernie bros are working overtime to bring down his potential opponents.

It won't work, Bernie. You fucked things up once, you're not going to get that chance again.

R127, please. He only begrudgingly supported Hillary after he got a sweet deal with the DNC.

It doesn't matter who defected to Trump. They showed a chart on the ABC Evening news this week. In the swing states that decided the election, the numbers of Bernsters who went Green and voted for Jill Stein was higher than the number Hillary lost by in those states. They gave us Trump.

Oh, c'mon, R124. Everybody knows that Sanders is the king of damning with faint praise. That's exactly what he did to Clinton after he lost to her in the primaries.

And don't let me start on Sanders giving ammunition to Trump with his criticism of Clinton at the late stages of Democratic primaries (when it was clear he had NO chance of winning).

"No R126! I'd rather continue to pout about the 2016 election and blame everyone but Trump and the people who voted for him! Bernie! The New York Times! Matt Lauer! The Washington Post! Even when confronted with proof that Sanders campaigned for Hillary, I will invent reasons why he didn't really support her in his heart of hearts! " --- R122 and their ilk

and everyone stop living in the past. there is another year coming up. Vote Progressive. In the glorious words of glorious RuPaul DONT FUCK IT UP, this time.

Again R131, those people were lost to Hillary from the getgo. If Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein had never been born, they would have voted for some third party candidate.

But keep on blaming your fellow Democrats.

it's always THEIR fault.

We ONLY live in the past R134

We only talk about sitcoms from the 1970s

Movies from the 1990s

Fashions from the 1980s

And the 2016 presidential campaign

[quote]they would have voted for some third party candidate.

We only know what happened. Your imagined scenarios are just that, imagined scenarios.

And to add insult to injury!!!

(There's some DL troll who always defends claims that many people found Hillary unlikeable by citing the fact that she'd been named "Most Admired Woman In The World" many times over. Turns out "Most Admired Woman In The World" is a PR ploy by Gallup, based on a poll of just 1,025 people.)

[quote] We only know what happened.

Yes we do.

Most of Sanders primary supporters voted for Hillary Clinton.

Most Republicans voted for Trump and he won the election.

Funny how that works.

heh, r137. I kinda love all that shit, but now it's serious. Vote Progressive in 2020!

Bernie we don't want white octogenarian men as president.

You are too fucking old. Every meet someone and they ask you out and you say no, I can't I am busy, I'm seeing someone else, I'm not over my ex. I leaving for Timbuktu tomorrow. Everything you can think of to get them to stop.

That's how it feels when Bernie says hey want everything thing but him. Look man, we don't want you again.

and like the eldergay I am, I meant r136. Anyone wanna talk about Dynasty?

We're R137 and R122 and we also blame all of you African-Americans.

ALL OF YOU!!!!

You got out and voted for Obama because he was black.

But because Hillary is a woman you would not vote for her!! You sat at home and did not vote for her!

And so it's your fault too that she lost!! If you had voted for her the way you voted for Obama she would be President!!

umm, are you having a meltdown r143? do you need a moment?

[quote]The vast majority of people who voted for Bernie Sanders in the primaries voted for Hillary in the general election.

Actually they didn't, they either stayed at home or voted third party or even for Trump. A large proportion of millenials bought the smear campaign talking points hook, line and sinker. Sanders fuelled that smear campaign against Hillary Clinton, just as his Bros are after Beto and Kamala Harris now.

do you have actual numbers for that r145

[quote]Yes we do.

[quote]Most of Sanders primary supporters voted for Hillary Clinton.

[quote]Most Republicans voted for Trump and he won the election.

[quote]Funny how that works.

Yes, we do.

The Sanders supporters who voted third party or Stein in the crucial states tipped the electoral vote to Trump.

Funny how that works.

Numbers, heh...

um, these are comments, not numbers. You know the difference, right?

We are not electing this Tired Old Man.

Yes I do, R148. Apparently, your like your own projections of what might have been over numbers. Fair enough.

ya don't need to, r149. You just need to elect the most progressive candidate you wish.

not a number in sight, r150. What is you, simple?

[quote] not a number in sight, [R150]. What is you, simple?

Oh, brother. Do you know how to use Google? What is you, simple?

Sanders -> Trump voters…

WI: 51k

MI: 47k

PA: 116k

Trump win margin…

WI: 22k

MI: 10k

PA: 44k

um, are you saying those numbers represent every Bernie Bro voting for Trump. You are a very silly person, ain't ya?

[quote] um, are you saying those numbers represent every Bernie Bro voting for Trump. You are a very silly person, ain't ya?

Those are Sanders supporters who ended up voting for Trump. What is the matter with you? Seriously.

no they are not. they are margins voting for Trump in particular states. That tells you nothing about who voted in the primaries and then voted for Trump. Nothing. You are wrong, and you do not actually get what politics are about, do you?

