Bernie Sanders Says Trump Won Because Democrats Are Out Of Touch

[portlander23]

Last edited Sun Jan 8, 2017, 08:53 PM - Edit history (1)

Bernie Sanders Says Trump Won Because Democrats Are Out Of Touch
Meg Anderson
NPR

"Look, you can't simply go around to wealthy people's homes raising money and expect to win elections," the Vermont senator, who gave Clinton a surprisingly strong run for the Democratic nomination, told NPR's David Greene in an interview airing on Morning Edition. "You've got to go out and mix it up and be with ordinary people."

"One of the reasons that Mr. Trump won is that we have millions of people who have given up on the political process, who don't believe that Congress is listening to their pain," Sanders said. "What the Democratic Party has got to do is start listening."

Trump promised repeatedly throughout the campaign that he would not cut Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security if elected. Sanders wants to hold Trump accountable for that promise, regardless of what Republicans in Congress want to do.

Sanders says Trump has a choice: "Either he can have the courage and get up in front of the American people, or do it through a tweet, and say, 'You know what? Hey, I was just kidding. I was really lying.'"

Are you going to show up on January 15th to protect healthcare?

[blue cat]

1. I'm getting really tired of this meme.

Whatever dude. He is beginning to sound out of touch. And I voted for him even though he wasn't a party person and I am.

[WhiteTara]

17. now you know.

[DFW]

33. So am I

Enough already. It's not like our candidate got 5% less votes or lost key states by a huge margin--and it's not like the results are free of any doubt or manipulation.

This is one broken record of which I have heard more than enough right about now. Anyone want to add anything about millionayahs and billionayahs while we're at it? I mean, as long as we're tossing out clichés and all.........

[JCanete]

43. it is like we don't have the house or the Senate or the Presidency. It is like the reason we have a

shitty election system is because we have a horrible media in this country, yes, owned by the millionayahs and billionayas, who have a vested interest in not covering election fraud, voter suppression, voting machines, real news...etc.


It is like we keep trying to work with those same millonayahs and billionayas who are destroying us in the media anyway and seating the likes of Donald Trump in the White House.

[George II]

49. OLIGARCHY!!

[DFW]

62. What??

No establishment DLC corporate corporatists?

[JCanete]

66. is it actually a joke though? Would Republicans be able to steal elections without the help of the

Oligarchy?

[LisaM]

61. Did he miss Hillary going to diners, schools, retirement centers, job sites?

Because she did all those things. Frequently. Unfortunately, the news outlets were all covering Trump's appearances.

[Cary]

123. If Sanders was so brilliant why couldn't he win the primary?

Yes, I'm tired of the unrebutted answers to the stupid meme too.

[MaeScott]

158. Well the Dems ARE out of touch...hey, we lost everything ..states and fed government

[tecelote]

177. Exactly.

[SidDithers]

2. Trump won because racist Rust Belt voters...

decided that Democrats' inclusive economic plan benefited too many workers with skin darker than their own.

Sid

[Grey Lemercier]

7. this

[WhiteTara]

18. Or because of the FBI, Putin, Assange

voter suppression, CrossCheck and the vilification of our nominee by Sanders.

[Separation]

26. It couldnt have had anything to do with

Hillary all but ignoring it? Keep blaming the other side and not looking inwards. The pubs will love you for it.

[mcar]

39. And they've admitted it in quite a few interviews

I guess BS isn't paying attention to the "needs" of Trump voters.

[RKP5637]

52. Exactly!!! The Trump win was based on Racism and Bigotry!!! I don't get why so many back off

from calling it for what it was. FFS, it was clearly evident at Trump rally after Trump rally after Trump rally!

[putitinD]

53. trump only won MI by 10K votes. There were more votes than that not even counted in Detroit

(likely almost all for Hillary). The rust belt went heavily for Bernie in the primary. So I wouldn't say they were racist.

[brush]

59. DEM voters in the primary, not the racist repugs. Quite a difference.

[putitinD]

69. Hillary most likely WON MI, had they counted all the votes. Detroit is a democratic stronghold.

that usually goes about 97% for the democrat. Broken machines, and just bad oversight handed a victory to Drumpf. Not the voters.

[brush]

71. Yup, 75,000 votes in Detroit and Flint weren't counted. And you know most were Hillary votes

Repugs purposely didn't fix all the broken voting machines so the votes couldn't be counted.

