2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI just LOVE Bernie Sanders for saying this. It is so unsexist and so unmisogynistic!
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Sunday that the Democratic Party must move beyond “identity politics” in order to connect with a larger share of the voting public.
"It is not good enough for somebody to say, 'I'm a woman, vote for me.' That is not good enough," Sanders told a crowd at the Berklee Performance Center in Boston, according to WBUR. "What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industries.”
Sanders, who come in second place to Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination this year, has repeatedly voiced his concerns with the party’s lack of support in middle America.
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307014-sanders-dems-must-move-beyond-identity-politics
This was one of the most respectful things one could ever say about Hillary Clinton, our first ever democratic female candidate for President of the United States.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
ismnotwasm
(42,462 posts)
Hekate
(94,726 posts)
rocktivity
(44,883 posts)
But seriously, folks, even with the vote of every woman in America in his back pocket, how much standing up to corporate personhood can you expect even a male ex-DLC officer to do?
rocktivity
VOX
(22,976 posts)More than 10 years ago now. But what a zoo that was.
Lithos
(26,459 posts)Just curious as to what it is...
ismnotwasm
(42,462 posts)Others call 'fighting for civil rights"
Lithos
(26,459 posts)It is by nature devisive and exclusive as it turns the debate into an us vs them. It also gives an opening to the other side to play the same card (white identity) which becomes emotional and no longer about core issues. It is a weak way to frame an issue. Populism and Progressivism are inclusive. It is about Civil Rights for all. Equality for all, Jobs for all, Hope for all...
L-
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Lithos
(26,459 posts)?
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Lithos
(26,459 posts)actually was not what I was implying.. Thanks for playing.
If you want to understand my point - read this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-identity-politics-couldnt-clinch-a-clinton-win/2016/11/11/ed3bf966-a773-11e6-8fc0-7be8f848c492_story.html?utm_term=.69ca83f129a5
L-
relayerbob
(7,022 posts)was 100% identity politics
ucrdem
(15,703 posts)His angry opposition to TPP was pure demagoguery and now Trump has announced he's pulling out which from the point of view of US workers will have harmful if not disastrous consequences.
Akamai
(1,779 posts)but a bill to further corporate control. I agree with him.
http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/panoply/the-ezra-klein-show/e/joseph-stiglitz-on-broken-markets-bad-trade-deals-and-basic-48035656
JHan
(10,173 posts)Safest bet is to check out various views on it..
On Point has a good episode: http://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2016/08/04/election-2016-tpp-trade-nafta
Stiglitz also says stuff like the repeal of ONE provision in Glass Steagall is responsible for the crash of 08, which gives me a serious case of forest whitaker eye ( so pardon my skepticism)
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)JHan
(10,173 posts)It'll help if we're specific.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)This was the problem with NAFTA and CAFTA.
JHan
(10,173 posts)but superior to both NAFTA and CAFTA. I'm struggling to understand the sovereignty issues - I suspect it's a myth. No Trade Deal can override congress or the constitution. Countries CAN set their own rules and guidelines regarding environment, without triggering a lawsuit, and the deal seeks to lift the floor on labor standards in countries in the TPP region.
Gothmog
(154,601 posts)Sanders was focusing on and appealed to different groups who are not key members of the Democratic base which is why he failed to win the nomination. Sanders attacks here are not really believable
Akamai
(1,779 posts)His general issues are supported by more than 70 % of the American people.
I am very sorry things happened as they did, but I was happy to vote for Bernie and then for Hillary. Gave money, knocked on doors.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)White men and people claim that's inclusive.
what a heap of shit.
Lithos
(26,459 posts)Identity politics is focusing your campaign only on groups which you're targeting because of their identity, or better stated, your perception of their identity. The Democrats counted on an appeal to a changing Demographic and appealed to this new Demographic, often at the expense of their former base.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)They are republicans these days. She had solid economic plans that people wouldn't listen to because the media focused on Tweets and bullshit scandals, and pretended she did bit have solid economic proposals. She had more solid specific plans that any other candidate.
Lithos
(26,459 posts)They were fly-over states in her campaign.
http://www.salon.com/2016/11/17/how-democrats-lost-the-rust-belt-in-2016_partner/
But much of America moved on. The economic engines of the country shifted to places like Silicon Valley and Route 128 outside of Boston. Yuppies in suits, and later, dressed-down techies, replaced blue-collar workers as the symbol of economic strength and prosperity in the US. Leaders of the Democratic Party turned their backs on their working-class base. Bill Clinton and the Democratic Leadership Council moved the party toward the professional class of upwardly mobile “knowledge workers.”
Blue collar workers have been ignored by the Democratic Party who have stopped listening or even engaging them in the dialogue. She basically treated them as flyover states while she concentrated on the two coasts. She counted their votes, but failed to involve them in her campaign, even when local Democratic Leaders warned her and begged her campaign to spend time. These are not Republicans.
L-
BREMPRO
(2,331 posts)End of Identity Liberalism... this was one of the key strategic mistakes of the Clinton campaign:
"One of the many lessons of the recent presidential election campaign and its repugnant outcome is that the age of identity liberalism must be brought to an end. Hillary Clinton was at her best and most uplifting when she spoke about American interests in world affairs and how they relate to our understanding of democracy. But when it came to life at home, she tended on the campaign trail to lose that large vision and slip into the rhetoric of diversity, calling out explicitly to African-American, Latino, L.G.B.T. and women voters at every stop. This was a strategic mistake. If you are going to mention groups in America, you had better mention all of them. If you don’t, those left out will notice and feel excluded. Which, as the data show, was exactly what happened with the white working class and those with strong religious convictions. Fully two-thirds of white voters without college degrees voted for Donald Trump, as did over 80 percent of white evangelicals."
What Sanders was saying was you can't just expect someone to vote for you because you are a woman. That is not enough of a compelling reason. From the election results clearly many white women (54%) felt left out of the campaign that emphasized who they were in terms of gender, racial, religous and sexual identity politics, instead focusing on what she could do for them ie: job/security/etc politics.
More: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html?mc=aud_dev&mcid=fb-nytimes&mccr=NovHighMC&mcdt=2016-11&subid=NovHighMC&ad-keywords=AudDevGate
The other losing issue was NAFTA. you simply can't be a Clinton and shake the stench of NAFTA off in the rust belt without A LOT of WORK and attention. By all accounts Clinton and Mook neglected this group, as her husband bill and people like Michael Moore knew it would be an issue.
http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bill-clintons-lonely-one-man-effort-to-win-white-working-class-voters/article/2607228
It also goes to the heart of the matter that though I might on the surface belong to one group, I may identify with another group instead, or rank my priority with that other group ahead of the first. You have to focus on issues which transcend the identity ones. People do want Jobs, Healthcare, Education... If you frame things in these issues, you do well.
L-
robbedvoter
(28,290 posts)for any of us to use their terms is to - at best lack basic understanding of the most cherished democratic values.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
still_one
(96,580 posts)influential, why did a good number of his supporters refuse to vote for Hillary?
Why did every republican incumbent establishment candidate running for the senate in the swing states win?
Why doesn't Bernie register as a Democrat?
mcar
(43,523 posts)I'd like to hear the answers.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)for that Nazi tRump getting elected. Bernie endorsed Hillary whole-heartedly- as much as Hillary did Obama when she challenged him in 2008 - and he capaigned his ASS off for her. Bernie represented the Democratic Party admirably in doing so, while attracting many fellow independents - the best of ALL POSSIBLE WORLDS!! - so, you gotta give him a ton of credit for showing true Democratic Party loyalty... that in spite of the disparate treatment he received from the DNC. Bernie has demonstrated through DEEDS, not just WORDS, that he can unite our party... it's time we come together and recognize the tremendous contributions he has made and will CONTINUE to make!
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)severely when he dishonestly accused Clinton of stealing primary elections. Most Democrats, even those supporting him, didn't believe that, of course, but enough on the far left did to help throw the election to the Republicans. In fact, they still believe and are still angry.
He also thought 2016 was a great time for the fringe left to ignore the vast threat from the right and instead focus on taking over and remaking the Democratic Party to his liking, revealing both a profound, authoritarian disregard for the beliefs and wishes of most members of the party and dangerously bad judgment.
The inspiring, energizing Bernies of this world can be positive forces for change, but the change itself needs to be directed by wiser, ethical people. And liberals don't do authoritarian.
Response to boston bean (Original post)
Post removed
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Maybe Clinton was standing up to those special interests, but we were taking their money, so working class people were probably not very impressed.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
boston bean
(36,493 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)"On February 12, 2016, now-Presidential candidate Sanders was attending “A Community Forum on Black America” in Minneapolis when Felicia Perry, a panelist on stage, asked him about reparations.
“Can you talk about, specifically,” Perry asked, “Black people and reparations?”
Sanders appeared flustered and pivoted quickly to a more comfortable topic: white people.
“What I just indicated, in my view,” Sanders said, holding up his hand to quell the applause for Perry’s question, “Is that... it’s not just black. It’s Latino, there are areas in America, poor rural areas, where it’s whites!”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eoin-higgins/what-about-sierra-blanca-bernie_b_9233818.html
Bernie didn't even bother with campaigning for the Black vote during the primary, and I guess trying to appeal to them was out of his comfort zone:
In Harlem, the former Secretary of State showed that she’s just better at talking about race than Sanders.
“We still need to face the painful reality that African Americans are three times as likely as whites to be denied a mortgage,” she said. “Just imagine if white kids were 500% more likely to die of asthma than black kids. Imagine if a white baby in South Carolina were twice as likely to die before her first birthday than an African-American baby. These inequities are wrong but they’re also immoral.”
http://time.com/4226723/bernie-sanders-black-voters-south-carolina/
But Sanders seldom trained that same impassioned rhetoric on the problems that so many black voters wanted addressed: police brutality, white supremacy, and the ways in which economic inequality is inextricable from race.