R156, then post some numbers that prove the numbers I posted to be wrong. Sounds fair?

R156, here is a link for my numbers:

[quote][bold]About 12 percent of Bernie Sanders supporters from the Democratic primary crossed party lines and voted for Donald Trump in the general election,[/bold] a new analysis says.

[quote]In several key states — Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan — the number of Sanders to Trump defectors were greater than Trump’s margin of victory, according to new numbers released Wednesday by UMass professor Brian Schaffner.

your numbers are meaningless. It is really apples and oranges. Nobody can extrapolate from them. A certain number of people voted for Bernie in the primary. Another group of people voted for Trump in the General. Neither has anything to do with the other. There are no numbers that prove anything. You just don't know.

Sure, dear R159. We believe whatever your feel is right.

you're a moron r160. Nobody can know what you think you know. You are a dingbat, and you should stop embarrassing yourself.

So kind, R161. Insult when you cannot respond. Is that the Sanders way?

[quote] We're [R137] and [R122] and we also blame all of you African-Americans. ALL OF YOU!!!! You got out and voted for Obama because he was black. But because Hillary is a woman you would not vote for her!! You sat at home and did not vote for her! And so it's your fault too that she lost!! If you had voted for her the way you voted for Obama she would be President!!

So essentially black people voted for Obama because they are inferior, including their inferior decision making. Then black people turned around and didn’t support Hillary with the same level of support again because they are inferior to whites.

Keeping in mind that black people suffer regardless of which party is in office. The majority of the gains always go to whites. Issues that disproportionately affect black people and any attempt to specifically address them are both labeled “identity politics.”

[quote] We're [[R137]] and [[R122]] and we also blame all of you African-Americans. ALL OF YOU!!!! You got out and voted for Obama because he was black. But because Hillary is a woman you would not vote for her!! You sat at home and did not vote for her! And so it's your fault too that she lost!! If you had voted for her the way you voted for Obama she would be President!!

Since when African-Americans didn't support Hillary Clinton in 2016? Black women were by far Clinton’s strongest supporters. They had nothing to gain from Trump's victory.

R156/159 had serious comprehension problems.

Sanders deliberately was a spoiler in the 2016 election, to help Putin elect Trump.

Bernbros are young, white, male, and more conservative than the average Democrat. They were basically the younger Repug males who wanted to shake things up but didn't like Trump. Sexist, racist, fiscally conservative, selfish assholes who should be relegated to the dustbin of history, not catered to by actual Democratic candidates.

R143, you lunatic, the number of black voters who didn't vote in 2016 but did in 2012 is so low it made no difference.

The poster saying 12% of Sanders supporters voted Trump is right. We also know some Sanders supporters stayed home or voted third party. That's what added up.

R112 you’re missing the point that if the rich, like the Clintons and ther uber wealthy pals, paid their fare share in taxes that were directed into government interventions to address social and health needs charity wouldn’t be required. Charity is a way for the wealthy to appear beneficient to maintain the financial status quo with a much smaller transfer of theirwealth than if properly taxed.

Sanders is a total phony. The Clintons gave 11% of their income to charity, Sanders in 2014, that's the only tax return he released, only 4%.

Bernie Sanders is the biggest phony and poser.

Its true that *many* of his Dem opponents want these minority candidates regardless of what they stand for. That's something evident many times in interviews and internal messages, etc. Its all about ticking off a box for them and you will almost never pin them down about what policies they stand for that most of the rest of the developed world have already embraced and enjoyed.

But a) its not all of them (but Sanders seems cognizant of that if you read the whole thing), and especially B) many of Sanders supporters disregard the matter of being black, gay, female, latino to the point of gross dismissal of even the possibility of it mattering (it does). That's the 'Bros'. I wouldn't consider Sanders himself quite that, though maybe at most he has slight shades of that attitude in his 'rising tide raises all boats' sort of beliefs.

I can understand a distaste of some people putting 'representation' of identity categories above anything else to the point of a weird impracticality, but representation is not a zero or even minimal issue. It matters. More women in government will on average encourage women-friendly policies, more gay people in government will on average encourage gay-friendly policies, more black and Latino people in government will on average encourage racial and cultural minority friendly policies. As long as the social coalition (which intersectionality at least ideally represents) doesn't crumble. Raising the average standard of living for the majority of the nation won't matter to minority populations/powers if policies still range from disregarding them to even leaving them out in the cold or even actively kicked down with some upsurge of bigotry. While like Sanders I'd put this stuff at a non-first-priority, it must always be among the highest. I'd sacrifice any (but never all) gay rights in my country for only the most strangely absolutely secure promise that my nation enters a full-on Golden Age and enriches even almost all gay people (giving them power to regain those rights), and not anything less. That is to say... that gay rights (for example) are not actually *practically* up for debate. So its a good thing that in almost all issues, Sanders has not allowed these things to be up for debate. He just doesn't focus as much on them, and this does leave the door slightly ajar for fake lefties/socialists/liberals-who-happen-to-dislike-the-right to come in and make some things worse. The good news is that these are not necessarily 'Deplorables' (though some are) and that they are voters too, and a good-ass chunk of the non-party-affiliated that can and would pop up and boost the voting total by maybe a lot. The bad news is that they're ignored by parties for a reason; parties usually have strategy keep a base, then reach out beyond it - not alter their base with people relatively much more willing to in-fight.