Typical of them and their dirty tricks yet so many here on DU keep moaning how flawed a candidate Hillary was instead, HEY THE REPUGS CHEATED US OUT OF THIS ELECTION WIN. LET'S MAKE DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT OUR PRIORITY SO IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.

Do you hear that, Bernie?

[Goblinmonger]

54. Yeah, I mean all those visits Clinton made to Wisconsin

surely made sure that Wisconsin would be hers. Oh, wait.

[SFnomad]

116. It's easy to take potshots from the cheap seats after the fact

and you seem to do it so well.

[golfguru]

127. Goblinmonger makes a valid point.

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2017, 11:57 PM - Edit history (1)

Trump held 30 rallies in swing states, in 10 days prior to election day.
Hillary held how many? She acted over-confident based on polls.

[SFnomad]

139. It doesn't matter if the point is valid or not

With the aid of hindsight, vision is 20/20 ... and Goblinmonger's snarky attitude is a load of crap.

I don't know what tRump or Clinton's count of swing state rallies was in the final 10 days. In the final week, I do know that Clinton was in Pennsylvania several times, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and others. If you want to pretend that she was ignoring swing states, you can ... but facts would say otherwise.

[golfguru]

169. In hind sight, she ignored Wisconsin,

and she lurched into MI only at the last minute.
She should have focused on WI, IA, MI, PA and ignored AZ, OH & FL.

If Trump loses WI/MI or PA he was toast.

[SFnomad]

170. Re: She should have focused ...

Again, hindsight is 20/20 .. it's easy to play armchair quarterback after the fact.

If Trump lost WI/MI, he still would have won .... 286 to 252
If Trump lost PA, he still would have won ... 280 to 258
Those EC totals are not taking into account faithless electors

So FFS, if you're going to continue to beat up on Clinton, at least get your math right. Looking at the states that were close, she couldn't win it by flipping only one state. And the only way should could have won it flipping just two states is if one of those states she took was Florida.

[golfguru]

126. Why did the same "racist" rust belters voted for Obama twice?

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2017, 11:55 PM - Edit history (1)

Your POV makes no sense. Trump held 30 rallies in 10 days before election.
How many rallies Hillary bothered with, leading to election day?
Hillary rested, based on polls.

[JI7]

147. most of them didn't .

[golfguru]

168. Wait a minute, Obama won PA twice.

And how come Trump won so many counties previously won by president Obama? Did those people suddenly become more racist?

[JI7]

171. it was more due to non voters and trump getting racists that thought

Mccain and Romney were liberal

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. It's good that Sanders will keep after Trump.

He fights for all of us.

[George II]

51. He certainly didn't this morning when they counted electoral votes.

[Gothmog]

101. Sanders did not object to the electoral college results

[George II]

106. My point. That would have been a perfect opportunity to "keep after Trump". He didn't.

[Gothmog]

111. We are in complete and total agreement as to that

[Tavarious Jackson]

109. No he won't.

Let's bet.

[Dustlawyer]

4. Obama said pretty much the same thing.

[MADem]

21. Really? Do show us where.... nt

[Dustlawyer]

41. It wouldn't do any good. Google his statement about how he won Iowa he made

a month or so.

[MADem]

79. Extraordinary claims like those you make demand solid proof, not "go google." nt

[Dustlawyer]

129. I am pretty sure you looked it up but won't admit it.

If you didn't you don't want to know, either way it won't change your opinion. i gave you the reference to find it so there goes your proof. My guess is you will throw another negative comment and put your head back in the sand with your fingers in your ears. DU had it posted and you may have even commented about the betrayal. It was less than a month ago!

[MADem]

131. I am pretty sure I didn't. But since you can't come up with a citation, I'll

take that to mean that you couldn't find one, and instead are trying to snark at me to deflect from your inability to produce proof of your extraordinary claim.

You gave me NO "reference." You made an assertion and you did not back it up.

You still can, you know. I'll be interested in seeing it if you can come up with it.

Seems to me, had you done that in the first place, you might have avoided all this pointless back-and-forth. It's what people do when they make claims, ordinarily--they provide the proof.

[Dustlawyer]

136. Washington Post by Aaron Blake on 11/17.

Not tech savvy to post link from phone. Yesterday didn't have time. Do not know where/how to check DU archives. I will spend time figuring out for future because several posts were placed over this. Many Hillary fans were upset over his comments though he didn't mention her by name. It was clear he felt she didn't go to the people and instead attended small fundraisers instead. She was out of touch with the people. I agree with this criticism, it is a common failure of corporate Dems who grow to dependant on Donor money.