It may have been white privilege, or simple cultural ignorance of black people and our plights. The Vermont senator, who built a movement on lofty promises like universal health care and free college, dismissed reparations for black people as “very divisive.”
He appeared not to realize that you can’t simply deliver the same speech on economic inequality to a room full of black people in Atlanta that you would to a room full of white people in Iowa.
http://fusion.net/story/323539/how-bernie-sanders-lost-black-voters/
Uponthegears
(1,499 posts)Could you provide me with a link where she said that white folks need to pony up the SIXTY TRILLION DOLLARS they stole from us over the course of North American slavery and almost 200 years of institutional racism?
For that matter, could you provide me with a link where YOU, or any of the other Hillary loyalists attacking Bernie AGAIN on race, said that white folks need to pony up the SIXTY TRILLION DOLLARS they stole from us over the course of North American slavery and almost 200 years of institutional racism?
Let's make it easier . . . how about a link where you or she called for the federal prosecution of the killers of Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Sandra Bland, Eric Gardner, . . . and the list goes on and on? How about the speech she gave on sentencing reform, or about how the "war on drugs" was actually a "war to disenfranchise urban blacks and destroy their community structures," or about how the entire "self protection" industry (which is almost completely responsible for introducing the current cornucopia of firearms into the stream of commerce) flourishes because of white suburban racism, or even about ending capital punishment?
Let me guess . . . those were too divisive for you. They were things that might drive away the white suburbanites you completely depended upon to vote Democratic, but instead cued up behind a f'ing fascist.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)His weak attempts to address black voters in the South were embarassing.
http://bcnn2.com/2016/02/bernie-sanders-visits-south-carolina-black-church-dinner-struggles-to-get-an-amen/
And Bernie seemed to think that marriage equality was "too divisive" in his state, after he voted against DOMA, because "it's a states' rights issue." Of course it was "too divisive" for Bernie's tastes - he was in the middle of a re-election campaign.
No one is pure when it comes to being more pragmatic than idealistic when it comes to their political career. But it seems Bernie's supporters think that he's somehow above the reproach that they give everyone else.
The job of the gadfly and the job of the president are two different things, as much as we would like otherwise. And if you can't even get the support of the majority of the party that you suddenly decided was your ticket to the top, then perhaps you are better suited to being a gadfly. Nothing wrong in that.
Uponthegears
(1,499 posts)Of course you didn't answer the question.
Of course, you returned to the primary, where Hillary's campaign INTENTIONALLY drove a wedge between social justice liberals and economic justice liberals (an act which I will tell you from personal knowledge disgusted and repulsed both those of us who started off in the BPP and/or other liberation movements and MOST of those who started out with Dr. King, the SCLC, and the Poor People's Campaign and know/knew in all certainty that we are joined at the hip to the working man) to defeat Sanders (particularly in the South where we are THE VOICE of the Democratic Party). Yes, IN THE PRIMARY, she stood by us in our churches and our communities, she stood with the victims of police violence, etc. and we stood with her. Yes, that tactic allowed her to jettison our traditional working class allies and still get the nomination. Congrats.
THAT'S NOT THE SUBJECT.
The subject is that, WHEN SHE GOT TO THE GENERAL ELECTION, she refused to stand up for us at all on ANY ISSUE that would offend the target of Third Way political theory, i.e., upper middle-class suburbanites AND the big money donors the Third Way believes determines winners and losers.
Unfortunately, not only did this leave the working class whom she vilified in the primaries less than inspired, it also left people like me butting our heads against the wall trying to get our community to turn out. Even more unfortunately, the wedge she created to get the nomination was welcomed with open arms by that racist POS Trump who went to Hillary's target audience in the suburbs and told them that the election was them vs. not just us, but also gays, Muslims, and Spanish-speaking immigrants AND the Third Way's target audience, those white suburbanites, men and women alike, voted like the racists some of us always knew they were.
ismnotwasm
(42,462 posts)Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Like when he was going out into the streets into black areas that had never seen a presidential candidate bother to visit them before?
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)That is how she completely understands black people and why they trust her. At least that is what I was told by someone on DU
DURHAM D
(32,838 posts)Fuck 'em.
ThirdEye
(204 posts)In terms of his actual root point:
What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industries.
Is that something we can all agree is a progressive ideal? Noting of course that the quote includes "is a woman"?
DURHAM D
(32,838 posts)To say otherwise is a lie. So, what is your point?
ThirdEye
(204 posts)Would she? Perhaps if we put enough pressure on her once she was sworn in.
If you think it's a lie to believe that Hillary was a standard corporate oriented politician who focuses on the donor class first, everyone else second, then we're at an impasse.
My point was, Sanders might have spoken in an insensitive way, but his actual point was spot on in my opinion.
How about this? You're the liar if you're willing to state publicly Hillary was going to be the common person's champion. Don't agree? Annoys you to be labeled a liar in this fashion? Stop doing it yourself. (and no, I don't think you're a liar)
DURHAM D
(32,838 posts)
progressoid
(50,751 posts)
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)Sanders is suddenly OK with a $10 minimum wage, and Tulsi Gabbard is willing to become part of the Trump team.
progressoid
(50,751 posts)Tulsi statement:
"President-elect Trump asked me to meet with him about our current policies regarding Syria, our fight against terrorist groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS, as well as other foreign policy challenges we face. I felt it important to take the opportunity to meet with the President-elect now before the drumbeats of war that neocons have been beating drag us into an escalation of the war to overthrow the Syrian government—a war which has already cost hundreds of thousands of lives and forced millions of refugees to flee their homes in search of safety for themselves and their families.
“While the rules of political expediency would say I should have refused to meet with President-elect Trump, I never have and never will play politics with American and Syrian lives.
“Serving the people of Hawaiʻi and our nation is an honor and responsibility that I do not take lightly. Representing the aloha spirit and diversity of the people of Hawaiʻi, I will continue to seek common ground to deliver results that best serve all Americans, as I have tried to do during my time in Congress.
“Where I disagree with President-elect Trump on issues, I will not hesitate to express that disagreement. However, I believe we can disagree, even strongly, but still come together on issues that matter to the American people and affect their daily lives. We cannot allow continued divisiveness to destroy our country.
“President-elect Trump and I had a frank and positive conversation in which we discussed a variety of foreign policy issues in depth. I shared with him my grave concerns that escalating the war in Syria by implementing a so-called no fly/safe zone would be disastrous for the Syrian people, our country, and the world. It would lead to more death and suffering, exacerbate the refugee crisis, strengthen ISIS and al-Qaeda, and bring us into a direct conflict with Russia which could result in a nuclear war. We discussed my bill to end our country’s illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government, and the need to focus our precious resources on rebuilding our own country, and on defeating al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other terrorist groups who pose a threat to the American people.
“For years, the issue of ending interventionist, regime change warfare has been one of my top priorities. This was the major reason I ran for Congress—I saw firsthand the cost of war, and the lives lost due to the interventionist warmongering policies our country has pursued for far too long.
“Let me be clear, I will never allow partisanship to undermine our national security when the lives of countless people lay in the balance."
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)I see an opportunity to advance my career.
ThirdEye
(204 posts)... the idea that Bernie does anything at this point in his life solely to further his career, as opposed to his cause or ideology, is laughable. The man says and does things regularly that aren't career friendly in this country. Exhibit A: being willing to use the words "democratic socialist" when he describes himself. Yeah, that really helps his career.
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)for a spot on The Apprentice: Presidential Edition. She looked mighty sheepish walking the press gauntlet in the lobby of Trump Tower. Awk-ward.
Funny how you took the remark to be about Sanders. 
ThirdEye
(204 posts)My bad. 
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)We're all going to need one to survive the next 2 years. (We will take the midterms!)
hueymahl
(2,647 posts)ThirdEye
(204 posts)But I will accept the possibility I communicate it in a way that doesn't translate well to forum posts. Hell, look at my post count. I have a lot more experience reading.
CajunBlazer
(5,648 posts)People who think like you do represent a small sliver of the voting public. You didn't even have enough political muscle to get Bernie nominated. What makes you think that your group had enough leverage to pressure a sitting President.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Shored up by 25 years of GOP smears, and plenty of anti-Hillary ads by Karl Rove's superpac to help out Bernie where he wasn't doing well, and not a little bit of misogyny on the left (one reason that the women's movement broke off) that was in FULL display when Elizabeth Warren went from darling to "corporate shill" 10 seconds after she endorsed Hillary.
No such anger at Kieth Ellison for the same.
Even with all that, Bernie could not get the votes from people of color, women, and LGBTQs. I'm sure Jeff Weaver had a bit to do with that. Even benefiting from a pro-Bernie super pac.
Hillary had the average flaws of a politician, with a fantastic record of public service and accomplishments. Bernie had many flaws, but didn't have the record of that one might expect of a career politician, and couldn't get the endorsement of progressives who had worked with him.
I, along with more voters than any candidate other than Obama were willing to put her in office. She appealed to many groups other than white men, and the women who draw their power from the men they align with which was apparently her biggest sin.
Hekate
(94,726 posts)This has been the overriding mission and theme of her life.
The "common person"? You don't get more common that that.
MelissaB
(16,558 posts)Neither of the candidates were common and neither were popular. I think some people are having trouble understanding that even though those numbers have been out for many, many months.
I think we need to look at what happened this election and not sweep the dirties under the rug. If we can't see and admit where we went wrong, how can we fix it?
Hekate
(94,726 posts)Tell me again how she "lost." Better yet, tell me how the system that Bernie, Donald, and Liz all said was rigged actually defeated the woman with more votes than anyone. Tell me again how unpopular Hillary is, how unexciting, when she is on track to beat Trump by 2 million votes.
No analysis worth its salt should fail to mention how the system was really rigged -- against the candidate who got that many more votes in the total.
MelissaB
(16,558 posts)The Clintons are HATED here. When I visited my family in Alabama last year, I knew what to expect from the right. I was sick of defending the Clintons, but there I was again going to bat for them.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)and Michelle. So maybe we should just have a Democratic primary where the GOP can vote and pick a candidate for us...one they find acceptable. I lived in the South too...and you could run Jesus as a Democrat where I lived in Georgia and he would lose. I see no reason to cater to those who never vote for us.
