Bernie Sanders's attack machine comes back to haunt him

[Gothmog]

Link to tweet

She also recalled that Sanders in 2016 claimed she was “unqualified” although she “had a lot more experience than he did, and got a lot more done than he had, but that was his attack on me.” She warned, “I just think people need to pay attention because we want, hopefully, to elect a president who’s going to try to bring us together, and not either turn a blind eye, or actually reward the kind of insulting, attacking, demeaning, degrading behavior that we’ve seen from this current administration.”.

This comes on the heels of another flap in which Sanders publicly apologized to former vice president Joe Biden for his campaign sending around an op-ed accusing Biden of corruption — a rare moment of contrition for Sanders.

And in yet another blowup over Sanders’s honesty, his attempt to insinuate that Biden favored Social Security cuts (taking a sarcastic comment out of context) was rated false by pundits and fact-checkers. Paul Krugman of the New York Times blasted Sanders for this move: “The Sanders campaign has flat-out lied about things Biden said in 2018 about Social Security, and it has refused to admit the falsehood. This is bad; it is, indeed, almost Trumpian.”....

Warren wants to “fight” while Buttigieg wants to “bring people together.” Sanders thinks capitalism is crooked and capitalists are crooks; Klobuchar wants to be the president not for half of America, but for all of America. To some extent, this contrast is the difference between leading a movement where getting things done and making deals are irrelevant (or even a sign of weakness!) and trying to govern in the messy world of real politics wherein the other party will never vanish and disagreements will divide even one’s own party.

If Sanders is feeling the heat now, it is only because his critics and competitors are sick of giving him a free pass to present himself as an honest, pure idealist while playing Trumpian politics. Put differently, two women — Warren and now Clinton — have had enough of his thinly disguised misogyny.

[melman]

1. Jennifer Rubin

lol

[Kurt V.]

2. +1000 . lol

[Aaron Pereira]

36. Rubin is a Republican.

So it's no surprise she has a strange fetish for writing attack pieces on Bernie Sanders. She opposes every policy position Sanders stands for.

[melman]

37. All true

[Cha]

117. A #NeverTrumper who wants him OUT.

[melman]

118. A right-wing smear merchant who said this of President Obama...

"His sympathies for the Muslim World take precedence over those, such as they are, for his fellow citizens"





http://web.archive.org/web/20100814105602/http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/340536





Pretty ugly stuff, don't you agree?

[Cha]

120. whoa

[Kahuna7]

119. You beat me to it, Cha. At least she's honestly, Never Trump. nt

[Gothmog]

44. Has sanders actually joined the Democratic Party yet?

Has sanders agreed to run as a Democrat when he is defeated in the Democratic POTUS primary and runs for re-election for his senate seat?

[redstateblues]

53. She hates Trump. She thinks Bernie can't beat Trump.

I think she’s right this time.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

78. That's because RethugliKKKons fear Bernie the most!! It's obvious!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[Skidmore]

82. ...

[TomCADem]

50. Classic BS Move. Ignore Substance, Make Attack On Media

Is there anything in Rubin's article that is factually inaccurate?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/27/bernie-sanders-attacks-media-press-fair-or-trump-2020-democrats

Are Bernie Sanders' attacks on the media fair – or Trumpian?

he newsletter landed in supporters’ email inboxes with an ominous subject line: “What We Cannot Discuss.” In it, the author lambasted “the Washington pundits who are paid by the corporations and billionaires who own the media”.

“[C]orporate and billionaire-owned media often tilts coverage against candidates … who push a working-class agenda – an agenda that threatens the political power of corporations and billionaires,” he continued, arguing that such biases have harmed his boss’ presidential campaign.

The author’s boss is, perhaps surprisingly, Democrat candidate Bernie Sanders, and not the notoriously anti-media Donald Trump

In fact, the Vermont senator’s campaign has repeatedly questioned the alleged biases of the mainstream media in recent days, leading some to compare Sanders to the president he hopes to defeat.

[melman]

83. I didn't read it

Why? Because Jennifer Rubin is a right-wing hack of the worst kind.


Have a look at this incredibly ugly column she wrote on President Obama.



http://web.archive.org/web/20100814105602/http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/340536




Now, tell me if you would be so kind...

- Is there some "substance" I'm missing in that?

- Am I "Trumpian" for condemning filth like that?

- Does a person who writes garbage like that deserve to be taken seriously as a legit columnist? If so, why?


Eagerly awaiting your answers.

