Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
84 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Where was Bernie today? (Original Post) EffieBlack Jan 2017 OP
Same reason none of the other Senators did. elleng Jan 2017 #1
But isn't Bernie supposed to be different from the rest? Stronger, braver, tougher, more independent EffieBlack Jan 2017 #2
Touche' Cha Jan 2017 #10
Post removed Post removed Jan 2017 #76
+1. Great question. I'll await the answer, but I suspect it may never come. nt Tarheel_Dem Jan 2017 #12
Oh snap. sheshe2 Jan 2017 #22
what would he have been standing up to? The problem is Trump still won the electoral college. That JCanete Jan 2017 #37
Standing up and questioning the Electoral College vote wouldn't have changed the outcome... George II Jan 2017 #68
Because he has been advocating for things that nobody else was on board with or willing to entertain JCanete Jan 2017 #72
His low level of legislative achievement isn't a "metric", it's a fact. George II Jan 2017 #73
He was invited to be by his side...you think sanders just showed up and said "is this seat taken?" JCanete Jan 2017 #74
Yes, Sanders is a US Senator, not a State Senator, but he's a US Senator from VERMONT, not New York. George II Jan 2017 #75
okay, I retract it, but I also resent your characterization that seems unmerited under the JCanete Jan 2017 #77
But what does that have to do with this story? NWCorona Jan 2017 #39
Dang! Spot on, EB. eom BlueCaliDem Jan 2017 #52
Your made up narrative certainly makes it look that way... TCJ70 Jan 2017 #60
among those was free college, which she ended up adding to her platform, which New York just JCanete Jan 2017 #63
He needs to concentrate on things he can have an effect on like Medicare womanofthehills Jan 2017 #70
No - cos he's the leader of the Revolut...i..o.. fuck it. pkdu Jan 2017 #3
Today he lost whatever credibility he had left. He talks a good game, but didn't utter a peep when EffieBlack Jan 2017 #9
Yep. Agreed. nt pkdu Jan 2017 #14
So did every sitting Dem senator lose any credibility? NWCorona Jan 2017 #40
Yes, many of them did, elleng Jan 2017 #48
I can appreciate the consistency. NWCorona Jan 2017 #50
Yes, they did - but not as much as the guy who's supposed to be such a revolutionary EffieBlack Jan 2017 #59
People that voted for Bernie and then Hillary always say... tecelote Jan 2017 #30
Yes indeed, our priority should be coming together. elleng Jan 2017 #49
You as a staunch Bernie Sanders supporter...did you vote for Hillary in the GE? BlueCaliDem Jan 2017 #53
I staunchly supported Governor O'Malley, elleng Jan 2017 #54
You're correct. You were for O'Malley. My apologies. I forgot that part. BlueCaliDem Jan 2017 #56
Isn't it obvious? HassleCat Jan 2017 #4
Based on his earlier writings, I think he probably resents being defeated by a woman. George II Jan 2017 #6
So, why do YOU think that he didn't speak up today? EffieBlack Jan 2017 #7
For the same reason none of the others did. HassleCat Jan 2017 #11
So speaking up and standing with the CBC members on something this important was a "futile quest?" EffieBlack Jan 2017 #13
Bernie, Bernie, Bernie! HassleCat Jan 2017 #15
Who said anything about "everything being Bernie's fault?" EffieBlack Jan 2017 #16
Is the number 44 significant? HassleCat Jan 2017 #19