MelissaB
(16,558 posts)they especially dislike the Clintons because of history. They have more to sling at/about them.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)She lost because you win elections by winning the electoral collage, not by winning the popular vote. Are there any other very basic civic lessons you'd like explained, or can we start planning to win elections again instead of throwing them away against the worst candidate the Republican party has ever run in its history?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)And dry. They want the resources to make those decisions. We can't fly somewhere for an abortion without their support and they like it that way.
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)(he'll ally himself with Trump for a $10 minimum), and Tulsi Gabbard interviewed for a spot in the Trump administration today, so we already know how committed they are to progressive principles.
Why don't you put some pressure on them?
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)
metroins
(2,550 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ThirdEye
(204 posts)There is no chance he's not going to be re-elected when the time comes. I mean... geez, he got 10% of the vote on election night via write-ins.
edit: 10% in VT approximately. I voted Hillary.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)Clinton saying she would work with a republican congress, that was good politics and something Sanders couldn't do because he was all or nothing?
Now faced with the reality we have, Sanders is writing with republicans to get some level of what he wants and that's bad?
Revisionism at its finest
MelissaB
(16,558 posts)
BainsBane
(54,797 posts)Last edited Tue Nov 22, 2016, 07:58 AM - Edit history (1)
in communicating that women and people of color should have no say in the political process. To claim Clinton ran on noting but being a woman is a blatant lie, one he has manufactured to try to ingratiate himself with the white male voter he continues to believe matters more than everyone else.
That he remains critical of Clinton for daring to run while being a woman while Trump is using the presidency to enrich himself shows that he has far more contempt for the Democratic Party and its voters than he has concern for Wall Street reform or the relationship between public service and the corporate elite.
He also never bothered to think through ANY policy on Wall Street reform himself and told the NY Daily News it shouldn't be expect to know any details since he wasn't CEO of Citigroup. Clinton had a far more substantive and extensive policy proposal than Sanders in that regard. What she didn't do was use the banks as a rhetorical scapegoat. She in fact didn't scapegoat anyone. She focused on solutions, something that has never interested Sanders.
Rhetoric constitutes the entirety of Bernie's political engagement. He doesn't develop or pass policy. He gives speeches. He communicated precisely what he meant. He has been making those same comments for decades, from the time he first sought to stop the first woman from becoming governor of VT in the early 1980s. His position has not changed since then.
We just saw an election in which white nationalist identity politics triumphed, and he is still angry that the women and people of color who comprise the majority of Democrats refused to pay deference to him. He continues to revel in some delusion that he is part of the white working class (as he indicated in a recent tweet), when he is a New York Jew who has never worked as a laborer in his life. That means he is every bit as much despised by the Trump voters as the people Sanders attacks in the linked article.
And now in the wake of Trump's blatant use of the presidency for self enrichment, he continues to chastise Democrats for representing and seeking to be represented by women and people of color. Someone concerned about the relationship between capital and the state does not focus his contempt on marginalized groups. It turns out his comments were in to a Latina woman who referenced the MA state legislature. He blasted her for daring to even daring to mention she was Latina.
He can vie with Trump for the loyalty of the white male voter all he wants. He won't get mine and these comments demonstrates why he was unable to get the majority of Democratic voters. Clinton's message to women like the Latina Bernie supporter was clear: Never let anyone tell you that you aren't good enough, that you can't rise and be whatever you want.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)BainsBane
(54,797 posts)that got me wondering.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)ThirdEye
(204 posts)I appreciate you sharing your detailed opinion with me. Not doubt that makes me read like a newbie.
I think where you and I, and many others, don't align is the idea that this works in absolutes: "to claim Clinton ran on nothing but being a woman is a blatant lie"
We can't get into Bernie's head ourselves, but I believe it is highly probable he does not believe, nor has he claimed, that Clinton ran on being a woman and that alone. That is silly notion. I feel he's saying you can't rely on those kind of identity politics to win.
I do believe some people used her gender as a tool to force alignment with her candidacy, otherwise threatening to labeling people as misogynists. Subtle difference. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's the nuance I believe. I also believe that is a tiny factor and would never claim the threat affected that many people's vote. I will say it definitely helped deflate excitement among those I know, men and women.
BainsBane
(54,797 posts)Women and people of color trying to share in economic and political power. That resentment that helped propel Trump to victory. Society returns to its natural order--incompetent men on top and women and people of color perpetually subordinate. It's once again safe to claim superiority without bothering to work to acquire knowledge or competence. Equality is just too uncomfortable.
Omaha Steve
(103,489 posts)https://mic.com/articles/158995/more-white-women-voted-for-donald-trump-than-for-hillary-clinton#.ZW4e4lrlQ
By Alex Orlov
November 09, 2016
One might think Donald Trump's sexist and vulgar statements would sway female voters away from the candidate. But roughly 53% of white women voted for Trump on Tuesday, CNN reported.
White women turned out for Trump far more than other minority women. Around 4% of black women and 26% of Latina women voted for the Republican candidate, CNN's exit polls revealed.
Roughly 53% of white women voted for Trump.Source: Mic/CNN
Why white women voted for Trump
It appears that many women weren't concerned with Trump's comments about women. The official "Women for Trump" website doesn't overlook it — the site, which is not officially affiliated with or supported by the Trump campaign, acknowledge's Trump's sexist comments and rationalizes they make him authentic.
"That's because he's not working off a TelePrompTer or a script fine tuned by a consultant and focus groups," the Women for Trump site stated. "We look at his actions, not his words."
MORE at link.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
BootinUp
(49,039 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)boston bean
(36,493 posts)
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)So no...Sanders once again sowing division among Democrats...he is not even a Democrat.
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)Like this guy:
"Sanders, speaking with reporters at a Christian Science Monitor sponsored breakfast, said he is ready to embrace Trump on a handful of campaign promises. Those include protecting Social Security and Medicare, negotiating for lower drug prices, raising the minimum wage to $10.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/17/politics/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-allies/
sfwriter
(3,032 posts)...Are you saying he should NOT support an increase in the minimum wage? He should hold his breath and turn blue? What? Its about governing. He would have been holding Hillary to her $15 promise had she won. A promise he extracted from her.
I think he is right to focus on the economic and right to focus on the class anger. That's a universal sell. I wish more actual Democrats did as well.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Is the "future" of "Change."
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)After a little time for cooler heads to prevail, I predict the progressive movement will coalesce around Bernie and the revolution that he started will spread again like a wildfire!
Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And he was all about "states rights" when it came to marriage equality, except when it came to Vermont in an election year, then it suddenly became "too divisive."
Bernie is no "buddha" and projecting all your hero worship on him doesn't benefit anyone.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)heard about.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)80 he won't run in 20.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)but we need fresh blood. Let's not try to win the last election. Bernie would be 80...it won't happen, and it shouldn't.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)instead of discord.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)Why you gotta love Bernie!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)No, he said that everyone else did, so that they would make him their leader.
I don't love that about anyone.
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)Weaponized votes, like elections, have consequences.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)lapucelle
(19,533 posts)I'm saying that he talks a good game, but doesn't follow through.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)"But Senator Sanders starts with a full loaf here, and the full loaf is $15 an hour. If you start off with half a loaf, you end up getting crumbs.”
I heard that Hillary was "selling out" to corporations for daring to start at $12.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-minimum-wage_us_5714fc02e4b0060ccda3b8df
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)Why Bernie?
Lithos
(26,459 posts)is to invite the other side to play it as well. This is what happened this past election.
L-
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,566 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)The right has been using racial animus for years...did you ever hear of talk radio? Fox news? I am sure our fight for civil rights began it all (sarcasm).
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)who say stuff about Blacks and women and other Minorities...for over 30 years...and then you buy yourself newspapers and TV stations and do the same...and you tell the white voters over and over again that they are the ones being marginalized? Why I do believe that happened years ago.
mcar
(43,523 posts)
Kurska
(5,739 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And of course, anyone who supported her was doing that...
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)a divisive primary.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)
Maven
(10,533 posts)And we men will tell you when it's the right woman, got that ladies?
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ThirdEye
(204 posts)until this:
And we men will tell you when it's the right woman, got that ladies?
Gimme a break. Plenty of women would say the same thing about Hillary. It's not about her gender, it's about her policies. It's as if, simply being a women removes Hillary from all forms of critique as a public servant. You may say, hey, Bernie is talking about gender here! Well, only because he's trying to say, it's not about gender it's about policy.
Additionally, we're talking about President of the United States - it is about the right individual. That's why it's legit to tell a Bernie fan, such as myself, that his lack of focus on foreign policy could have killed him in the GE. That's a valid stance to argue.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Bernie's represented the whitest leftiest constituency in the country. He didn't even try to get the black vote in the south, and his record on women and gay rights isn't as spotless as so many like to think.
Notwithstanding the taxes. Not gonna see Bernie demanding Trump's tax returns any time soon.
okasha
(11,573 posts)how to get the black vote in the South, as his visit to a South Carolina black church showed. By those folks' standards, he was a barbarian.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Maven
(10,533 posts)This result is much better.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)lost so much...in terms of policy, we fought for since Roosevelt...the GOP is in complete charge Bernie..but please bash Democrats some more...so the GOP can get a 2/3 majority and ram more awful stuff home...he is on our side right?
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)We little women find it so hard to understand about policy and stuff!
(because some will need it)
mcar
(43,523 posts)
kcr
(15,522 posts)Bernie's Mad Men Liberalism is a huge turn off for a lot of people. It's too bad, because he could ditch that aspect of it and include everybody and have a real movement going. A real shame.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Bernie supports social justice, reforming law enforcement, ending civil forfeiture, and banning private prisons. Among other things.
I've never heard him come close to undermining the ideals behind Black Lives Matter.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Yes, I know he didn't say "it's not enough to be black" because that would insult Kieth Ellison.