[MADem]

149. You cut out the url and post it--it's easy.

http://www.androidcentral.com/how-use-copy-and-paste-android

You should also cut/paste the salient paragraph where your alleged point is made.

He didn't "mention her by name," eh?

That rather obviates your claim upthread. Further, SANDERS is the one griping that -- not Clinton (she has not been in "Congress" for quite a while, she's been a member of the Executive Branch and then, a private citizen) -- but CONGRESS is out of touch.

Cut/pasted from the OP to which you responded:

"One of the reasons that Mr. Trump won is that we have millions of people who have given up on the political process, who don't believe that Congress is listening to their pain," Sanders said. "What the Democratic Party has got to do is start listening."

[Dustlawyer]

150. Thanks for the tip.

As for the Obama said it is clear from the context, especially if you watch the video, he was referring to Clinton.

[MADem]

153. You've got to give me a link in order for me to watch a video.

Besides, the OP gripes about CONGRESS, as I said.

I rather doubt Obama trashed Clinton. Just not buying it.

[Cary]

125. Back

Pedal

[jonno99]

60. Biden too:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512666369

[Zoonart]

5. Bernie, Bernie, Bernie

Don't get me wrong... I voted for Bernie, but where are the young Democrats? Let's let them step up to the mike.

[Grey Lemercier]

6. it is NOT "Bernie hate" whatsoever when I now call him out for aiding in the minimisation

of the Comey ratfuck, systemic Rethuglican-led voter suppression of PoC, pervasive racism, misogyny, homophobia, and Russian OVERT interference in our electoral process. These factors are FAR, FAR more germane to why Shitgibbon won than what Bernie's hectoring tries to pinpoint about the so-called failings of our party, a party he is not even a member of yet again.

He rails on and on about our failure to appeal some long-lost WWC, a group who not only aids, but now (and has for decades) actively votes/works to achieve all of those bad things that are now utterly foundational to the Republican worldview of American political life.

[brush]

63. Good post. Why is "broken record Bernie" ignoring all the real reasons that you stated?

There's a huge elephant in the room with Putin, Comey, Assange, Crosscheck, vote suppression, and other repug dirty tricks written all over it but Bernie pretends not to see it.

Why? So the complicit media will continue to feature him trashing the Dems like he did in the primaries?

God, Bernie. Time to retire the canned, anti-establishment talking points and see what really happened.

[TexasTowelie]

8. If Bernie is a Democrat, then he has just admitted that he is out of touch with the voters.

I'm not at either extreme as far as being a liberal Democrat or a conservative Democrat and from what I gather I'm somewhere in the middle. I'm also 20+ years closer to being the median age of American voters than Bernie. I find it insulting to be told that I am out of touch when I voted for the candidate that won the popular vote.

[MADem]

22. He is not a Democrat--he has said this. He is an independent who caucuses with the Democrats.

He is not bound to vote with us on anything except procedural issues. That's where his loyalty ends, and for that he got a couple of committee seats.

Here's the link for those who think this truth is a 'bash:'


http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/independent-bernie-sanders-democratic-leadership-231486

Bernie Sanders was just appointed to the Senate Democratic leadership team. But the Vermont senator still isn't becoming an official member of the party.

After new Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer on Wednesday added the 2016 presidential candidate to his leadership slate as outreach director, Sanders waved off a question from POLITICO about whether he is now a full-fledged Democrat. An aide later confirmed that the Vermont senator would remain an independent who caucuses with Democrats.

Sanders' decision to run for president as a Democrat after touting his status as an independent during 26 years in Congress sparked frustration among supporters of Hillary Clinton during their bitter primary battle. The Vermonter said during the Democratic National Convention in July that he would be leaving the party after Clinton defeated him to serve the remaining two years of his Senate term as an independent.

[TexasTowelie]

35. I'm aware of his independent status

which is why I consider his remarks to be an insult. I could see it as an insult regardless of whether someone supported Clinton, O'Malley or Sanders in the primary and frankly I consider Bernie to be out of touch by being so tone-deaf. I would consider anyone that makes similar remarks about Democrats to be tone-deaf also.