Because those Democrats haven't set themselves up to be mavericks who buck the "establishment" EffieBlack Jan 2017 #31
No Democratic Senator spoke negatively about President Obama, either. Bernie did. He even BlueCaliDem Jan 2017 #55
Huh? You seem to contradict the first part of you post with what you wrote in the second part. brush Jan 2017 #26
If he's intent on dividing the Democrats then why was he appointed to a Dem leadership position? NWCorona Jan 2017 #41
This would have been a good opportunity to show leadership. nt ucrdem Jan 2017 #47
There are a lot of books to be sold. George II Jan 2017 #5
Books to hawk? leftofcool Jan 2017 #8
Bernie had other issues to deal with. Buckeye_Democrat Jan 2017 #17
Hee hee. narnian60 Jan 2017 #57
At least you... tonedevil Jan 2017 #18
Very warm NWCorona Jan 2017 #42
I must admit... Mike Nelson Jan 2017 #20
+1 uponit7771 Jan 2017 #27
Where was Bernie in 2004? ucrdem Jan 2017 #21
I love Maxine Waters. sheshe2 Jan 2017 #23
She is fearless. ucrdem Jan 2017 #24
Hey you.... sheshe2 Jan 2017 #62
heya sheshe! ucrdem Jan 2017 #64
Seriously! True_Blue Jan 2017 #25
+1 uponit7771 Jan 2017 #28
I believe Bernie was in Ft. Lauderdale and stuck in the chaos down here. Sorry to interrupt your monmouth4 Jan 2017 #29
Link? EffieBlack Jan 2017 #32
It was mentioned in the tv coverage on MSNBC..n/t monmouth4 Jan 2017 #33
Can't be true onenote Jan 2017 #34
I can only report what I heard, sorry..n/t monmouth4 Jan 2017 #35
You could acknowledge that the facts don't square with what you heard. onenote Jan 2017 #36
Would you like his itinerary? NWCorona Jan 2017 #43
if it shows how he could be caught in Fort Lauderdale onenote Jan 2017 #45
IDK, that's a good question. Ligyron Jan 2017 #38
He probably didn't want to insult the segment of Trump voters that could be reached hollowdweller Jan 2017 #44
He doesn't want to insult Trump voters so he turned his back on a loyal Democratic base EffieBlack Jan 2017 #61
... NWCorona Jan 2017 #46
Primary is over. I respectfully suggest we focus on Putin's Poodle DLevine Jan 2017 #51
It's over. Time to regroup. azmom Jan 2017 #58
Where were the other Senators in the party? 4bucksagallon Jan 2017 #65
Not "picking on" Bernie. Bernie held himself out as different, better, beyond the others EffieBlack Jan 2017 #66
Because of the people here claiming Bernie was the best leader treestar Jan 2017 #67
Sanders is not some "other Senator in the Party." He is not in our party at all. DFW Jan 2017 #69
He's a meanie!!1!!11 QC Jan 2017 #71
its irrelevant, we aren't a cult. policies and ideas, not to mention that caucusing, JCanete Jan 2017 #82
This again? HassleCat Jan 2017 #78
Holding him accountable for walking his talk is not "Bernie hate" EffieBlack Jan 2017 #79
Yes, it is, actually. HassleCat Jan 2017 #80
His talk has not been to disavow the electoral college, or to waste energy pointing at Russia JCanete Jan 2017 #81
Taking Trump, Preibus, Republicans, et al. to task for possible cuts to... SMC22307 Jan 2017 #83
He was doing all that at 1 pm on Friday? EffieBlack Jan 2017 #84
 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
2. But isn't Bernie supposed to be different from the rest? Stronger, braver, tougher, more independent
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 01:16 AM
Jan 2017