But Hillary and her voters - yeah, that's OK.
think
(11,641 posts)Asked by a questioner how she could become the second Latina senator in U.S. history, Sanders said a candidate's gender or race isn't enough.
"I have to know whether that Latina is going to stand up with the working class of this country and is going to take on big money interests," Sanders said.
He added:
Here is my point -- and this is where there is going to be a division within the Democratic Party. It is not good enough for somebody to say, 'I'm a woman, vote for me.' No, that’s not good enough. What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry.
In other words, one of the struggles that you’re going to be seeing in the Democratic Party is whether we go beyond identity politics. I think it’s a step forward in America if you have an African-American CEO of some major corporation. But you know what, if that guy is going to be shipping jobs out of this country, and exploiting his workers, it doesn’t mean a whole hell of a lot whether he’s black or white or Latino....
Read more:
http://www.wbur.org/politicker/2016/11/21/bernie-sanders-berklee
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Thanks for highlighting how truly sexist his drivel was in this instance.
think
(11,641 posts)in light of the entire passage?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)There is simply no question about the sexist nature of the quote. That is why you are moving onto racism.
Show me the quote you are talking about.
think
(11,641 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Just as you missed the blatant sexism dripping off his words. Note that you didn't reply to one word in my post. Simply went on to racism. I understand why as the sexist nature of his words are not easily dismissible by a contentious person.
If it's right there why didn't you just repost the quote. Simple as could be.
think
(11,641 posts)It's where the conversation started.
boston bean
(36,493 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)No, it's not. That will be the end of my replies to you here. I pulled my quote directly from the sexist comments of Sanders you shared. The quote I pulled was directly from your post. That is where it started.
I appreciate you highlighting Sanders sexist jargon. I will let others comment on your concerns about his possible racist nature as well as his blatant sexism. It does look like Sanders has gone full transparency as he goes with "those people" comments. Just adding to his sexist nature.
boston bean
(36,493 posts)over eveyone elses and any other issue. This is nothing new,right?
Sanders seems to forget that many times these men are sexist,racist etc.
He want the dem party to put those persons on the back burner in favor of white mostly male working class.
DemonGoddess
(5,123 posts)over fifty years ago. Unless we're willing to put everyone else under the bus, there is no getting that group back. I, for one, will not sit by while people attempt to put the rest of us under the damn bus.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)It's all about them, and never mind they refuse to take responsibility for having vote GOP, time after time, the party that destroyed the American Dream beginning with Ronald Reagan.
DemonGoddess
(5,123 posts)angrychair
(9,748 posts)I mean that sincerely, as I have no desire to start a turf war with fellow Democrats as we all will lose and trump will win, but to continue to argue that Clinton did not lose states her inner circle knew they were losing since the primaries is not being honest about the shortcomings of her campaign. Yes, she won the popular vote. By a lot. It is something to be proud of and it is worth noting that trump has no mandate from the people.
That being said, she lost states Democrats have held for decades. Not just one state but several (more than 3). She didn't lose Michigan or Wisconsin or Pennsylvania because there all misogynistic racist. Or because of Stein or Johnson. Or because of vote rigging or suppression.
Why? Because president Obama won those states in 2008 and 2012 easily under very similar conditions.
Would I have said what Sanders said the same way? No. that quote is a single sentence in a much bigger quote in answer to a young latina woman's question. In context it is a fair perspective. Doesn't mean you or anybody else has to agree with it but I do not take it the same way as some.
I take it his meaning to be one on inclusiveness. That for as long as there is harm done to any one of us, it is an injustice to all of us.
I may be a white male but I am also an atheist, I've been homeless, I'm an immigrant, a feminist and a father. That walk a mile in my shoes has been easier for me than some, harder than others.
Take a deep breath and remember that Sanders will not be running for president again.
Trump is a narcissistic, racist, bigoted and xenophobic fascist. We are either united in our fight against his agenda or we will all become a victim of it. Your choice.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Other than that, good stuff. Excellent post ruined by the need for personal assumptions that couldn't be derived in honest from anything I said.
angrychair
(9,748 posts)If I assumed something out of context. Again, NC, don't want a turf war about who is right or wrong. I'm willing to listen to what anybody has to say. Our (Americans, all citizens of the world) future is far more precarious than most are willing to admit out loud. We need each other more than ever.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Wasn't being sarcastic.
hueymahl
(2,647 posts)Hopefully as people's rage about the election recedes, they will be able to read it with the objectiveness it deserves. Until then, it is everyone and everything else's fault that Hillary lost other than, apparently, Hillary herself.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Bernie has a reputation on the Hill of being condescending, and acting like he's the smartest person in the room, no matter who is in there.
I hear a lot of whitesplaining in that interview.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)How very white of Bernie to give her that credit.
Not opportunistic at all. No sirree.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,378 posts)I think you proved Bernie's point.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)Also, what you say about this site is not complimentary. If Bernie is in any new party...count me out. His behavior during the primary cost us the election. And I am an identity politics kind of girl...you know I believe in equality for all. And that it is our duty to promote this value.
LisaM
(28,610 posts)He seems to absolutely not care.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)It is all about the men with him. Typical of the New Left type of guy from the 1960s.
Hekate
(94,726 posts)....in the face of all evidence to the contrary.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ThirdEye
(204 posts)Going beyond, to me, means taking everything you already have and moving forward to something greater. Whatever it might be.
In this case it's, go beyond simply being excited, for very good reason, about the first woman president of the USA and be excited about the first woman running for president who is a champion of working class people.
The difference? it's additive, not a replacement.
In terms of focus, yeah I suppose he's saying put more focus elsewhere, but we can do many things at once. We can be excited about her gender while focusing on her policies. That kind of thing.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)“These are guys getting hung up on gay marriage issues,” Sanders told Schultz. “They’re getting hung up on abortion issues. And it is time we started focusing on the economic issues that bring us together: Defending Social Security, defending Medicare, making sure that Medicaid is not cut, that veterans’ programs are not cut.”
"Getting hung up" on abortion and gay marriage was apparently interfering with the issues that the white working class was interested in.
http://www.rawstory.com/2013/10/bernie-sanders-tells-ed-schultz-southern-democrats-are-tired-of-being-abandoned-by-the-party/
riversedge
(73,138 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I have done so full well knowing many things about the man that are not to be liked in progressive circles.
Fuck Bernie Sanders from this point on.
Hekate
(94,726 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Maven
(10,533 posts)So over him.
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)otohara
(24,135 posts)although i stopped respecting him when he trashed our president relentlessly every friday and threatened to primary him.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)she's a woman. isn't that enough?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)
R B Garr
(17,379 posts)So sick of his pious, hypocritical and phony crap. He should have been put on a bus and sent back home after it was obvious he had no path to victory. 
liquid diamond
(1,917 posts)I said something similar yesterday and admin hid my post. I don't understand why Skinner is defending this third party spoiler. He helped cost us this election, and he CONTINUES to fuck us over with his divisive rhetoric.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)liquid diamond
(1,917 posts)And that's exactly what I told them. I've yet to receive a response. Figures.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)That's clearly a popular precedent you're setting, so kudos to your success. Bernie, on the other hand, is talking about policy and strategy, and your focus on bashing the messenger, doesn't shine any light on a fucking thing. It only makes us less likely to be able to discuss issues on these boards.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I plan on working with you.
"is talking about policy and strategy"
And his book sales. And the mean media. And....
I never understood the deification of politicians.
Tell Sanders to join the party and to work with progressives. He wouldn't be the worst we have to offer.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)future of the democratic party. I think he showed what could be done with a message, circumventing the typical purse strings and I think that his values should shape the future of the democratic party. I'm glad his legacy ends on one of recognition, and as somebody who has listened to him for years, fighting to shed light on things that matter, I hope that efforts to marginalize the man and by extension those issues and anybody who takes up his mantle, lose steam. I'd ask you to reconsider saying "fuck Sanders" on those grounds.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)"One cause for concern, Sanders explained to Schultz, was seeing many white, working-class voters in “low-income states” like Georgia, Alabama and South Carolina voting against their own best interest.
“These are guys getting hung up on gay marriage issues,” Sanders told Schultz. “They’re getting hung up on abortion issues. And it is time we started focusing on the economic issues that bring us together: Defending Social Security, defending Medicare, making sure that Medicaid is not cut, that veterans’ programs are not cut.”
Abortion and gay marriage - we're too "hung up" on that at the expense of the needs of the "white working class."
http://www.rawstory.com/2013/10/bernie-sanders-tells-ed-schultz-southern-democrats-are-tired-of-being-abandoned-by-the-party/
boston bean
(36,493 posts)Hekate
(94,726 posts)Bernie, Bernie, Bernie...
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Last edited Mon Nov 21, 2016, 03:04 PM - Edit history (1)
So let's move along, nothing to see here....
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And economic justice was never a whites-only cause, at any point in the country's history.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Missed that bit, did you?
How about "Immigrants* are taking our jobs?". Does that ring a bell?
*Brown and Asian immigrants, that is.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Last edited Tue Nov 22, 2016, 02:08 AM - Edit history (1)
That was about the racism of union leaders of the past.
I never claimed the labor movement was always perfect.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Hiring practice and salaries are equal? Woo hoo! I'm in for some real money now!
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I said the unions weren't looking the other way on that now.
They aren't perfect and they need to be stronger, but it's management that keeps workplace and wage discrimination in place now.
And it's not as though racism would have been solved by now if only the unions were weaker.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Wasn't that a republican thing?
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Not that we have eradicated institutional bigotry.
We need to keep fighting for BOTH justice movements.
We can't achieve victory in either by putting the other to the side.
I apologize for somehow sounding as if I thought anything was solved.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)So can the discussion of the relationship of economic justice to social justice not totally be about Bernie?
The vast majority of his supporters don't see things totally in terms of economic justice.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)You're shameless about doing exactly that. Dozens of OPs later, you're not convincing anyone to sit down and shut up. We had enough of that crap all through the primaries.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)But can we have this discussion as dialog now, rather than denunciation? And can it be about finding ways to bring people in, rather than kick people out?