[MADem]

154. I agree with your assessment. nt

[otohara]

137. Oh Geeze

if he had won the primary how long would it have taken him to go back to I status so he could continue to trash Democrats?
He's not happy unless he's blaming Democrats for one thing or another

At least Trump stayed with the R status.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

9. You keep fighting that primary. nt

[Me.]

65. Correct

The question is why

[randome]

10. Why did you lose the primary, oh most wise one?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[TheCowsCameHome]

14. Maybe to give

HRC a chance to lose the big prize.

[ciaobaby]

103. Check with Debbie for your answer on this one.

[Whiskeytide]

11. People here are in denial...

..., I'm sorry, but it's true ... and Sanders is dead on balls right about this. There are multiple reasons people voted for Trump instead of Clinton - and the nasty, racist, bigoted, misogynist views of the "deplorables" - while certainly a large part of his base - was only the "was never going to vote for anyone else anyway" portion of it.

Many Obama voters switched or stayed home. That is simply a fact. They did that because they believe the American political system has not spoken to them in decades - and they are frustrated. And because the media in this country has done a piss poor job of identifying WHY the political system has left them high and dry. To truly understand why middle America has deteriorated over the last several decades, you have to follow politics closely, and learn to ignore most of the media bullshit out there. We - Americans - don't do that very well.

I'm in a deep red state - and the Trump voters here that I know personally (I don't often hang with your typical "deplorable", so while they are certainly around, they're not who I'm speaking of) voted for him because he represented something "anti" business as usual in DC. They are not policy wonks the way most of us here are - they didn't consider policy issues in casting their vote (I know that for most of us that is sacrilegious, but that is the reality for the average voter in the US). Instead they voted for someone who would shake things up - or possibly even tear things down in DC - because they're pissed off at DC, and they WANT to hit back at it. And it's a non-partisan hatred ... Trump fucked with establishment republicans as much as he did the Dems. They LOVED him for that! New voter registration was up highest in conservative counties in Alabama in the weeks before the GE - meaning that people who had been so disconnected to politics because they hated everything about it decided in 2016 to register and vote for the "anti-politician". And I know - I KNOW - he's not really what they think he is... but most of them don't know that. He staked out the anti-establishment ground in their averagely informed minds, and they flocked to it.

To us, Trump seemed to be courting the deplorables - and he was, no doubt - and that should not be minimized. But he was also courting this seething frustration and anger that crossed over deeply into the independent vote. We didn't see that , or didn't think it would work, or thought his negatives would overshadow it. Clinton grossly underestimated this frustration ... and the fact that, at the end of the day, the condition of the average voter's bank account generally plays the dominant role in their ballot choice.

Clinton is probably not the 1% shill they make her out to be - but she didn't do enough to distance herself from that image for the average voter. In fact, she did things that played directly into that narrative - or at least were used by her opponents to link her to it. And that is Sander' point. The average, run of the mill Navin R. Johnsons of the world saw her as established DC politics as usual, and more of the same crap they have endured for 30 years. They voted - in large numbers - against that.

[randome]

13. I think she lost because we are all tired of politicians from the 1990s.

Out with the old and in with the new. NMS (No More Septuagenarians) !
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[TheCowsCameHome]

32. Unless it is HRC or EW.

Then I suppose it would be OK.

PS - Wait until YOU are one. Then tell me you don't like them.

[randome]

47. I'm 58, close enough, and I don't want anyone my age or older telling us what to do.

Obama is close to my age but he's the exception rather than the rule. We are not likely to see someone of his caliber again.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[NCTraveler]

15. As for your first paragraph.

Why do you think millions more voted for Clinton over Trump?

I love what you call a "fact". You can't back up one of your "facts" because it cant conceptually be defined as a fact. That is how far you have gone here. Bernie is doing the same thing on his book tour.

[Whiskeytide]

27. The popular vote ...

... is significant, but it's not how a candidate is elected in the GE. Don't tell me Clinton and her team - and the DNC - didn't know this. Trump sure as Hell did.

You're right. Most of my post is my opinion. But it's pretty clear that several states that voted for Obama went for Trump this time. You can google the two maps for comparison.

Why is that? Do you think it's because voters who cast a vote for Obama in 2008 and 2012 suddenly realized he was black? Do you think Obama voters decided they were ok with a black president, but couldn't accept a woman as president? Some switched, and a lot of them stayed home. What's your theory on that? Fake news, voter fraud, machine tampering, Comey, gerrymandering? A role? Maybe. Not likely enough to sway the vote, IMO.