[ehrnst]

84. Lacks the racism and misogyny of many of Cenk's screeds. But he's a Left Wing hero now.

So there's that.

Eagerly awaiting your thoughts....

[melman]

85. whataboutism mixed with straw man mixed with red herring

Impressive. And who said I like Cenk? Besides you that is.



also LOL that you find that column to be "lacking racism".

[ehrnst]

86. Those terms you use... I don't think that they mean what you think they do...

It was an example of a comparable situation where someone who was once vilified as a RWer gained favor as with statements that made sense to progressives.

Is that clearer?

[melman]

87. Oh that is rich

Rich with a bit of a "whoosh" mixed in for god measure. Impressive indeed.



Impressive but not nearly as amazing as saying Jennifer Rubin's incredibly racist column lacks racism


That is a post for the ages.




eta: this is the post I responded to...





As you can see it was subsequently edited to make it "clearer"

[ehrnst]

88. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone who said that piece "lacks racism?"

Because you should know by now, I don't defend straw men other people set up to attack.

[melman]

90. Not at all

You quite clearly said that as anyone reading can see.


Done here.

[ehrnst]

91. "Done here."

Best to fold when you have nothing in your hand.

[melman]

92. Look

You can play word games and parse to your heart's delight, but you said it and it's there for everyone to see.


and in case something happens to the post in an effort to make it "clearer"

here it is again:





reminder to readers:that was said in reference to this



http://web.archive.org/web/20100814105602/http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/340536


So no, it's not that I have "nothing in my hand" it's that there's nothing more to add.

You said it. The proof is there. And that is all there is to it.


And that is why I'm done here.

[ehrnst]

94. "I'm done here" Again?

Last edited Fri Jan 24, 2020, 02:53 PM - Edit history (1)

How can I miss you if you won't go away?



Look, when you conveniently ignore the qualifier in last part of the sentence where I was referring to the POST you shared,



"Lacks the racism and misogyny of many of Cenk's posts" you then are changing the meaning to something very different, and you have created your straw man. And yet again, failed to get me to attack it

So, anyone can read the above and understand that "Jennifer Rubin's column lacks racism" is clearly not what I said at all.

See also: "Obama told business leaders "they didn't build" their business..."


You can play word games, buy and attack straw men by the bale, and parse to your heart's delight, but you said it and it's there for everyone to see.



The basis of your claim was "done" the minute you went after that strawman...

But you'll be back again, replying to this debunking yet again saying "I am DONE here!"

Promises, promises..

[brutus smith]

103. Ok joni.

[ehrnst]

104. Ok joni.

(is this what the cool kids are doing now?)

Or are you confusing me with someone else...

Myohmy...

Have a donut and some coffee and that'll help.

[brutus smith]

106. Go read some more rubin op-eds.

[ehrnst]

107. Very sweet of you to come to melman's defense like that.

Last edited Sat Jan 25, 2020, 12:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Is he still sad that someone explained about how he was attacking a straw man when he misrepresented something someone else said in order to try to prove that person wrong?

Luckily he has friends like Brutus to go after those meanies!!



But anyhoo, are you a fan of her book? I was as a kid, too!!!



I'd recommend casting a line elsewhere. Fish aren't biting.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

77. Say no more.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[Cha]

3. Jennifer Rubin is Dead ON!

[Kurt V.]

6. She's a conservative. is this where we are?

[BannonsLiver]

11. What specifically is inaccurate?

[Kurt V.]

20. i didn't bother to read it. why the hell would i. after trump she'll be calling dems socialist again

[Cha]

15. I know Exactly who she is.. a #NEVERtrump.

[Kurt V.]

21. never trumpers means they'll never take responsible for trump. Which they are.

[Cha]

24. We need Allies in getting rid of trump.

[Kurt V.]

26. well probably. but i can't hang my hat there.

[Cha]

27. Don't care.

[Kurt V.]

29. yes you do. :)

[Cha]

39. No.. because we have work to do and

Jennifer Rubin has a big Bully horn at the WaPo.

[lapucelle]

76. How entitled does someone have to be to 'splain to someone else what they *really* think?

Asking for a friend.

[Thekaspervote]

30. Conservative or not she's speaking the truth!!

[Kurt V.]

71. we're getting took by these wolves in sheeps clothing

[LanternWaste]

66. Ah yes... many want to pick and choose politically pure sources only.

Is that where you are...?

[Kurt V.]

