Video Of What Bernie Said In Mississippi

[jg10003]

A good example of why every news story, even those we agree with, should be fact checked.

&feature=youtu.be

[Sophia4]

1. I hope everyone here will listen to this postive, inspiring video in which Berni

encourages Democrats to, themselves, run for office.

Knee jerk reactions to misleading news reports do not help unite Democrats and certainly do not help to win elections.

They divide us.

Bernie is uniting us with this speech -- at least the part of it on this video.

[Demsrule86]

13. This video enraged me and made me more certain that Sen. Sanders should not run in 20.

[EffieBlack]

18. You find this positive and inspiring?

ok

[Sophia4]

43. In this speech, Bernie encouraged people to run for office.

I find that very inspiring.

How are Democrats to win elections if they ridicule and exclude other Democrats?

I just don't understand what benefit there is in reacting negatively to someone that some Democrats -- maybe 43% based on the percentage of the vote Bernie got in the primaries prior to the convention -- so actually, many Democrats admire.

No one has to support Bernie or vote for him, but how about we react rationally so that we don't offend people who like him.

Bernie was speaking before a mostly African-American group, and they responded well to his suggestion that more people should run for office. I respond well to that too.

We have to have a united party for 2020. I hope we do really well in the November elections and keep doing well through the coming years.

Republicans should not hold the governor's offices in 33 of the 50 states. We Democrats should be doing better. It's not your fault. It's not my fault. But we all need to ask ourselves what we can do to promote harmony rather than discord on the liberal/progressive/Democratic side of the country.

Discord leads to defeat. So we need to work for unity and set certain negative personal feelings aside. We have to come together to win. Alabamans did it. Wisconsin citizens did it. And if they can, the whole country can. But we need to stop whining.

Who wants to go to a party where people just sit around and complain and gossip about people they don't like?

Nobody. That's who.

[EffieBlack]

44. You think the audience needed Bernie Sanders to tell them that people should run for office?

They don't live in caves, you know.

[RandomAccess]

35. Unfortunately, there are many here who are incapable of seeing / hearing

ANYthing Sanders does in a positive light, or even just some flavor of neutral/non-offensive.

I wrote in another thread that what happened in the last primary was that Sanders got swiftboated on race/racism. I watched it happen, in horror. As a result, there are large swathes of the Democratic party who are simply -- as I said -- incapable of seeing him as anything but some racist pig. The ressponses you've gotten are small bits of proof.

[Raine]

2. Thank you so much

for posting this!

[diva77]

3. K&R

[pansypoo53219]

4. i read some & i was huh? sounded good to me. now more good.

[njhoneybadger]

5. Nonsense, they gained seats because of racism,Republican propaganda and

Gerrymandering

[Skittles]

6. CORRECT

[eShirl]

7. and supressing voting

[progressoid]

9. Racism, GOP propaganda, gerrymandering, and voter suppression still exist.

Yet we are now winning those seats.

[Demsrule86]

12. Thanks to an overwhelming dislike of Trump and the gerrymander has weakened as shown

by the 16 result for Clinton in some districts.

[karynnj]

17. "and the gerrymander has weakened" -- in most places the lines for districts have not changed

Even in PA, where we won court victories, the OLD districts are still in place and Connor Lamb won one of them.

In 2016, gerrymandering did impact the House of Representatives. It can not impact the Senate races or the Presidential race - as it simply defines the districts within a state.

[sl8]

24. I think you're mistaken about the old PA districts being in place.

I'm pretty sure the new districts are in place and that the May primaries will use them.

Conor Lamb was elected in the old district, after the PA Supreme Court decision, but before their map took effect. He's facing primary challengers in the new district.

Ballotpedia article about the PA redistricting:
https://ballotpedia.org/Redistricting_in_Pennsylvania

[karynnj]

27. We're saying the same thing.

My point is that the races we have won so far are NOT in the new districts - and I gave the example of Lamb. Our court victories mean that the new districts will come into force -- and in fact, the May primary will use them.

[progressoid]

20. Which supports what Sanders said at 1:50 in the video.

"You don't win elections, unless you show up (applause)" .