Anathemizing Bernie and the left achieves nothing. It leaves us standing for nothing that can ever get majority support. We can't win by driving the young people who backed Bernie away unless they choose to totally give up their distinctiveness.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)We noticed how he was not inclusive when he first started stumping here and were viciously attacked as shills. We (mostly people in the AA group but also feminists) were alert stalked by Sanders supported here and kicked off the board. You really want to be doing this after how ugly it was here?
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)read for content can you?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Solved by unions or anywhere in the workplace yet. Or how many different ways discrimination effects us economically. He's trying to appeal to our greed in saying the "revolution" will help us equally while we know that is not the truth.
But hey, at least people here stopped heartening back to FDR and the great society so frequently.
ThirdEye
(204 posts)He's saying they're hung up on that issue. As in, they can't simply accept the new reality and move on. He's saying we can bring people together on common ground. He's not saying we shouldn't advocate for the rights of everyone.
While saying "marriage is a right for everyone" you can also say "let's stop rewarding corporations who outsource jobs overseas."
For what it's worth, I idea makes me uncomfortable. I don't feel like holding hands, symbolically, with people who hate or disrespect my friends and family that don't live life to conform to some right wing religious agenda.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)in that interview, by being 'hung up' by those pesky abortion and gay distractions.
“And they are tired of being abandoned by the national Democratic party. They want some help, and they believe that with some help they can start winning in these conservative states.”
boston bean
(36,493 posts)issues. You might think makes bernies point. However they find comfort belonging to the racist sexist party over their economic well being. Why do we want that in our party. At the expense of the real base. Women and minorities. Oh maybe he thinks those people should put their issues on the back burner. No thank you.
pnwmom
(109,563 posts)No Democratic woman EVER has run by saying "vote for me, I'm a woman."
athena
(4,187 posts)It's ironic that people assume a woman would actually benefit from her gender when we're talking about a position that involves power and prestige. When do we ever hand over power, prestige, or money to a woman just because she's a woman? We do, however, do precisely that with men and have done so for millennia.
pnwmom
(109,563 posts)We all knew what that meant.
uponit7771
(91,793 posts)sfwriter
(3,032 posts)He isn't saying "white men were not being heard," as you say in the subject line, he said they were not hearing. There is a difference. He then articulates a universal strategy to reach out to everyone, on "issues that bring us together," rather than on a basket of identity issues. He in fact supports all those issues, but does not campaign on them.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)These jackasses have been voting the wrong way for DECADES. They are willfully stupid and can't be reasoned with.
Sanders is the typical 1960s New Left sexist jerk.
greatauntoftriplets
(176,865 posts)still_one
(96,580 posts)if Bernie was so in touch with the pulse of America.
The 27% who voted for trump, is similar to the number of Americans who believe President Obama isn't an American.
Those who voted third party, or refused to vote, many who were Sanders supporters in the primaries, should hold their heads in shame
Even if you accept the premise that these people "hated" Hillary, why wouldn't they at least vote for Russ Feingold?
Every swing State Senator Democrat running, lost to the ESTABLISHMENT republican incumbent
In Michigan, Hillary lost by .3%. Jill Stein received 1.1% of the vote. Similar numbers in Wisconsin and other critical states that would have made a difference
Those folks who didn't vote or voted third party deserve trump.
Hillary won the popular vote, and they do not deserve trump.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)and a one year attack from the very white male left.
still_one
(96,580 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)
hueymahl
(2,647 posts)Yes, she was attacked from the left (for good reason). Bernie being a white male really has nothing to do with it.
Hekate
(94,726 posts)hueymahl
(2,647 posts)But it is no problem attacking another Bernie. Just sayin'.
For the record, I do not think Hillary is bigoted in any way.
But I do think she was a deeply flawed candidate, and I do blame her for Trump being in the White house.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)mythology.
I think she had the flaws of an average candidate, and had a fantastic record of actual acheivements in public life, while Bernie had fewer achievements one would expect of a career politician.
He has some dark corners that hadn't been fully lit up, but he had worshippers who passed off the stunning lack of endorsements from those progressives who had actually worked with him as "them being ashamed of themselves, feeling dirty when they compared themselves to him," and "there is absolutely nothing in those tax returns - he has nothing, and has never had anything to speak of," and "Bernie is the Buddha - he's doing this all for us, and he is suffering all this to make our lives better!!!" Not to mention, "Bernie voted for the crime bill, but he didn't mean it - SHE WAS MARRIED TO THE MAN WHO SIGNED IT, and it was her job to cheerlead everything he did!!!" and "I never heard of Sierra Blanca, or Old Towne Media, or his votes for the bombing of of Yugoslavia and invasion of Kuwait because it was an election year, so it doesn't matter and HER SPEAKING FEES!!!"
And when Hillary supporters dared to talk about her record of public service, we were shouted down with CORPORATE SHILL and SHE WANTS TO DRONE CHILDREN, SHE IS IN BED WITH WALL STREET, SHE AND BILL GET REVENGE ON EVERYONE WHO CROSSES THEM - LOOK A BIRD LANDED ON BERNIE'S PODIUM!!!
So don't talk to me about not being "able to attack Hillary" when we needed to form closed FB groups to avoid being Berniesplained at best, and viciously harassed at worst, that we women and black people and gays really didn't know what was the REAL issue was - because it was capitalism at the root of all our problems, and we are voting with our vaginas, and when Bernie takes down capitalism, sexism, racism and xenophobia will be dealt with because men will be earning what they should be earning. You know, like it was all dealt with in Europe once everyone had health care. and better pay equity... And when the new defectors to Jill Stein supporters insulted us with, "Well if you must vote for a woman, why not Jill?" and really thought that their condescending distain was clever, we just stopped, and they said, "Why is it when I ask a Hillary supporter what it is that they like about her, I never get an answer?"
Oh and "I'm not sexist because I would totes vote for Liz Warren" and then the cries of "SELLOUT" and SHILL and much worse exploded at her the minute she endorsed Hillary. But Keith Ellison seemed to have escaped that. So yeah - maybe you were muzzled on DU from trashing Hillary, but there was the rest of social media. Including the DU FB page.
So I blame Saint Bernie and his disciples/bros in large part for Trump being in the White House. Those people needed a bloodthirsty, money grubbing demon for Bernie to battle, and it was Hillary. Now we have a real demon in the White House - despite what looks to be a landslide, thank you.
She got more votes than any white man - and counting - but she didn't "inspire" enough- well white men anyway, because Bernie supporters felt entitled to a candidate that was customized to their user experience, like good consumers. She really turned out the vote among actual working class people and women, (despite all of the voter suppression and demonizing) but since they are not as white as a town in Vermont, they apparently don't count.
boston bean
(36,493 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)sanders rabid fans ate up their bullshit propagnda and spewed it all over DU for a full year. Not a one admitted they were duped by those who spent the last six months promoting Trump into attacking her and her supporters viciously. I liked Bernie, but the bullshit was too much for me. I kept expecting to try to tamp down the frenzy of hate he started, and it was too little too late. It was hard to tell the BOBs from Trump supporters for a good part of the year.
hueymahl
(2,647 posts)I respect your feelings. I disagree wth your conclusions. Bernie did not cause Hillary to lose. Hillary caused Hillary to lose.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)He did not concede in a timely fashion either.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Dems at the convention hostage, and by relentlessly attacking the party he was using to run.
He aided Trump's path in exploiting all that.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Hekate
(94,726 posts)
Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)Thank you.
seaglass
(8,179 posts)
Guilded Lilly
(5,591 posts)
Accountability needs to be recognized.
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)who didn't bother to even show up on election day for Trump being in the White House.
And apparently I'm not alone.
http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)he could be one, but has chosen not to become a Democrat. Hillary is a Democrat.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)hueymahl
(2,647 posts)I wish she would have won. I think we can all agree on that.
The point of this discussion and this "2016 Postmortem" forum (at least to me), is to explore why she lost.
Many think it was because of Bernie, or rigged elections, or Comey, or the Russians, or some other thing that is not Hillary.
I acknowledge all of those things were factors. Can you acknowledge if she had been a better candidate, none of those things would have mattered?
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)mcar
(43,523 posts)still_one
(96,580 posts)kcr
(15,522 posts)I bring this point up, too, and none of the Pity The White Working Man! Trump voter/third party voter defenders ever have an answer for it.
sfwriter
(3,032 posts)Claiming any group owed us their vote is destructive. I believe it is mathmatically dubious as well. Unless you know how many greens and libertarians were diehards or new converts, you can't say how many only voted against Hillary. Those voters I know are of the pox on both your houses types.
No one DESERVES Trump.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Bernie needs to STFU for maybe another two months. Then he can return to his ragged dog-and-pony show.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)
SidDithers
(44,269 posts)Sid
Response to SidDithers (Reply #59)
Omaha Steve This message was self-deleted by its author.
SidDithers
(44,269 posts)
R B Garr
(17,379 posts)with his book tour. This just shows how utterly out of context and void of content the Hillary bashing is.
It was Bernie who preached superiority and morality by accusing others of trying to gain monetarily from their public roles. Yet, there he is doing it. That's the point. It's like the Republican family values con job -- they try and keep the high ground by accusing others of doing the same thing they are doing. That's why people are disgusted to see Bernie cashing in with his book tour and self-promotion.
Instead, you are posting sales figures about Hillary Clinton's book... How clueless.
Omaha Steve
(103,489 posts)How clueless.
First time I remember posting her sales numbers was yesterday.
Bernie gives his book $ to charity.
https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/bernie-sanders
Bernie Sanders is the junior United States Senator from Vermont, and is running for President of the United States in the 2016 election.
Sanders began campaigning for civil and minority rights in the 1950s. While in high school he aimed to raise scholarship funds for Korean orphans, and he called for gay equality 40 years ago while running for office in Vermont. Bernie was arrested in 1962 for protesting against segregation in schools, and in 1963 he joined the March on Washington. An article on Alternet lists 19 ways Sanders has stood up for civil and minority rights.