70. There is like one maybe two conservative voices worth the time.

she isn't one of them. so yes.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

79. Apparently so.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[ehrnst]

89. Certainly Cenk used to be a RWer....and very racist and misogynist. Expelled from Justice Dems even.

but now is considered progressive enough for Bernie to endorse for office.

So apparently validating a statement by a longtime conservative as making sense is exactly where we are, as far as Bernie is concerned.

Or perhaps people change?

[Happy Hoosier]

114. Where is she wrong on this, though...

Bernie talks a big line, but in the end he not only tolerates, but pays people like Sirota and Turner.

[TiberiusB]

12. "Adjustments"?

"Now, I don’t know a whole lot of people in the top one-tenth of 1 percent or the top 1 percent who are relying on Social Security when they retire. I don’t know a lot of them. Maybe you guys do. So we need a pro-growth, progressive tax code that treats workers as job creators, as well, not just investors; that gets rid of unprotective loopholes like stepped-up basis; and it raises enough revenue to make sure that the Social Security and Medicare can stay, it still needs adjustments, but can stay; and pay for the things we all acknowledge will grow the country."

"Adjustments"? I'd like some clarification on that. It's not like Biden doesn't have a history on this subject that predates one statement in 2018.

[mcar]

4. He said she was unqualified

She also recalled that Sanders in 2016 claimed she was “unqualified” although she “had a lot more experience than he did, and got a lot more done than he had, but that was his attack on me.” She warned, “I just think people need to pay attention because we want, hopefully, to elect a president who’s going to try to bring us together, and not either turn a blind eye, or actually reward the kind of insulting, attacking, demeaning, degrading behavior that we’ve seen from this current administration.”.

[aikoaiko]

13. His comment came after he was asked about Hillary's people calling him unqualified.

Did Hillary not mention that in her documentary?

Both candidates were qualified and it was a bad moment for both of them.

[Cha]

16. It was "bad" for BS.. so is this..

Link to tweet

[aikoaiko]

18. We could do better in the South, including with white southerners.

[Cha]

19. BS:"That speaks to very bad work done by Democrats there."

[aikoaiko]

22. Yep, he said that and as a Democrat I can live with it.

[Cha]

25. BS is WRONG.

[Thekaspervote]

31. He isn't a dem..he's an independent. He's using the dem party to run his campaign as he did in 16

[Thekaspervote]

34. Yes!! Always a slam against Dems from bernie

[Cha]

41. Always.. the title of

the OP describes what's happening.

[mcar]

33. So?

[aikoaiko]

35. My point is that is was an unfortunate tit-for-tat.

[betsuni]

38. No, Hillary never said he was unqualified.

It was after Bernie's interview by the New York Daily News where he couldn't explain how to break up the banks. Hillary was asked if she thought Sanders was ready to be president and she said that he hadn't done his homework, hadn't studied or understood the things he had been talking about for a year, and that voters should ask themselves if he can deliver what he talks about.

Then the Washington Post wrote a headline saying Hillary questioned his qualifications. So Bernie believed the headline and didn't know what she actually said. After he found out she never said it, he didn't take it back, he doubled down.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/06/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-qualified/index.html

[aikoaiko]

40. I didn't say Hillary said it, I said her people did.

That was the story that was being posed to Bernie.

And he fired back.

My point being that it was a tit-for-tat that wasn't good for either candidate.

[TiberiusB]

23. Again, there's more to the Clinton/Sanders "qualified to be President" dustup

They essentially went after each other on experience and judgement. Sanders was more blunt and Clinton was more cautious in her phrasing, implying rather than outright stating.

bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton Atlantic article

[betsuni]

5. K&R

[oasis]

7. Jennifer Rubin's hitting hard. Some here can't handle the truth. nt

[BannonsLiver]

9. Yes, the Common Dreams/Salon bubble has taken a beating today.

To which I say: Gooooooood.

[Cha]

17. Well said! To which I say..

Cheers!

[Thekaspervote]

32. Second that!! 3rd and 4th it too!!

[mcar]

8. ...

Link to tweet

?s=20

“Hillary Clinton, in my view, was the single most qualified person on the face of it to run for president of the United States we've had, period. Period. It wasn't that she didn't have all these ideas. She did. But the press...you didn't cover it."
-@JoeBiden

[PatSeg]

10. Classy

[betsuni]

14. Perfect.

[MustLoveBeagles]

48. So true

It was Benghazi, Emails, Faintgate, etc.

[Farmer-Rick]

28. Giving Bernie a "free pass"????????????????????????

When has Sanders ever gotten a free pass from the corporate media? He certainly never ever gets a free pass here on DU.