Take a look at Virginia. Heavily gerrymandered state and yet we picked up 15 seats by just getting out the vote. Hopefully that enthusiasm continues into 2018. But by 2020, we're going to have to do more than just run against Drumpf. We need to hone our message that what we offer is better for America.

[Adrahil]

10. Exactly

Bernie and some of supporters want to believe that racism is a symptom economic inequality. That's reductive and dismissive.

Bernie Sanders does not get it.

[uponit7771]

36. +1, don't forget voter suppression

[DLevine]

8. K&R

[Demsrule86]

11. There is nothing inspiring about trashing Pres. Obama, the Democratic Party and

giving what is a campaign speech at a MLK event. I already watched the video before I posted a single comment on the other thread.

[panader0]

14. "Charismatic" "extraordinary" "brilliant" are not trashing words.

To note that the party model has not worked well for 15 years is a matter
of record, not opinion. I wish the Bernie bashers would concentrate on Trump
instead of attacking a man who ran for POTUS as a Democrat.
I'm not sure of the motive of these attacks except to divide the left.
Quit picking off the scabs at every possibility.
During the primaries. Sanders had a 4 to 1 preference here at DU.
Please let it go.

[shanny]

28. +1

[Adrahil]

33. How do you not see through that vaneer?

He basically says Obama has these characteristics, but failed as a leader of the party? How can you Berners honestly not see that? Are you just so blinded by loyalty? I'm kind of dumbfounded.... I'm feeling gas-lighted.

And even if YOU don't see it, do at least acknowledge he has a problem if lots of people like me DO see it? bh

[uponit7771]

38. +1. The CEO of GM is great but GM sucks... How in the hell is that a positive thing ?!

[uponit7771]

37. The contrasting but after is though

[Demsrule86]

42. It is what I call a back handed compliment...soft racism...Obama just wasn't good enough oh sure

he was brilliant and charismatic but....It made me so angry I got a headache.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. I have no animus toward him but I am tired of him.

[ehrnst]

26. Calling him an empty suit as head of a party that has been "A failure" for 15 years

Last edited Fri Apr 6, 2018, 08:19 PM - Edit history (1)

Is tone deaf at the very least...

[uponit7771]

40. +1, this is some gas lighting aint it !? The CEO of GM is great but GM sucks isn't a compliment

[NCTraveler]

15. The RawStory article was absolute shit...

As so many of their articles are. It still doesn’t negate some of the excellent commentary from DU members as to Sanders flaws and errors.

This highlights the fact that RawStory should be recognized for what it is, not some pass for Sanders actual words.

[disillusioned73]

19. K&R..

makes one wonder about peoples intentions & agendas..

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/329404-poll-bernie-sanders-countrys-most-popular-active-politician

[mountain grammy]

21. K & R and thank you.

It was a good town hall. Mr. Lumumba is going far. These are the very people who are going to bring progressive change to the South.

[progressoid]

22. +1

[karynnj]

23. Thanks for posting this, but everyone will likely continue to see it through a lens of 2016

The paragraph that was extracted is exactly what one would expect from anyone who is on the very progressive/ anti trade deals would say. Consider it as the mirror image of the 1990s/2000s DLC comment that the Democratic Party needed to change its message from the union/liberal driven message of the then "old" party that lost many races in the 1980s. The comment that OBama won due to his charisma, not the establishment policy he ran on -- could be balanced by saying (in retrospect) that Bill Clinton won because of his charisma - not the shift in what the Democratic platform was.

I think in both cases, that should have been the start of a discussion - not a war and certainly not a call that saying it insulted anyone or calling anyone as not in the Democratic tent.

In both cases, splitting the party primarillarly on trade policy, where they do differ, ignores that on most issues - including most that are most personal and most important to most people, the policies pushed by both parts of the Democratic party are the same. Both are for providing affordable access to healthcare, education (including college), and housing. Both are for a livable wage. Both are for a woman's right to choose and sensible gun control.

2016 was even more complicated, because Clinton, a long term establishment politician shifted on trade - even though TPP would have been her biggest accomplishment as Secretary of State. This was a gamble and was likely because she saw that policy as something that most Democrats supported and that it could heal that rift. She might have seen that as needed because on another issue where the party had factions, she opted to take a more hawkish position either Obama or Kerry.