'12% of Sanders supporters voting Trump' is meaningful in two ways. One is that relatively more Trump-tolerant (or approving!) people go for this guy, and this has its problematic elements for left wing politics. But another is that many (not the whole 12% to be clear), or at least enough that could tip elections, don't care about the same things you necessarily do, and just look for who is more economically populist. This can be up to millions of voters that the Democratic party...well I wouldn't say always ignores, but over decades had decided more and more to disregard, leaving open internal and external competition through Sanders and Trump. Sanders didn't manage to win over the party in 2016 though he has maintained a generally popular nation-wide position despite what DL leans towards, but Trump managed to win over the Republicans, and enough of the country to win the electoral college. Clinton couldn't and wouldn't fill in the populist gap that *enough* people were looking for, and part of that was her hyperfocus on particular identity politics matters - things that again matter, but are unconvincing to repulsive to enough voters for whatever reasons and whether we like it or not.

R169 more Republicans give to charity and in larger amounts than Democrats.

Some of the reasons (verified or speculated by myself include): wanting to look better, wanting to promote individual contributions instead of collective, religious obligation (subtle or overt), political philosophy.

I'm not surprised Sanders donates less while advocating more tax revenue and distribution. Besides any selfish angle you can argue, it is perfectly fitting that the sort of person he professes to be would want what he considers to be ultimately better public efficiencies than an even worse bureaucracy of charities that skim more than a little off the top. Technically that shouldn't stop him from finding the most helpful, least corrupt charities though, so I'm not excusing.

R166 this sort will always exist though, even if in different form.

Here in Ontario, sure, the younger white male conservatives voted steadily for Ford, but there's a growing cohort of non-white, and/or female, not-necessarily-conservatives that didn't just hesitatingly vote for him, but gladly. There's immigrant populations that much more easily align with most of the professed social conservatism (stated or clearly implied) by Ford. There's young women that feel an appeal is being some sort of counter-culture in being a 'neo-pro-life' ('not anti abortion, I just think we should promote the lives of children!'). You can probably push out those you'd call Berniebros, just be aware that the general sentiments they carry with them are eternal and can cross all major identities: people who care far more about their economic future than some solidarity with progressive social issues (though perhaps willing to play a lip service or minor help towards them). People who want to tax/fight/riot the most wealthy in thinking it will help them and those they care about (to be fair, it often does), but neglect the social meaning and importance of progressive reforms elsewhere.

Is there a difference in wanting a minority candidate and NOT wanting a white male candidate? Because, honestly, I think that's the case. We're fucking sick of white males running everything into the ground, being unable to keep their hands and dicks to themselves, acting like immature babies when they don't get their way, having histories filled with things like frat boy bullshit like getting drunk and trying to rape classmates, wearing black face and/or KKK outfits, presiding over committees that let the likes of Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court while vilifying Anita Hill, calling women "little lady", and on and on.

I'm not particularly looking for a certain race or sex in a candidate but I'm done with arrogant and presumptuous white males. This crap from Sanders is just him whining about the fact that many of us are sick to death of their whining from on high. Fuck them and their privileged, out-of-touch, casually racist and sexist asses.

"Are you a Democrat?" should be the only question this asshole gets to answer before he decides to fuck up the Democratic primary.

Bernie's still not a democrat, and still an asshole trying to sink democrats.

I think the 'You're not a Democrat, are you?' angle could be super successful and might be the best thing against him. He isn't one, and shouldn't throw stones at his hosts. But I also think that this could be easily turned around as "And you're the democratic party, aren't you? Perhaps act like it", as we're all aware that a third party candidate has essentially no shot in the current, highly flawed electoral system, so much of the idea of democracy is that anyone has their shot at exposure of their selves and their ideas, so we can more confidently then dismiss that which loses (as opposed to the dark intrigue of elitist republics).

(And practically, open competition within a party is done in order to not severely split the vote, something that is rather a penchant for much of left wing politics. I'm not saying Sanders himself could successfully start a major third party, but I think USA politics has increasingly with each decade had bigger and bigger demand for what could become a successful third party. The primary process is partially there to filter out any further extremes - as well as the most boring middle positions - so the party can tell the nation 'we hear you, here's someone for you as well as us'.)