... I think Trump represented change to these people. Obama had that angle in 2008. Clinton, on the other hand, reminded everyone of the '90s - and if they haven't been happy with the political landscape over the last 24 years, she took the blame for that. That may be unfair to her, but in my opinion it was a big part of the problem.

[crazycatlady]

16. This

I have family in a district that flipped in 2016 (it's the one district that's electoral vote went against its state in 2016) and going to the district, I see years of structural economic decline. Kids often get out as soon as they can and never return. Even though they all voted for Trump, they're not racist deplorables. They're just ready for change and for someone to finally pay attention to them (a Manhattan billionaire is the last person that typically would). They also didn't think that Hillary understood the challenges that rural America faces (Bernie does as he represents a rural state).

This is a scene that could be repeated throughout rural America.

Say what you want to about hacking, Comey, gerrymandering, etc, but until the Democrats understand districts like this (this particular district voted Democratic from 1992-2012) they can't win national elections. We won't win every district like this, but moving the needle a few percentage points in rural areas would make a difference in a statewide race.

Yes Hillary won the popular vote, but (as of right now) the presidency is not decided by the popular vote. Winning Chicago, NYC, and LA by large margins only helps get electoral votes in IL, NY, and CA. There's more to the United States than major cities.

[bettyellen]

23. Bank account? His voters averaged 70k and are "seething" about money only because they despise

A black president redistributing that money to brown people. And voters in Alabama aren't noticing color all of a sudden? LOL, okay...

[Whiskeytide]

28. I didn't necessarily say ...

... that their reasoning was well founded. But it is what it is. Clinton did not get their votes while Obama in many cases did. That at least raises an inference that, for many, it wasn't about race or sex.

And average income means little when the billionaires and millionaires are in the calculation. People pissed at DC voted for Trump. Period. Why did they prefer Trump over Clinton?

[SlimJimmy]

95. Live in California, make 70k for a family of four, and see how far that gets you.

The line "A black president redistributing money to brown people" is just a cop out. Those folks in the rust belt and in states that had voted overwhelmingly for President Obama twice, had lost hope that it would get better, and voted with their pocketbooks. I've been a Democrat for almost 40 years. Listen to me when I tell you that we've lost our way, and need to get back to representing ALL of the people, and not just select groups. If we happen to learn this lesson, we might just start winning some elections again.

But feel free to keep feeding into the line that only white racist folks voted for Trump.

[bettyellen]

99. Racism and sexism were the biggest predictors of a Trump vote. I'll grant you it overlaps with

The overal attitude of Dems is that they're a "tax and spenders" but they also seem to think urban people are freeloaders and they're the only ones who actually work. 70k is a good salary in the rust belt, which is where that figure comes from. Self segregating whites who earn a good salary were Trumps bread and butter. They stupidly think it's only (liberal) environmental and trade policies that have hurt them. They are misinformed and in more of a bubble than we are. They think the moron is going to rain dollars down on them any day now.

[SlimJimmy]

130. I absolutely, but respecfully, disagree with your assessment.

As I stated, I've been a Democrat for nearly 40 years. I've seen major changes in how my party approaches elections. Splitting people into little groups has been the biggest downfall for us. We used to be the big tent party, but that's no longer true. I'll say it again. We lost (and have been losing) because we abandoned a large segment of the blue collar Democrats of all colors and stripes across this country. Until we get back to that model (a 50 state model and not a coastal model) we will continue on a path to irrelevance.

I understand that these are harsh words. I also understand that many progressives will not want to hear this. But until we realize that we are truly on the wrong path, nothing will change.

[bettyellen]

132. As long as this chasing WWC idea does not include "setting aside" the rights and justice

Deserved but denied to women and POC... I'm good.
But I've found this focus one them to be a preamble to asking us to STFU. Not happening.

[SlimJimmy]

134. Here's the problem. YOU and other progressives keep focusing

on the WWC instead of the actual working class (of all stripes) that have been ignored by the Democratic party ... MY party. And I'm damn sick of it. I've been sick of it for a long time now. We have literally ignored WC African Americans, Hispanics, and Asians for way too long, and we do it at our own peril. And that's all I have to say on the matter. Keep spinning around yelling WWC for as long as it takes to make you feel better. But if that's the case, then get used to losing. I for one, am also sick of LOSING.