That's what we've been told over and over.

So, now he's just one of the crowd?

Response to Cha (Reply #10)

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
37. what would he have been standing up to? The problem is Trump still won the electoral college. That
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 11:58 AM
Jan 2017

kind of should be honored on principle. Is it stupid that the majority voters don't win in this country? Yes, but its been like that forever, and post election LOSS is not the right fucking time to tackle that. As to50 illegitimate electors, would getting them disqualified have mattered if they just got replaced? The result was going to be the same.

There is no reason to appear petty. That will just be used against the Democrats as the party that cried wolf when they go after real matters.

Just saying "he's a maverick right? and does mavericky anti-establishment things right...so why not this..." is really really really silly. His focus isn't all over the map. It is about the money. It is about corporate influence on policy. You want to simply make him out to be a hater, and since you could give a shit about his actual message, you see no reason why he shouldn't insert himself into even pointless attention grabbing fights like this one.

George II

(67,782 posts)
68. Standing up and questioning the Electoral College vote wouldn't have changed the outcome...
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 10:47 AM
Jan 2017

...of the election. But it would have given Democrats an opportunity to discuss the circumstances behind that result.

By not having that 2-hour formal debate many things that happened in the last few weeks of the campaign will not be in the Congressional Record.

You talk about his "focus" and it being "about the money" - what legislation has he written and introduced, much less gotten passed, in his 25+ years in the House and Senate that could or would have done something on that issue? Oh, he's "co-sponsored" bills written and introduced by others, but what has HE done other than tag along on others' shirt tails?

I'll save you the trouble, here's the list:














 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
72. Because he has been advocating for things that nobody else was on board with or willing to entertain
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 01:25 PM
Jan 2017

You might want to consider that his relatively low legislative achievement according to your metric of success had had to do with that reality. He may have determined that using his vote as leverage to affect legislation, he was more effective than writing bills that would die without ever seeing the light of day.

He used his role to be a thorn in the side of the wheeling and dealing, and to speak truth to power, and I think, given that they certainly weren't going to help him do more than that, he used his position as effectively as it could have been used.

What cosponsorship could he have gotten on bills about the money? To think that all legislation and ideology is equal in Washington and that all Bills are capable there in the inner sanctum, without outside pressure clamoring at the gates, is truly living in Pollyanna land.

BUT, who fucking cares. I'm not actually interested into trying to defend Sanders at every turn. What I like about him, and would still like about him more than the rest of the field, if he himself even had seriously complicated baggage, is that he has really been the only one to talk about the money affecting not just our elections but our policies, and that he has been able to get that message heard. I would still prefer him because he is talking about social improvements to our system that aren't middling, but are dramatic, and have become possible just by getting them into the national discourse. Hey lookie over there! New York just adopted free college for people making under 125 thousand.

George II

(67,782 posts)
73. His low level of legislative achievement isn't a "metric", it's a fact.
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 01:59 PM
Jan 2017

There are 100 members of the Senate, the vote of one lone Senator is not going to result in much "leverage", if any, or affect legislation. In fact, that has even been used as an excuse by him and his supporters for some questionable votes of his, "well, it would have passed anyway", etc. So much for the leverage factor.

On the other hand, writing and introducing bills puts his so-called issues on stage, whether they're passed or not. This excuse in a sense is similar to the one above, "well, it wouldn't get passed anyway so why bother introducing it".

Yes, he talks about money affecting politics, but that's about all he does - he rarely if ever follows up with any action. That has been one of the criticisms of Sanders - a lot of talk, no action. And you're here saying exactly that. Yes, he's talking about social improvements but what has he ever done to actually implement any of those improvements? Again, rarely if ever.

You're right, partially, New York's Governor Andrew Cuomo proposed a plan for free tuition at state colleges (they didn't "adopt" it!), and characteristically who was by his side trying to take credit for it? Senator Bernard Sanders!!!

( http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/03/nyregion/free-tuition-new-york-colleges-plan.html?_r=0 0

So tell me, why wasn't Sanders in VERMONT working with HIS governor to come up with a plan for free tuition for state colleges? Was that stage not big enough?

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
74. He was invited to be by his side...you think sanders just showed up and said "is this seat taken?"
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 02:32 PM
Jan 2017

That is some FOX NEWS level spin, and is not becoming. As to Vermont, Sanders is a US Senator not a state Senator, and Vermont has a Republican Governor.

I am saying that the talking has to come first and that it has to reach the public. That without it the establishment has no interest in changing...no need to deviate from the status quo. I think we have pretty damn good evidence of that over the last 30 years. When there isn't a populist push for something, you mostly just get a steady erosion of good policy and regulations.