He has also supported parent-child centers and senior citizens groups. In 2011, he gave his book royalties, nearly $23,000, to the Addison County Parent/Child Center. In October, 2015, Sanders refused to keep a campaign contribution donated by a pharmaceutical CEO who controversially raised the price of an AIDS medication. Instead, he donated $2,700, the maximum amount allowed from a private donor, to Whitman-Walker Health, a clinic that specializes in the treatment of HIV patients.
R B Garr
(17,379 posts)to behold. So Bernie's book is good and pure and the reasons for him writing a book are good and pure, but if Hillary writes a book then every detail of its sales are dark and sinister. Just truly amazingly petty. 
Omaha Steve
(103,489 posts)Is a gift.
How clueless.
R B Garr
(17,379 posts)out, it is good and pure and everyone loves it. His book tour is for the good of The People. Of course, his donations go to a charity, which we will never really know because he won't release his taxes, wink wink.
If Hillary has a book out, then she is a grifter and her sales are down.
Petty to the max.
Omaha Steve
(103,489 posts)Comprehension!
seaglass
(8,179 posts)her inheritance which she claimed paid for the house was only 150K.
http://vtdigger.org/2016/08/18/sanders-lake-home-purchase-leaves-questions-unanswered/
emulatorloo
(45,569 posts)Please post something positive about anybody, rather than dredging up snippy gossip from more than 2 years ago.
Omaha Steve
(103,489 posts)I pointed out somebody else sells books too.
emulatorloo
(45,569 posts)of your chosing.
Rather than dredging up dated and stale Howard Fineman petty insider bullshit.
Thanks and have a Happy Thanksgiving!
Omaha Steve
(103,489 posts)Now Maybe Sid will delete his.
Happy Thanksgiving.
emulatorloo
(45,569 posts) 
Omaha Steve
(103,489 posts)She cracked a tooth yesterday. She will have a temp for three weeks. Then a new crown. She is just getting over the virus I had. But she doesn't have to cook today.
OS
emulatorloo
(45,569 posts)I know you will take great care of her today.
JustAnotherGen
(33,595 posts)And he won't be the leader of the movement - Obama will. BB - chill - he's got this and our backs.
seaglass
(8,179 posts)jg10003
(1,029 posts)This is a shortened version of another post of mine (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028295186)
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/books/richard-rortys-1998-book-suggested-election-2016-was-coming.html?src=me
The result was disastrous. The alliance between the unions and intellectuals, so vital to passing legislation in the Progressive Era, broke down. In universities, cultural and identity politics replaced the politics of change and economic justice....
“Nobody is setting up a program in unemployed studies, homeless studies, or trailer-park studies,” he wrote, “because the unemployed, the homeless, and the residents of trailer parks are not ‘other’ in the relevant sense.”
Mr. Rorty did not deny that identity politics reduced the suffering of minorities. But it just so happened that at the very moment “socially accepted sadism” — good phrase, that — was diminishing, economic instability and inequality were increasing, thanks to globalization.
“This world economy will soon be owned by a cosmopolitan upper class which has no more sense of community with any workers anywhere than the great American capitalists of the year 1900.”
Which left the white working-class guy and gal up for grabs — open to right-wing populists, maybe even strongmen....
“Why could not the left,” he asked, “channel the mounting rage of the newly dispossessed?”....
Which brings us to Hillary Clinton. She may have had a plan to relieve the misery of the working class, but she didn’t speak about it much. (Bernie Sanders did. And lost.)....And though her slogan was “Stronger Together,” her campaign was ultimately predicated on celebrating difference, in the hope that disparate voting blocs would come out and vote for her.
Here, Mr. Rorty’s most inflammatory words are most relevant, and also most uncomfortable: “The cultural Left has a vision of an America in which the white patriarchs have stopped voting and have left all the voting to be done by members of previously victimized groups.”....
People are furiously arguing about what played a key role in this election — whether it was white working-class despair, a racist backlash or terror about the pace of cultural change. It seems reasonable to think that all three played a part.....
The left, both cultural and political, eventually abandoned economic justice in favor of identity politics, leaving too many people feeling freaked out or ignored.
pnwmom
(109,563 posts)over logic and reason.
Trump won because he used his same Trump U con man techniques -- putting his potential buyers into a "roller coaster of emotion" -- on the American public.
Not because the Dems tried to represent the wrong constituency.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)He wasn't a serious candidate, and shit, does it show. Only Zucker and his network made this shitbag viable.
Maven
(10,533 posts)I'm ashamed to admit I once considered supporting him.
If, instead of attacking the fascist, people choose to go after the woman who tried to save us from the fascist, there is just no hope for the future. This is how much we hate women. We'd rather let a fascist destroy everything that the people of this country have built than acknowledge the competence, intelligence, honesty, and strength of a good woman. It's not just Bernie. It's all of us. This is who we are as a country. 
Yavin4
(36,415 posts)Okay. Looking forward to those fights. Gonna happen any minute now.
boston bean
(36,493 posts)uponit7771
(91,793 posts)... going to accept bribes ... fuckin wow
LiberalLovinLug
(14,378 posts)So it IS good enough she is a woman?
So many in here still don't get it. For most Democrats that preferred Bernies vision both men and women, not talking Republican voters, it was about P O L I C Y. Can you at least try to understand that for one minute. Can you bear to imagine just once, both candidates as genderless? Can you take out the "first ever democratic female candidate for President of the United States!" out of the equation and you're butt hurtness about that for a second and look at what both offered? One was a more-of-the-same DNC top down corporate friendly establishment, one had their campaign funded by $35 dollar donations and represented real actual progressive egalitarian changes.
We need a man or a woman or a trans person for that matter, because that doesn't matter! to take on the corporacracy and the unfair wealth distribution going on that is heading the country to a fascist state regardless of if Trump won this time or not.
athena
(4,187 posts)No different from any other woman. No different from Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann or Megyn Kelly or some woman you passed on the way to the grocery store. Just a woman.
If you think that the only reason to vote for Hillary was that she was a woman, you do not belong on DU. Welcome to ignore.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)That her gender automatically meant that any opposition to her, even from the Left, was illegitimate and driven by sexism.
Hillary would be a good president...she COULD have been transformative...but, for example, use of force by her would be morally indistinguishable from use of force by any other possible president. War is war is war.
BTW, if left opposition to Hillary was primarily sexist...how do you explain the fact that virtually every Sanders supporter was planning to be an Elizabeth Warren supporter when her candidacy was a possibility? I've never heard a good answer to that question and it's been asked more than once.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)just like Obama being black was transformative.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)n/t.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)"she COULD be transformative"... and I think at a certain level, she would automatically be transformative as the first female president. That doesn't mean she would run things notably differently.
And yes, it's silly to automatically label opposition to her as sexist.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)My main concern at this point is to get people to be open to different tactics for the next time. It seems to me there's a lot of pressure being applied here to shut down any real discussion and to enforce a "stay the course" line.
Staying the course is the path to perpetual defeat, as far as I can see.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)especially for dealing with the media and getting the right message out for the next campaign. Assuming there will be another election... 
boston bean
(36,493 posts)I live in MA and ther is sexism on the left here as well. Hell we have bever voted in a woman Governor.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)I didn't say she had actually declared a candidacy.
If Warren HAD run as the anti-Establishment candidate instead of Bernie, would you still have supported Hillary, and what arguments would you have made against Warren?
boston bean
(36,493 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Would you be willing to answer the question I asked in the previous post?
boston bean
(36,493 posts)I don't know who I would have supported. But I can assure I wouldn't have been tearing down either as some corrupt politician and would probably be fighting with people who told me I was still ONLY voting for a woman. Neither Hillary or Elizabeth ever spoke of democrats like Bernie does. Like identity politics... being a woman isn't enough... I've NEVER EVER heard Hillary of Elizabeth ever say a Democrat was corrupt, you????
Jesus, Ken you just want to carve out these hypotheticals without taking into consideration the reality of what occurred.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)then that discredits the idea that we supported Bernie because we didn't want a woman to be president.
If there had been a candidate who was exactly like the person we ended up nominating but who happened to be male, the Sanders supporters would still have chosen Bernie OVER that candidate in the primaries.
And a lot of us worked like hell to get Hillary elected in the fall, so there's no reason to be demonizing Bernie OR his supporters now.
Doing so will not flip the Electoral College.
boston bean
(36,493 posts)Hekate
(94,726 posts)...for consistently teling them otherwise. They couldn't see it was them calling her Lyin' Liz.
I like Warren very very much for her own life of hard work. It's just I believe her to be truthful.
JI7
(90,551 posts)and did endorse and campaign for Hillary.
so what you say isn't true for many.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,378 posts)And that's a good question that I have never heard answered either.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)"She should have known her place"
progressoid
(50,751 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,378 posts)Its about policy, direction, vision, youth engagement, educating the public about the possibilities, moving away from failed trickle down economics, along with gender equality, minimum wage hikes etc..and doing it from a position of authority of someone that has a record of NOT pandering to the 1%.
So, no I do not "think that the only reason to vote for Hillary was that she was a woman". The exact opposite. I don't know how you came to that conclusion. I surmise what you meant to say was " if you think the only reason I voted for Hillary was that she was a woman you are wrong." So tell me what were the other reasons?
Why is it that during the primaries, it was like puling teeth to try and get a die hard Hillary supporter to list reasons they were voting for Hillary over Bernie based on actual policy differences. It was all...don't you dare saying anything bad about our inevitable candidate or you are a sexist!.
I too, believe it or not, was thrilled about the idea of the glass ceiling being shattered. And if she would have pulled it off, I would have been out there celebrating that fact. But, as was with Sarah Silverman, a better candidate came along...regardless of gender.....I wish I didn't have to keep emphasizing that.
boston bean
(36,493 posts)Keep telling yourself Bernie was a better candidate with evidence smack dab in the face that he was not
a better candidate.