Everytime a misleading or half backed complaint about Bernie is published in the "liberal" media, an angel gets its wings ripped off by a Nazi.

And Traitor Trump, his Slovenian Sex Worker and a Russian murderer applaud because devide and conquor.

[Gothmog]

43. sanders was such a weak candidate that he has never been vetted and was treated with kid gloves

The Clinton campaign had a 100+ page well written memorandum on opposition research on sanders but never had to use it because sanders was such a weak candidate that it was not needed. sanders was mathematically eliminated after the Super Tuesday contests and never had a chance of being the nominee and so there was never a need to vet him

The Clinton campaign treated Sanders with kid gloves because sanders had no chance in the real world of being the nominee. The press did not vet sanders because sanders was such a weak candidate and it would have been a waste of their time. VOX had a good article on the potential lines of attack that Sanders would be exposed to if Sanders was the nominee. http://www.vox.com/2016/2/3/10903404/gop-campaign-against-sanders One of the more interesting observations in the VOX analysis is the fact that sanders have been treated with kids gloves compared to what sanders would face if he was the Democratic nominee. I strongly agree with the VOX's position that the so-called negative attacks against sanders have been mild. Form the article:

I have no interest in litigating any of these attacks here. Like any Democrat elected president in 2016, Sanders wouldn't be able to get much done, but he would block attempts to roll back Obama's accomplishments and have a chance to fill a few Supreme Court vacancies.

When Sanders supporters discuss these attacks, though, they do so in tones of barely contained outrage, as though it is simply disgusting what they have to put up with. Questioning the practical achievability of single-payer health care. Impugning the broad electoral appeal of socialism. Is nothing sacred?

But c'mon. This stuff is patty-cakes compared with the brutalization he would face at the hands of the right in a general election.

His supporters would need to recalibrate their umbrage-o-meters in a serious way.

sanders was treated with kid gloves by the Clinton campaign because of the amusing over-reactions of the sanders supporters in the primary process. It appears that you are upset that Hillary Clinton did not use all of the oppo research that was available. sanders was a weak candidate and would have been destroyed if the oppo research was used.

[AverageJoe]

58. Agreed

I though DU had a policy against bashing Democratic candidates. I guess that protection only applies to Third Way candidates.

[jcmaine72]

110. It seems some Democratic candidates are more equal than others.

[Farmer-Rick]

67. Like I said, no one, especially here on DU, has ever given Bernie a pass

You just got 15 angels wings ripped off by Nazis.

[comradebillyboy]

42. The Rube hits it out of the park!!!!

[emmaverybo]

45. Her analysis is spot on. In doling out honest criticism of Sanders, she shows she is certainly

not on Trump’s side or trying to win for Republicans.

[Gothmog]

46. Hillary Clinton was correct to be worried about sanders' bogus attacks and lies on real Democrats

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

47. How Negative Is Sanders Willing to Go?

Link to tweet

F

or example, the Sanders campaign sent out an edited transcript of something Biden said about Social Security, claiming that he agreed with former Republican Speaker Paul Ryan. Politifact rated that statement false. Here is the part of the speech they left out.
Now, I don’t know a whole lot of people in the top one-tenth of 1 percent or the top 1 percent who are relying on Social Security when they retire. I don’t know a lot of them. Maybe you guys do. So we need a pro-growth, progressive tax code that treats workers as job creators, as well, not just investors; that gets rid of unprotective loopholes like stepped-up basis; and it raises enough revenue to make sure that the Social Security and Medicare can stay, it still needs adjustments, but can stay; and pay for the things we all acknowledge will grow the country.

Since the campaign got caught in that lie, Sanders supporters have attempted to claim that Biden has been advocating for cutting Social Security for 40 years. As is often the case with disinformation, that is based on a half-truth. To solve a budget impasse in 1995, Biden supported a freeze on all federal spending, including cost of living adjustments to Social Security. Then there was his support for an Obama proposal to change the way cost of living increases were calculated, including both the income tax tables and Social Security. But the Sanders campaign turned those positions into an accusation that Biden attempted to “slash Social Security.”
An honest look at the totality of Biden’s position on Social Security would come from listening to Jared Bernstein, a progressive economist who served as an advisor to the former vice president.

Link to tweet

.....Some of us spoke up when Sanders hired David Sirota because his modus operandi was obvious to anyone who knew his history. Sirota has a reputation of being a ruthless attack dog. The campaign had to know that when they hired him. But now it seems that Sirota went too far with his attacks and his boss has been forced to apologize.