In that environment, because it is rarely about convincing people of good legislation, and usually about "convincing" them of it by making sure their lobbyists are happy and their constituencies are either getting something out of it or are not going to tar and feather the politician for it, little change can get achieved by a lone voice...

and still I'd rather that lone voice be there if just to point out the sicknesses in the bills that do make it through committees.

But again, I have no interest in combing through his record to show you why he was a model politician and actually used every ounce of his position at its best capacity, because again, in a sea of politicians with not so stellar records for one thing or the other,
what I care about--because it really is the most important-- is that he is saying things that most of our elected officials have been ignoring for the last 30 years, AND for whatever miraculous reason, he is finally being heard. And, case in point, the public hears him and finally after all his time in Washington, the establishment Dems start to hear him. It just doesn't work the other way around.

Hell, I supported Edwards even though I never quite trusted him...he was so slick and kind of smarmy, and if memory serves, I don't think his record was consistent with his rhetoric...but given the playing field and that he was the ONLY one saying "fuck compromise, we can't work with the GOP, we have to fight them"...you know...the thing we're finally saying today...he was absolutely my pick for President. He was right about the one thing that we needed a politician to be right about. It sucks that he sucked. It sucks that he ended up betraying those who voted for him by being so arrogant. And of course, knowing what I know about him now, I would not have supported him because he could have harmed his message rather than furthered it, and gotten a Republican elected...but the message is what mattered.

In Sander's case, the message is spreading, not dying...at least for now, and he has demonstrated that his own packaging is not a poison pill for it.

George II

(67,782 posts)
75. Yes, Sanders is a US Senator, not a State Senator, but he's a US Senator from VERMONT, not New York.
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 03:06 PM
Jan 2017

And you're correct, Vermont has a republican Governor, a republican governor who has been in office for all of three days - he was sworn in on Thursday.

For the six years prior to that Vermont had a Democratic Governor, Peter Shumlin. So let me ask again, where's the action? In your long post above you talk about lots of things that Sanders said, but not one single example of what he has actually done.

PS - I resent your comment about what I presented as being "Fox News spin", it was uncalled for.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
77. okay, I retract it, but I also resent your characterization that seems unmerited under the
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 03:14 PM
Jan 2017

circumstances. I fully admit a shitty job researching the governorship, but it wasn't that germane to my point anyway, so I didn't do due diligence.

The point about New York is that it was his promotion of it at an AUDIBLE National Level, AND IMPORTANTLY, Clinton's adoption of it in her platform as a primary concession, that made this a possibility. Vermont, on the other hand, has not taken it up, which is again, not Sanders actual role to make happen any more than he could have directly done it in New York.

NWCorona

(8,541 posts)
39. But what does that have to do with this story?
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 01:03 PM
Jan 2017

The fact that no one else signed on should be enough for most to understand except for the most ardent Bernie haters.

Did Maxine Waters call out Bernie specifically?

TCJ70

(4,387 posts)
60. Your made up narrative certainly makes it look that way...
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 05:52 PM
Jan 2017

...but hey, you vehemently supported the person who suggested not even trying things because they're hard. So you don't have much of a leg to stand on.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
63. among those was free college, which she ended up adding to her platform, which New York just
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 11:52 PM
Jan 2017

adopted for the State. Apparently these things are doable when you stop pretending they aren't.

womanofthehills

(8,584 posts)
70. He needs to concentrate on things he can have an effect on like Medicare
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 11:10 AM
Jan 2017

why waste his time on a done deal.

pkdu

(3,977 posts)
3. No - cos he's the leader of the Revolut...i..o.. fuck it.
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 01:18 AM
Jan 2017

He claims ( or at least his supporters do) to be out there leading the charge against Trump ( in ways meaningful AND symbolic )

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
9. Today he lost whatever credibility he had left. He talks a good game, but didn't utter a peep when
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 01:41 AM
Jan 2017

it really mattered.

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
59. Yes, they did - but not as much as the guy who's supposed to be such a revolutionary
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 05:50 PM
Jan 2017

and castigates other Democrats for being too pragmatic and afraid to take a stand.