I'll give you the last word.

[bettyellen]

138. No, I am complaining about the media's focus on the WWC - did you miss all the round tables

And the town hall sanders had? People were obsessed with this segment of voters.

[SlimJimmy]

141. I gave you the last word, you didn't do much wth it. Want to expand your answer?

[JI7]

156. actually the working class minorities voted for Clinton in the primaries

clinton did not ignore the working class.

[SlimJimmy]

166. They didn't seem to vote for her in the general. What happened?

[JI7]

173. they did vote for her in the general. only reason it's ignored us because some think only white

People can be working class.

[SlimJimmy]

178. And therein lies the problem. Many non-white working class in this country have also

been ignored by our party to a large extent. If, for example, you are an African American or Hispanic small business owner, the party has not been all that interested in your plight. You tend to get lumped in with all other small business owners who are struggling to keep businesses afloat and bills paid. I heard her rhetoric, but I failed to see any concrete plans from Hillary that addressed these issues. Saying we need more fairness, to tax the rich more, and offer free college did not cut it for many. Including myself. I voted for her, but only as a lesser of two evils choice. We could have done so much better. Joe Biden comes to mind when I think of this.

Say what you want. But the truth is that her campaign missed the mark when it came to this demographic.

[JI7]

180. lol. Buden is very pro big banks and credit card companies

Hillary went into many details amd media didn't report it.

No she did not miss the mark as she did win working class people who are minorities.

And she even won among whites whose top concern were economy.

[SlimJimmy]

184. Well, we just disagree on this one. Clearly, I'm not going to change your view.

[JI7]

148. most families in california make much less than that .

[SlimJimmy]

167. My brother lives and works in California and makes about 60k a year. To be honest, he is

struggling to make ends meet.

[JI7]

172. it's not too difficult but you have limited options for type of housing

[SlimJimmy]

175. With the price of housing in meropolitan areas of California, that's easy to understand.

[SFnomad]

174. That really depends on where in California you live

And mostly the difficulty is just housing and associated costs. Anyplace near the coast from just north of San Francisco all the way to Mexico would be difficult. Also, along the I-80 corridor from San Francisco to Reno / Lake Tahoe.

But most of the rest of California is really no different than the rest of the country and there are large areas where average housing prices are no more than $100k. Of course, the closer you get to even the smaller "large cities", like Fresno and Bakersfield, the prices do shoot up, but nothing like SF.

[SlimJimmy]

176. He lives in the Fresno area and housing there is quite expensive compared to the rest of the

country (outside of the cities)

[JI7]

181. and he lost california

[SlimJimmy]

185. Yes he did. Badly. But did you really think the "Donald" was ever going to win there?

[George II]

88. Navin R. Johnson was a jerk!

[ciaobaby]

105. You are 100% Correct

Thanks for putting it out there but yeah, people here are in denial and consumed with finding someone else to blame for Hillary's loss.
And we know it will eventually end up with Bernie being the one big reason Hillary lost even though it was "her turn".

[realmirage]

135. Good post, but denial is too powerful for many here

to truly absorb the reality. Populist candidates beat establishment in the general. I'm sick of centrist candidates

[NCTraveler]

12. Bernie has become a songbird with an incoherent message. Nt

[earthside]

19. Bernie is correct, of course.

And not just on the double standard of big money.

It is politics.

But a party and its candidates that have become more identified with transgender-bathroom rights than the fact that working class Americans haven't had a raise in eight years is a party out-of-touch.

[JCanete]

50. While I think Sanders is right, Democrats were right to champion transgender bathroom rights.

We are right to combat human rights violations. We're just stupid (or cynical) to not effectively support class warfare as well, and in the process, to give rural communities a far more compelling boogey man.

[Whiskeytide]

120. That may be the most succinct statement ...

... of the problem I've seen. Thank you.

We're just stupid (or cynical) to not effectively support class warfare as well, and in the process, to give rural communities a far more compelling boogey man.

We HAVE let the boogey man identify us - progressives - as the boogey man. I think a strong effort to better educate voters - pointing out examples of how republican policy has hurt Americans time and time again - is at least a start. That's something Sanders did, and it drew a lot of support from people who weren't really expected to support him. I don't know whether he might have won the primary if the landscape had been different - but the fact that his message drew such crowds and resonated outside the Dem party should have been a sign for someone, I think!