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)Hillary wound up with millions more actual votes than anybody who ran in either the primaries or the general. To me that's a big story that no one is discussing. Hillary (and Democratic policies) won the mandate. Sanders could be using that fact to be a champion for the people.
The fiery progressive senator from Vermont could be making that argument and pushing for the platform that Democrats passed and the majority of voters endorsed. He's choosing to do something else entirely (as is Tulsi Gabbard).
It doesn't say much for his character.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,378 posts)I have spoken on both sites how I felt caught in the middle. And I criticized their 'burn down the house' mentality over there. I supported Hillary after Bernie conceded, but by no means thought or think she would have been what the country needed when there was a once in a lifetime candidate available.... regardless of gender.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)
marlakay
(12,205 posts)I voted for Hillary also but this site lost its openmindedness.
What good is it if we on the left can't listen openly and honestly to each other.
I would be willing to bet we had to hold our tongue on both sites. I only visited JPR a few times because they went crazy for Jill and this site was blind to any failing Hillary was making.
To offer even suggestions was made to feel like you weren't supporting her even if you planned to vote for her.
Our party will never win again if we can't sit at the table and try to see both sides. Which also includes looking at why people voted for Trump or not at all.
Qutzupalotl
(15,153 posts)We need better candidates who will stand up for the working class, regardless of what category they fit in. I don't care if you're man/woman/tg, black, brown, white or purple. All I care about is, do you have my interests at heart?
boston bean
(36,493 posts)Think about this.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)Not like Trump's plan to end entitlements, Obamacare, minimum wage,overtime pay, and unions etc.
Qutzupalotl
(15,153 posts)I am not saying Trump wasn't worse.
uponit7771
(91,793 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)all can I hope for is that those who are so smug having not voted for Clinton...suffer more than the rest of us. I dislike Bernie Sanders. He won't run again thankfully.
JudyM
(29,517 posts)jack_krass
(1,009 posts)
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,378 posts)Continuing his revolution is America's last best hope of defense against Trumpism. Most voters will be hard pressed to go back to the establishment well for awhile. So there must be a left of center anti-establishment alternative movement to keep that choice alive.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)government. Thanks Bernie.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,378 posts)That is hillarious.
Blame the better choice, the one that would have won and maybe had us the House and even the Senate, instead of the flawed candidate that should never have had the path artificially paved for her and forced down the throats of blue collar workers that felt betrayed, as their only choice other than Donald.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)You don't support the Democratic Party and want a new party. I want to win... the sort of ideas found on JPR will only lead to more losses...they already helped elect Trump.
Justice
(7,198 posts)cpwm17
(3,829 posts)the Democratic Party can look forward to losing many more elections. If Bernie would have been the Democratic nominee, this election would not have been the disaster that it was. The polls all showed Bernie performing far better.
emulatorloo
(45,569 posts)THE MYTHS DEMOCRATS SWALLOWED THAT COST THEM THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
BY KURT EICHENWALD ON 11/14/16
http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044
1. The Myth of the All-Powerful Democratic National Committee
2. The Myth That Sanders Would Have Won Against Trump
It is impossible to say what would have happened under a fictional scenario, but Sanders supporters often dangle polls from early summer showing he would have performed better than Clinton against Trump. They ignored the fact that Sanders had not yet faced a real campaign against him. Clinton was in the delicate position of dealing with a large portion of voters who treated Sanders more like the Messiah than just another candidate. She was playing the long game—attacking Sanders strongly enough to win, but gently enough to avoid alienating his supporters. Given her overwhelming support from communities of color—for example, about 70 percent of African-American voters cast their ballot for her—Clinton had a firewall that would be difficult for Sanders to breach.
<snip>
So what would have happened when Sanders hit a real opponent, someone who did not care about alienating the young college voters in his base? I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers.
Here are a few tastes of what was in store for Sanders, straight out of the Republican playbook: He thinks rape is A-OK. In 1972, when he was 31, Sanders wrote a fictitious essay in which he described a woman enjoying being raped by three men. Yes, there is an explanation for it—a long, complicated one, just like the one that would make clear why the Clinton emails story was nonsense. And we all know how well that worked out.
Then there’s the fact that Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s, and that he stole electricity from a neighbor after failing to pay his bills, and that he co-sponsored a bill to ship Vermont’s nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic community in Texas, where it could be dumped. You can just see the words “environmental racist” on Republican billboards. And if you can’t, I already did. They were in the Republican opposition research book as a proposal on how to frame the nuclear waste issue.
Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system. His pitch for universal health care would have been used against him too, since it was tried in his home state of Vermont and collapsed due to excessive costs. Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ while President Daniel Ortega condemned “state terrorism” by America. Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.”
The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.) In other words, the belief that Sanders would have walked into the White House based on polls taken before anyone really attacked him is a delusion built on a scaffolding of political ignorance.
Could Sanders still have won? Well, Trump won, so anything is possible. But Sanders supporters puffing up their chests as they arrogantly declare Trump would have definitely lost against their candidate deserve to be ignored.
------
We def need to change and move forward, and we also need to be as accurate and truth-based as we can as we do so.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)emulatorloo
(45,569 posts)Eichenwald has an excellent track record: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Eichenwald
Your blogger is an opinion writer whose track record includes regurgitating discredited rightwing conspiracy theories about the Clinton Foundation.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)okasha
(11,573 posts)He has a donation link.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,378 posts)He said while the primaries were on that it wasn't about who wins the primaries or who even wins the Presidency. Its not over until we decide its over. But that's fine, let others do the hard work and you just pretend that its all over and hide in your basement for four years.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Bernie is all about Bernie. He's trying to recoup the failed "revolution" of his youth, giving himself the starring role and rounding it off with a happy ending.
Throw your money, time and effort down that hole if you want to. The rest of us have a fascist regime to bring down.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)jack_krass
(1,009 posts)And hopefully the country. Expect to see, and hear more and more of Bernie, and people like him
DLC, third way, centrism, republican-lite (and it's adherents like the Clintons) are proven losers.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)athena
(4,187 posts)progressoid
(50,751 posts)That'll really help in the next four years of hell.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)n/t.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)This OP is an example of privileged people not getting it (you know, the ones who didn't lose their jobs, houses or retirement during the crash).
And they will continue to *not get it* thru a second Trump term if they keep this up.
MelissaB
(16,558 posts)Couldn't agree more.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Most Bernie supporters are, and what they support isn't alien to this party.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)In any case, Bernie is very wrong to think that thinking you can talk about "working class" without talking about race:
“But class politics is identity politics — it’s just a very dangerous version of it,” he said.
UC Irvine law Professor Catherine Fisk took up the thread in a post to the blog On Labor Friday, writing that “from the end of Reconstruction up through the election of 2016, political elites have done a masterful job convincing the white working class that they do not share a common interest with nonwhite workers,” and “the task for labor and the left now is to make sure that the 2016 election is the last time that happens.”
Other academics, writers and organizers are also sounding the alarm.
“Unless progressives realize the ways in which race and class are at work simultaneously, there’s no way we can build a true coalition of the 99%,” Haney-Lopez said. “Only by seeing our shared humanity do we have any chance of building a coalition that will allow us to wrest power back.”
https://www.buzzfeed.com/coralewis/unions-saw-trump-winning?utm_term=.bmWJ962zG#.rtpqgGM37
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)I would have tossed him out of the party for what he did in the primary, but hey I am not in charge.
progressoid
(50,751 posts)Probably not a good idea to alienate them.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)I don't give one damn about Bernie Sanders. I have no idea why he is still bashing the Democratic Party though.
progressoid
(50,751 posts)Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)In fact, I posted it on another thread...there is nothing constructive there...just more division from a person who is not even a Democrat.
Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #132)
BlueProgressive This message was self-deleted by its author.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)Just FYI
Maru Kitteh
(29,107 posts)Dude.
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)To the most unqualified candidate in history. And try to blame bernie all you want, but last I checked, he endorsed her. Get over it.
Maru Kitteh
(29,107 posts)He's still unable to grow into a role larger than his limited and joyless perspective. I can't wait to see him duke it out with Professor Farnsworth for the 2020 nomination. Should be a hoot.
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)Last edited Tue Nov 22, 2016, 03:34 AM - Edit history (1)
Acting like a sore loser? The sore losers are the ones who feel they have to blame a candidate representing half their party for something that is more the fault of bigotry and hate than anything else.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)win in 18 or 20.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)We literally just finished running a race in the way you wanted with the candidate you wanted and lost to the weakest opponent in history. Yet apparently the people who argued for a different strategy are the ones who should shut up and go away so you can repeat your mistakes in four years? Oh hell no.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)He's a sitting senator with a leadership position in the Democratic Party. She's unemployed.
That's why he's talking and she's not. That's why Mitt Romney went away in 2012 and we still have to listen to McCain.
(The Farnsworth joke was funny, by the way. I like Bernie, but I suspect that if his future head jar could run for office, it would)
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)The guy brought more joy to many more millions of people than Hillary Clinton has ever come close to mustering.
cry baby
(6,778 posts)It's just false that she isn't a woman of "guts" enough to do progressive things.
He must not have been listening or he is just bitter......or both.
What a damn shame.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)I think he's bought into the idea that the nomination was stolen from him.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)You know Bernie you cost us the presidency by running in the primary.. a bitter divisive primary where you refused to concede in a timely fashion...the courts are gone most likely, and Satan's spawn are about to start registering an entire minority religious group just like Hitler did...but you want to bash Democrats once again...didn't you do enough of that during the primary? We may have lost the millennials because you poisoned them against Democrats...by railing against Democrats day after day in the primary...Respectfully, I would like to ask you to be quiet and not cause further division in my Party...of course not your party.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)I can not stand him. He should be shunned.
Demsrule86
(71,023 posts)told me I was being unfair to Bernie...then she listened to his Identity speech. She threw here Bernie buttons away. She supported him in the primary.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)Running against Hillary? We should have just annoited her, and that's it?