I'm not surprised by most of the other Democrats' failure to act since that's how they usually act. I am surprised by Bernie who's supposed to be different. And saying "but THEY didn't do anything EITHER!" doesn't cut it.

tecelote

(5,122 posts)
30. People that voted for Bernie and then Hillary always say...
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 09:03 AM
Jan 2017

"I voted for Hillary and supported her". We're trying to move forward.

Yet, so many hate Bernie. Outright vitriol any time his name is mentioned.

Our priority should be coming together... to save the world.

elleng

(130,153 posts)
54. I staunchly supported Governor O'Malley,
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 02:40 PM
Jan 2017

and after he was forced out, my 'support' went to Senator Sanders. Finally I recognized need to vote for Secretary Clinton. Satisfied?

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
56. You're correct. You were for O'Malley. My apologies. I forgot that part.
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 02:43 PM
Jan 2017

And yes, although it doesn't matter in the greater scheme of politics, I'm satisfied.

 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
4. Isn't it obvious?
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 01:21 AM
Jan 2017

He's not a Real Democrat. He hates Hillary. He's intent on dividing the party. He only cares about his own ego. And so on and so forth.

This reminds me so much of blaming Nader for Gore's loss. Heap vitriol on a scapegoat and ignore the behavior of the Real Democrats. I suppose it makes people feel good to do this, but it will not help us.

 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
11. For the same reason none of the others did.
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 01:58 AM
Jan 2017

It's a futile quest, and they want to pick their battles.

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
13. So speaking up and standing with the CBC members on something this important was a "futile quest?"
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 02:09 AM
Jan 2017

Got it.

But during the primary, Bernie and his supporters were full of sanctimonious lectures about why Hillary was a "sellout" because she didn't fight for certain things that would never have occurred. Bernie bellowed and waved his fist and insisted that the fight was important. When Hillary picked her battles, she was a corporatist, oligarch without principles or backbone.

But today, Bernie couldn't be bothered to get up from his seat and say, "I object" because it was "futile?"

Bernie's full of it.


 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
15. Bernie, Bernie, Bernie!
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 02:21 AM
Jan 2017

It's already happening, just as I predicted. Everything is Bernie's fault. I expect to see a post revealing how Bernie substituted sugar pills for Trump's mom's birth control pills.

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
16. Who said anything about "everything being Bernie's fault?"
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 02:29 AM
Jan 2017

I simply asked why Bernie did not stand up for principle today when members of the Congressional Black Caucus begged one Senator to stand up and join their objection to Trump's Electoral College vote.

No - the man who yelled last year to his adoring crowds about the revolution he was going to lead today sat on his ass and didn't say a word.

 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
19. Is the number 44 significant?
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 03:02 AM
Jan 2017

Actually, you make a good point. Sanders may be doing the wrong thing with his revolution, but he's doing something, not sitting on his ass. The reason nobody made an objection is because they knew it was a waste of time. It's so curious that so many people are on Sanders like a blanket, but say nothing of the 44 Democrats who "set on their asses."

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
31. Because those Democrats haven't set themselves up to be mavericks who buck the "establishment"
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 09:22 AM
Jan 2017

Bernie is supposed to be different than those other Democrats - isn't that what makes him so "special?"

Funny to see the same people who idolized Bernie because he supposedly ALWAYS fought for what's right even when it wasn't "pragmatic" and seemed to be an impossible cause - and attacked Hillary for being a sellout when she picked HER battles - now defend Bernie for remaining silent and not speaking up for what's right because the "establishment" Democrats didn't do anything either.

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
55. No Democratic Senator spoke negatively about President Obama, either. Bernie did. He even
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 02:41 PM
Jan 2017
lied about the sitting president in 2011. NO sitting Democratic Senator did.

Now you're trying to claim that just because other Democratic Senators didn't stand up (we expected as much) Bernie is absolved for not doing so, too? THIS while he had no problem criticizing President Obama for months during PBO's re-election campaign??