It is clear that the Sanders campaign will rely on attacks against his opponents. But this latest incident demonstrates that they are still struggling with where the boundaries are for those negative attacks. It is good to know that, at least for the candidate himself, accusing Biden of being corrupt is outside the boundary.

[dalton99a]

49. +1. And his staff has a long history of dirty tricks and subterfuge

[AverageJoe]

51. What utter tripe

It should surprise me, but it does not, that so many people here embrace a Republican commentator while bashing a progressive presidential candidate.

[Cha]

52. NOPE. Not at all.. very spot on!

[AverageJoe]

54. Embracing Republicans, Bashing Progressives

Damn. Enjoy four more years of trump.

[Gothmog]

57. sanders is such a weak general election candidate that trump will easily win 45+ states

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[AverageJoe]

61. Silly fear mongering

Support the candidate of your choice. Vote for the nominee. That’s what I’m going to do.

And I’m not going to bash Biden or the other Third Wayers who seem to have DU in thrall, though I disagree with these candidates on many policy issues. It’s just not productive.

[Cha]

121. NOPE.. Straight up FACTS

[Cha]

63. We're All Working to Get Rid of trump.. What do you think this is DOING?

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

FALSE!

Link to tweet

[redstateblues]

55. The enemy of my enemy is my friend-I'll re-evaluate after we beat Trump

[AverageJoe]

56. Why is Sanders your enemy?

I have my preference in the primaries, but will enthusiastically support the nominee—whoever that might be—in the general election. These attacks on Sanders only serve to alienate his supporters. Can’t you see that?

I want us to win the general election, regardless of who we put up against trump. I don’t get the sense that everyone here necessarily feels the same. That is terrifying.

Sanders isn’t your enemy. Trump is.

[Gothmog]

60. When why is sanders going so negative on other Democrats

It is sanders who is telling outright lies and going negative. I have seen first hand how sanders operates and it is not pretty.

I will support the nominee of the party. I really doubt that sanders will be the nominee because there are far too many real Democrats with good memories who will not forgive or forget. If sanders wants to be taken seriously, he may want to stop telling falsehoods and going negative.

[AverageJoe]

62. Okay, real Democrat

I’ll leave you be. Follow your conscience and I will follow mine.

[Gothmog]

69. Why did sanders call for cuts to social security?

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Scurrilous]

59. The thing that Bernie will not discuss.

"... and trying to govern in the messy world of real politics wherein the other party will never vanish..."


He will not discuss this. Avoids it or resorts to nonsense about people rising up and joining him and his revolution and then the reality of the world we live in will change so forget actual reality. BernieMagik.

How BernieMagik will enact (make into law) Medicare for All - 'the single most ambitious, disruptive piece of social policy ever passed in America':

"I will tell you how we'll do it," Sanders said. "We'll do it the way real change has always taken place, whether it was the labor movement, the civil rights movement, or the women's movement. We will have Medicare for All when tens of millions of people are prepared to stand up and tell the insurance companies and the drug companies that their day is gone, that health care is a human right, not something to make huge profits off of."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/28/politics/bernie-sanders-2020-democratic-debate-medicare-for-all/index.html

"The Medicare-for-all bill he introduced on Wednesday would be the single most ambitious, disruptive piece of social policy ever passed in America. It would abolish the private health insurance industry as we know it and rebuild Medicare from the ground up as a national health system. But that is the beginning of Sanders’s vision, not the end. He also wants to flesh out and pass a Green New Deal, break up the big banks, protect voting rights, and get big money out of American politics, to name just a few things.

Under current Senate rules, all of these bills would need 60 votes to pass. There is no plausible path by which Democrats will have 60 votes in the Senate. Even a simple majority will be hard. As such, Sanders had proposed an agenda whose passage was unthinkable under the current Senate rules."

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/4/11/18306132/bernie-sanders-filibuster-budget-reconciliation-medicare-60-votes

Messy world of real politics vs Our Revolution and its unthinkable passage agenda 2020.

[Thekaspervote]

64. Thank you!! Politics is a very messy business. It's not about purity and governing just the far left

As President Obama once said, “I am president of all the people.”

[Scurrilous]

65. Yes he was.

And he got things done despite all the messy obstacles.

[betsuni]

74. Thank you!

Rallies are the solution to everything.