Fresh_Start
(11,341 posts)but of course I've never done anything with those brilliant ideas.
Thank you, Bernie, for delivering us to trump.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)In a way he's never gone after the GOP. He's too enthralled at the idea of bringing bigoted men back to progressivism. Let him bring them somewhere else.
jalan48
(14,410 posts)Hekate
(94,726 posts)...though, because the system really IS rigged to deliver a white racist fascist woman-despising cabal to the highest office in the land.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)So obviously her failure to win based on the popular vote is clear evidence the race was rigged..
BainsBane
(54,797 posts)Why Sanders could never get a majority of Democratic voters. That comment is absolutely horrific and very much like what the far right of the GOP says. It was enough for a candidate to run on his hatted for all those groups: white nationalism is the ultimate identity politics.
No one should ever expect me to hold anything but complete contempt for Sanders after this. Funny how he forgets that some of those first class white male votes he thinks so highly of hate Jews as much or more than women. What does he think all the comments about putting journalists and their families in ovens is about? The international banking conspiracy rhetoric Trump engaged in is about Jews, first and foremost. Unlike Trump AND Sanders, Clinton actually had detailed policies to regulate Wall Street. She didn't just say she shouldn't be expected to know the details because she didn't run Citigroup. Actually that's not quite true about Trump. He does have a plan: to deregulate Wall Street and is moving to repeal Dodd-Frank. As usually, Bernie is unable to look beyond his own ego.
This is a man who refused to consider a $12 and indexed minimum wage but can't wait to work with Trump on a $10 non-indexed wage, even though Trump's stated position is to abolish any minimum wage.
Bernie made similar comments when running against a woman in VT in the 80s. this is a recurring problem for him. His comments are reprehensible.
SidDithers
(44,269 posts)Sid
BainsBane
(54,797 posts)The 19th amendment hasn't yet been repealed. And women and people of color greatly outnumbered white men in the Dem party.
ismnotwasm
(42,462 posts)Such a spectacularly stupid thing to say--what he calls "identity politics" I call "feminism"
boston bean
(36,493 posts)but hoping some eyes are opened.
ismnotwasm
(42,462 posts)So disappointing as well as sickening
Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #174)
Post removed
okasha
(11,573 posts)boston bean
(36,493 posts)Who bashes liberals again? Saying they don't support white people?? Just who is doing the bashing of the dem party? Hint its Bernie who is doing that.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Last edited Mon Nov 21, 2016, 08:24 PM - Edit history (1)
(And this time I did criticize Bernie for those who have falsely accused me before )
Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)JI7
(90,551 posts)but i regret voting for him in the Primary. this is just a really ugly offensive comment. the fact is that Hillary was a far better candidate than he was. she has a better record of actually doing things to help people and had actual plans to help people.
i use to think that being from vermont where there isn't as much diversity that he wasn't as used to campainging among different groups as clinton was and that he would learn from others. but looks like he isn't doing that.
Response to JI7 (Reply #209)
Post removed
athena
(4,187 posts)Early on, I donated to both candidates because I thought having two strong liberals running would make the party stronger. But pretty quickly, he started resorting to very negative attacks against her. He came up with memes that the Trump campaign adopted against Hillary. If Bernie Sanders had not run, and if we had all united around our candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton would be our president today.
MelissaB
(16,558 posts)athena
(4,187 posts)I guess to some people, Bernie simply can do no wrong.
DFW
(56,579 posts)It didn't exactly turn out like I had hoped.
This was not "Let a hundred schools of thought contend," but rather "goldfish are too establishment, let's toss a few piranhas in the pond for some diversity."
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)He basically just reiterated MLK's message about content of character over color of skin and used it in the context of gender. His supporters were frequently accused of misogyny for saying they didn't like her policy positions, and that is something that genuinely is 'ugly and offensive'.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)who voted for Trump, except of course he didn't. Only mostly the white college-age males with his Monty Hall act of free college and so forth.
Lest we forget why Sanders wouldn't have ever had a shot at the presidency:
Right in the middle of the Cold War is when he made that video.
I quit giving him a dime to his campaign after that video got played in one of the debates. He had to be arrogant in the extreme to think he ever had a shot at the nomination given all of his interviews and writings.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)He didn't praise Castro, in fact he said quite clearly he wasn't saying Castro was good. He was making a point about propaganda and how the message put out by US politicians and media often doesn't live upto reality.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)That's bullshit. She was THE BEST QUALIFIED candidate to run this country. Yes, even better than St. Bernie.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I'm curious though, how exactly was she the most qualified candidate? She was the First Lady (an unelected position), parachuted into one of the safest Senate seats in the country, and then did 4 years as SoS. It's certainly not a bad resume, but I get genuinely confused by the idea that she's supposedly the most qualified candidate in history (other people's claim, not yours).
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)And I don't feel obligated to convince you.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I just don't see how that resume compares to politicians who have spent their entire careers running for elected positions, and gaining experience of how government works at each level in the process.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)make sure we divided over it? Is there something specific you disagree with that Sanders said, or do you just object to the uncanny resemblance of his depiction to Clinton and her candidacy?
This board has so many emotion governed "discussions" its no wonder we're fucked as a nation.
LexVegas
(6,578 posts)
JCanete
(5,272 posts)was going to make history, doesn't cut it.
jack_krass
(1,009 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)...and would much rather we didn't keep demanding more of our candidates.
LexVegas
(6,578 posts)DFW
(56,579 posts)Oh, wait. She didn't. Never mind.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)"There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!"
DFW
(56,579 posts)But if you are still obsessed with re-fighting the 2016 primaries, with all their anger and bile, you'll have to look for someone else to spar with. In case you missed it, that horse left the barn long ago.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)When you make a claim, and someone provides evidence to show your claim is not accurate, then you decide you don't want to talk about it any more? Is that what just happened?
DFW
(56,579 posts)Otherwise, I'm not interested. That is what just happened.
Streitsüchtig much? Fine, go right ahead. But go fight with someone else.
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)I don't see any point in continuing this either, you have a nice day.
lapucelle
(19,533 posts)Not only did Sanders show a decided lack of class with his remarks, he also failed to use the opportunity to advance progressive ideas. He should be out there making the argument that the popular vote supports the claim that the Democratic platform has a mandate. He should be fighting for the platform. Instead his subtext is an extended bellyache about why he was entitled to a nomination he didn't win.
Instead of working to advance the platform, Sanders is out there launching facile, gender-based accusations against the majority that voted for Clinton. Women-folk and ethnic minorities don't need to be schooled by an old white man about how best to cast their votes.
Sorry, but above all else Sanders is interested in Sanders. Trump has not even taken office, and Sanders has already sold out on the minimum wage, while "real democrat" Tulsi Gabbard is auditioning for a role in the Trump reality-show based administration. Neither of them is a champion of the people.
LisaM
(28,610 posts)I, for one, am not going to fall for it, though I see from some op eds being shared around, that some already have.
Gothmog
(154,601 posts)
betsuni
(27,258 posts)What I imagine Bernie asking his bathroom mirror every morning. The mirror, of course, never talks back, it knows its place.
emulatorloo
(45,569 posts)Amimnoch
(4,558 posts)backhanded swipe at those of us that did care about breaking that glass ceiling.
Trying to shame us because many of us actually did think that was a great and important thing about this election.
It's also a double slap since his "identity politics" i.e. misogyny is also what played such a big part against her. So, it's okay to vote against someone because she is a woman, but it's not okay to vote for a woman because she is a woman.. fuck that noise.
rumdude
(448 posts)I remember the Clinton campaign's very first commercial - way back in April of 2015. I remember thinking "this is PC fluff that will have little appeal in the swing states."
robbedvoter
(28,290 posts)back in the 90s.
JHan
(10,173 posts)It's as though this year Hillary wasn't up against a misogynistic pig which made her presidential run, as female nominee , all that more significant.
So she said "woman card" a couple times, i never got the impression she was saying "I am a woman , vote for me"
I guess all us women who voted for her did so because VAGINA , thanks Bernie : #WhenYoureALeftistButEndUPBeingSexistAnyway
Renew Deal
(82,931 posts)And if you're saying that being a woman is enough for someone to vote for a person then you're a sexist.
BREMPRO
(2,331 posts)from my viewpoint this was one of the key strategic mistakes of the Clinton campaign:
"One of the many lessons of the recent presidential election campaign and its repugnant outcome is that the age of identity liberalism must be brought to an end. Hillary Clinton was at her best and most uplifting when she spoke about American interests in world affairs and how they relate to our understanding of democracy. But when it came to life at home, she tended on the campaign trail to lose that large vision and slip into the rhetoric of diversity, calling out explicitly to African-American, Latino, L.G.B.T. and women voters at every stop. This was a strategic mistake. If you are going to mention groups in America, you had better mention all of them. If you don’t, those left out will notice and feel excluded. Which, as the data show, was exactly what happened with the white working class and those with strong religious convictions. Fully two-thirds of white voters without college degrees voted for Donald Trump, as did over 80 percent of white evangelicals."
What Sanders was saying was you can't just expect someone to vote for you because you are a woman. That is not enough of a compelling reason. From the election results clearly many white women (54%) felt left out of the campaign that emphasized who they were in terms of gender, racial, religous and sexual identity politics, instead focusing on what she could do for them ie: job/security/etc politics.
More: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html?mc=aud_dev&mcid=fb-nytimes&mccr=NovHighMC&mcdt=2016-11&subid=NovHighMC&ad-keywords=AudDevGate
The other losing issue was NAFTA. you simply can't be a Clinton and shake the stench of NAFTA off in the rust belt without A LOT of WORK and attention. By all accounts Clinton and Mook neglected this group, as her husband bill and people like Michael Moore knew it would be an issue.
http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/bill-clintons-lonely-one-man-effort-to-win-white-working-class-voters/article/2607228
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The corollary of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" is "when broken, fetch the wrenches"
Sanders is, was, and will be, absolutely right.
Clinton didn't even carry white women with the identity politics message.