I thought Sanders would use the same bombastic tactics he used against Hillary Clinton during the primaries on tRump. I have yet to see him do that, and when he didn't stand with Black House Dems in calling out the corruption in the EC results, I was flabbergasted as well as deeply disappointed.

If any Senator had the creds to stand with House Dems to object to the EC results, it was Sanders, and he failed.

Mike Nelson

(9,903 posts)
20. I must admit...
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 03:03 AM
Jan 2017

...Bernie standing up with Maxine Waters would have been a powerful and long-lasting image.

ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
21. Where was Bernie in 2004?
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 03:37 AM
Jan 2017

Where was he in 2000? Where was he last November?

p.s. here's where Maxine Waters was last June:





ucrdem

(15,512 posts)
24. She is fearless.
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 03:53 AM
Jan 2017

She's fought many a battle and is always ready for the next one. She picked a winner too!

p.s.

True_Blue

(3,063 posts)
25. Seriously!
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 05:48 AM
Jan 2017

Almost everyday he blames the Democrats for losing the election. All that does is legitimize this Russian coup.

monmouth4

(9,664 posts)
29. I believe Bernie was in Ft. Lauderdale and stuck in the chaos down here. Sorry to interrupt your
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 08:59 AM
Jan 2017

Bernie bashing.

onenote

(42,380 posts)
34. Can't be true
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 09:39 AM
Jan 2017

The joint session to count electoral college votes was scheduled to begin at 1 pm, and as typically is the case, took less than an hour to complete, even with the House objections.

Direct flights from Fort Lauderdale to DC take 2 and a half hours. The first reports of shots fired came just before 1 pm. So if Bernie wanted to be in DC for the vote counting, he would have had to be in the air long before the shooting started.

onenote

(42,380 posts)
45. if it shows how he could be caught in Fort Lauderdale
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 01:24 PM
Jan 2017

because of an event occurring around 1 and still have planned to be in DC before 1, yes.

Because I've always been fascinated by time travel.

Ligyron

(7,592 posts)
38. IDK, that's a good question.
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 12:17 PM
Jan 2017

BTW, where was Liz Warren, etc.?

Maybe he, Bernie, was at a gun rally bashing BLM?

Or in Lauderdale helping that idiot load his weapon.

Honestly, this hatred of Sen Sanders by some here is so silly and counter productive.

The "It's that mean, sexist Sen. Sanders who prevented our queen's coronation!" misses the fact that we ran a candidate wrongfully disliked by so many that we flat lost. Our folly in this may well be the undoing of this grand experiment in Democracy we call the USA.

Comey, the unanswered, unchallenged long-term brainwashing of half the public by a RW media machine and the Russian's interference had way more to do with this disaster than anything Sanders could have done even if he tried.

The DNC's corruption from the top and shortsightedness certainly didn't help either.

We best figure this out - and quick or we are truly doomed as a party and a people.

 

hollowdweller

(4,229 posts)
44. He probably didn't want to insult the segment of Trump voters that could be reached
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 01:21 PM
Jan 2017

There is a small segment of voters that swing back and forth. Clinton sent a crucial margin to Obama when Bill said the thing about "Jesse Jackson won SC" in the primary.

Obama sent some to the other side when he said the "Clinging to Guns and Religion"

Clinton sent some to Trump with the "Deplorables" thing.

Now if the dems had some coordinated strategy they had been working on since the election to discredit the Trump win based on the Russian hacking then this might be appropriate but IMO doing it now just risks losing more future votes.

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
61. He doesn't want to insult Trump voters so he turned his back on a loyal Democratic base
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 05:53 PM
Jan 2017

Got it.

So, I guess that means all the "Bernie's picking his battles and holding his fire" defenses are just bullshit since ANYTHING Bernie might do to stand up to Trump is likely to insult his voters and we can't let THAT happen, can we?

Wow.