[Scurrilous]

80. His bullshit hasn't gone unnoticed.

Link to tweet

Mitch doesn't care how many people you put in the street, DC cops will put up barricades and he'll continue to club Bernie's magic fairy dust revolution to death with votes.

[Gothmog]

68. Why did sanders call for cuts to social security?

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[NCProgressive]

72. Bernie's true colors are being exposed

Almost like watching a strip-tease

[AverageJoe]

73. Sanders is the new front runner

Well, whaddya know? Bernie is the new national front runner in the latest poll. Fancy that.

[Scurrilous]

81. Latest, not average.

Biden has led in the average since he entered the race. Currently up 6.2%. IOW...nothing has changed.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-d/national/

[Cha]

75. Damn Sraight! boo

[R B Garr]

93. "present himself as an honest, pure idealist while playing Trumpian

politics”.

WOW, thanks for pulling back the mask on this one, Rubin!

[Cha]

97. KARMA

[m-lekktor]

95. Coming back to haunt him? Looks to me like it's propelling him to Number 1 position!

Keep the attacks coming PLEASE!!!

[Cha]

96. Yep.

[Tarheel_Dem]

98. K&R

[Hortensis]

99. I believe Sanders' swiftboating of Hillary/Democrats in 2016 elected Trump.

And have put two anti-progessive, anti-regulation, pro-religion, anti-abortion, wealth-serving authoritarian archconservatives on SCOTUS.

We'll never know how many people just stayed home because of his and his supporters' two-year campaign that the Democratic Party was corrupt and betraying, like the Republicans even to massive election theft!

And he's continuing the same tactics because he thinks they worked.

Thank goodness his devastating past and present behaviors are finally hurting him instead of just everyone else.

[Gothmog]

100. I agree with your analysis

[Hortensis]

108. Just hoping blowback forces him to cut back.

[betsuni]

102. +1

[Cha]

112. Well done.

[samnsara]

101. i wonder when warren will be called a cooporate whore and dollar bills tossed at her...classy!!

...some images stick in ones mind forever and shape opinions..

[brutus smith]

105. Same old tired story.

All I know is that the Sanders supporters all say they will vote for whomever the Dem nominee is. Can't say the same about a lot of Joe supporters.

[Gothmog]

109. Sanders will have to fight dirty

Link to tweet

?s=20

[jcmaine72]

111. Bernie has an attack machine?

Who knew he was such a mad scientist? I wonder if this attack machine of his is more like the ED-209 or Mechagodzilla?

Of course, none of the other candidates are as nefarious as Bernie obviously is and posses attack machines themselves, just cute, fuzzy teddy bears and little baby ducks to help spread their respective messages.

[Gothmog]

113. The attacks by sanders supporters on this man disgust mr

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Gothmog]

115. Sanders' Social Security 'adjustments' undercut Biden attack

sanders and Sirota lied about Joe Biden and social security . sanders has called for cuts also https://apnews.com/31c432f20acba807a569c7004abaf473

As a congressman in the 1990s, Bernie Sanders expressed an openness to making “adjustments” to the tax and benefit structure of Social Security. He also praised an overhaul of the social safety net program signed into law by President Ronald Reagan that reduced benefits and increased taxes on working families.

Sanders’ presidential campaign and allies have highlighted similar remarks by Joe Biden to attack the former vice president and make the explosive charge that Biden was an outspoken proponent of slashing the program.
With Iowa’s first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses less than a week away, Sanders’ remarks from decades ago are surfacing as a counterpunch to the criticism of Biden, as the two top candidates in the Democratic race escalate a feud over the nation’s most popular entitlement, an issue that has particular reach among older voters.

Sanders, a democratic socialist, is a favorite of progressives who admire him for his convictions and consistency on issues. But when it comes to Social Security, it appears that wasn’t always the case.

In 1994, after Republicans took control of the House for the first time since the Eisenhower era, they brought a renewed focus on fiscal restraint and deficit reduction.
Biden and Sanders both bowed to those pressures in some respect.

Today, Social Security’s long-term finances are sagging under the weight of the ballooning number of baby boomers who are collecting benefits. The options available to sustain the program’s financing also remain the same: Benefits can be cut, taxes can be raised or a combination of the two can be enacted.

Sanders’ allies have specifically highlighted Biden’s past use of the term “adjustments” — a word they say was deployed as a euphemism for cuts.

Yet Sanders himself used the word in an election-year opinion article about Social Security that ran in The Burlington Free Press in 1996.

[Cha]

116. Yes, I'm looking for that OP now.. Thanks, Goth!