What is really happening now is that the Sanders/Progressive wing of the party wants the conventional wisdom to be that the establishment message failed -- and further, it has failed in past elections other than when a charismatic leader. Implicitly, their message is that the winning platform would be theirs - something for which they have no proof. There are also people, who align with Obama, who think the platform is fine .. but that Clinton was a mediocre candidate. The solution for them is the Obama message with a better candidate. People aligned with Clinton argue that it was extraneous forces, not the candidate or the 2016 platform that led to Trump becoming President.

This is a fight for what the party should be going forward. My own opinion is that it has to be an open enough tent to include everyone who agrees on most issues. I would also note that OBAMA himself accomplished this - even on issues where people - on either side - hoped he would move in their direction.

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. He was well received

I find some merit at times to the criticism of Bernie that he too often defaults to discussing racism as a subset of economic oppression and not enough as a stand alone evil in this world. His world view prism is first and foremost an economic one. I accept that some feel that's a valid reason for not supporting Sander's as one's preferred candidate for office. There can be other reasons also of course - and the same is true across the board as we look at our choices. There are no perfect candidates

But in a nation where likely a majority of elected white politicians (this includes Republicans) harbor some significant racist views, Bernie Sanders is an anti-racist. One can argue that he has blind spots. One can argue that he is tone deaf, one can argue many negatives against him, but Bernie Sanders forcefully opposes racism and has done so all of his adult political life. He may or may not be an effective political leader at effectively countering racism. Those who choose to can have that debate.

Many of us here frankly find it bizarre how many millions of keystrokes get expended on attacks on Bernie Sanders on Democratic Underground. Second only to Donald Trump there is not a political figure in America for whom the mere mention of his name will incite literally hundreds of emphatically damning posts about him here at DU. That is fucking crazy. These are attacks on the man who won over 40% of the votes in the last Democratic Presidential primaries - over 13 million votes. And he didn't win them by running as some kind of George Wallace white resentment figure. He won them supporting positions that virtually all of us agree with in principle even if some of us feel they were poorly thought through in terms of political strategy.

There are real villains out there but Bernie Sanders isn't one of them. I like having his voice present loud in the public mix. Others don't. Fine we can agree to disagree on that. But anyone who doesn't understand that constant attacks on a man who almost always stands on our side of the issues (who inspires loyalty and confidence among many millions of voters whose votes Democrats depend on) demoralizes important elements of the larger Democratic coalition - particularly among younger voters ... well it's hard to know where to begin. I'll use the simplest term. It is counter productive to our larger immediate goals.

I know the dance, I've been through it here many times before. We will soon enough be back in national primary mode here at Democratic Underground. But now the first primaries are almost two years away, and the mid terms are in November. Can we try to keep our eye on the ball?

[shanny]

29. Well said, thank you. nt

[progressoid]

30. Well said. However,

"We will soon enough be back in national primary mode here at Democratic Underground"

I don't expect there will be much of Democratic Underground left by the next primary. I've been here for 14 years and have never seen it this lack luster. During this shit-storm of an administration, this place should be exploding with activism. But it seems to be a losing steam. How many people did we lose in the last year because they were either run off or just faded away.

[vi5]

32. Oh it will still be here....

...but I worry that it will just become all establishment, all the time, the only thing anyone can suggest that may be done differently or better will be to clap louder, and anything outside of that will be run out or fade away as you said.

[vi5]

31. Good god, thank you for that....

..I really could not have said it any better myself.

The short sightedness of people on here and in our party who want to claim seemingly out of spite for Bernie, that we have done nothing wrong as a party, don't need to change anything, and that every criticism of the party is a lie is going to continue costing us.

The man is not proposing or suggesting anything that 25+ years ago would have been anything even close to radical for the Democratic party yet he's vilified simply because he dared to say out loud what a lot of people have been thinking for quite some time.

[leftstreet]

34. +1

nicely stated

[uponit7771]

39. In a vacuum your right, this is ... NOT ... a vacuum and many on this site are not LIVs.

We've heard Sanders bashing (unfair criticism) of Obama in the past and this is an extension of it

[Arazi]

41. Thank you. My god these same tired roundabouts are fucking lame