DLevine

(1,788 posts)
51. Primary is over. I respectfully suggest we focus on Putin's Poodle
Sat Jan 7, 2017, 02:28 PM
Jan 2017

and the KGOP. They are the real threat.

4bucksagallon

(975 posts)
65. Where were the other Senators in the party?
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 07:19 AM
Jan 2017

Sounds like the rest of the Democrats knew this was a lose lose situation. I don't hear you disparaging them.. Why pick on Bernie? Never mind I think anyone that reads this forum knows the answer. Hate is such a winning strategy for bringing new people into the party, isn't it?

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
66. Not "picking on" Bernie. Bernie held himself out as different, better, beyond the others
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 09:11 AM
Jan 2017

Bernie - by his and his supporters own claim - is supposed to be a maverick, a revolutionary, unafraid to go against the crowd of "Establishment" Democrats to say and do what is right, even if it's unpopular or hard or if the goal seems impossible.

But when he has the opportunity to do that but doesn't, the excuse is that "no one else did it either" and we who ask about it are accused of "picking on Bernie."

So, Bernie claims to be a rebel, but he's really a sheep - and a snowflaky one, at that ...

Got it.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
67. Because of the people here claiming Bernie was the best leader
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 10:26 AM
Jan 2017

the very bigly best. He is a real leader no? The others don't claim that.

DFW

(54,055 posts)
69. Sanders is not some "other Senator in the Party." He is not in our party at all.
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 11:04 AM
Jan 2017

He caucuses with the Democrats, but misses no opportunity to remind everyone he is not one. Except for a few months during the primary season, we have not succeeded in "bringing" Bernie Sanders into the Democratic Party. That's not hating Sanders or anyone else, just citing the record.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
82. its irrelevant, we aren't a cult. policies and ideas, not to mention that caucusing,
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 06:02 PM
Jan 2017

transcends the importance of a pretty D on someone's jersey.
 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
78. This again?
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 03:18 PM
Jan 2017

The Bernie hating just keeps rolling in, wave after wave. I would think, sooner or later, most people would let go of the anger and think about where we go from here. This is kind of discouraging, and I hope it abated pretty soon.

 

HassleCat

(6,409 posts)
80. Yes, it is, actually.
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 04:17 PM
Jan 2017

When he is singled out for every last little perceived sin or error, when people target him and then offer the excuse that he sought a high profile, when DU is filled with posts that just pick, pick, pick at everything he does. I suspect this is why Hillary is still laying low, so she won't be subjected to all the sniping from disgruntled Bernie Bros.

 

JCanete

(5,272 posts)
81. His talk has not been to disavow the electoral college, or to waste energy pointing at Russia
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 04:21 PM
Jan 2017

as the determining factor in our election, when it is always the big money here at home that king-makes, and absolutely did it again this cycle. He does talk about the corporate media's role in our fucked up election systems, and that is a far more appropriate place to spend our energy, along with figuring out how to reach those people that the media is continuing to misinform.

SMC22307

(8,088 posts)
83. Taking Trump, Preibus, Republicans, et al. to task for possible cuts to...
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 06:12 PM
Jan 2017

Medicaid, Social Security and Medicare. Addressing income inequality. Nailing Republicans on their goal of repealing the ACA, along with blasting Big Pharma on soaring profits and unaffordable drugs. Pointing out that many conservatives agree with having a minimum wage, but that their GOP representatives aren't listening to them. Highlighting the disproportionate use of police force against AAs versus other members of society. Thanking the First Lady for her service. Shall I go on?

 

EffieBlack

(14,249 posts)
84. He was doing all that at 1 pm on Friday?
Sun Jan 8, 2017, 11:12 PM
Jan 2017

Wow.

But, funny thing. The CBC members and their colleagues who were objecting to the count have also been doing those things AND they still managed to stand up on Friday and object to the count in order to prompt a much needed floor debate. Too bad that Bernie couldn't bother himself to join them.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Where was Bernie today?