And you're right. Dems WERE right to champion TG rights and other civil/human rights causes. But the core of the party needs to be class warfare - 99% of the votes are THERE! It's a no-brainer.

[MADem]

20. He's just wrong. Trump won because Putin helped him and we've got a shitload of racists in USA.

To say nothing of sexists.

Trump would have beaten Sanders by an even wider margin, AND his reputation would have been thoroughly destroyed in the process. His family would have encountered searing and unrelenting negative attention that would have highlighted every unfortunate aspect of their lives.

He and they wouldn't have been able to bear the scrutiny.

[stopbush]

24. Bingo. I think sexism was actually THE factor in Hilary's defeat.

[greatauntoftriplets]

144. Correct.

Every Trump supporter I know says incredibly racist crap against POC or Muslims.

As an example: the other day I posted Chuck Schumer's great line about the ACA -- Make America Sick Again -- on Facebook. Several Democratic friends responded. The a cousin I haven't seen for years chimed in saying

Sounds like the Democrats just continue to complain and whine when they don't get their way. It will take the republicans a LONG time to clean up the mess that the monkey, I mean so called President made during the last 8 years. Never heard the whining then. hmm!

I responded "monkey"??? The friends who had commented previously tore into her racism (and one used the word).

What gets to me is that we both grew up on Chicago's North Side and went to the same high school during the 1960s. I wonder where she went wrong. Never knew her parents' politics, though my grandfather/her greatuncle became a Democrat once he was a citizen. Fortunately, I haven't seen her in dogs' years since she lives in Texas.

The upshot is that she unfriended me. The hell with her.

[MADem]

146. That UPSHOT was a BRIGHT SPOT for you--who needs hating racists cluttering up your

life?

Shitbird did you a favor-LOL!

[greatauntoftriplets]

159. Still I wonder what made her so hateful.

[MADem]

160. Fear, maybe?

People hate when they're afraid that those they've been taught to disparage might do better than they are doing.

It's definitely a learned behavior....

[greatauntoftriplets]

161. I just don't know.

Guess it's good that I haven't seen her in so many years (can't remember how long). Sad.

[MADem]

164. I don't really know, either.

I guess we were raised right.

[greatauntoftriplets]

165. Apparently so.

I'm happy about that.

[bettyellen]

25. Bad time for a book tour, Sanders. Put the country first for fucks sake.

[TheCowsCameHome]

34. He does put the country first.

He walks the walk. Every time.

[bettyellen]

36. He talks the talk, fitting his square peg in every round hole out there...

Sorry but he's had this crap on endless loop for a year now, and evidence proves him wrong. He was a "tax and spend" liberal and that is not what his beloved "WWC" wanted this year.

[BainsBane]

85. How does he walk the walk?

there is a huge chasm between what he says and does.

[lapucelle]

183. Unless there's a book deal in the offing.

After he signed with St. Martin's Press in mid July, he was working on a tight deadline to get the book ready for the market by the week after election day in order to maximize publicity during the post election scrum. It explains why he was largely absent from the general election campaign.

http://macmillan.supadu.com/images/ckfinder/704/images/Thomas-Dunne/Sanders%20Announcement.pdf

[MADem]

155. He needs the money. Trying to flog that book, but it's not working too well.

He thought he'd be beating up the (winning) Dems from the left, energizing his base to push the party further left.

Instead, he's standing on the sidewalk with half of (shocked) America, watching the jackbooted thugs metaphorically goose-step down Pennsylvania Avenue.

He's out of touch and out of time.

Frankly, if the Dems had won back the Senate, and had a comfortable margin, they wouldn't give him the time of day.

[TheCowsCameHome]

186. He's still out there taking on Trump, Wall St., and the deplorables.

Meanwhile, where is Hillary?

[Gothmog]

29. Sanders lost because he failed utterly to appeal to voters beyond a narrow base of white voters

Sanders was rejected by Jewish, African American and Latino voters and got less than 43% of the vote in the primaries The DNC had nothing to do with the fact that Jewish, African American and Latino voters rejected him. Sanders was rejected by Jewish, African American and Latino votes. Sanders did not come close to getting enough votes.
http://pleasecutthecrap.com/a-message-for-hardcore-bernie-stans/

Hillary Cinton won the nomination because of democracy. She received more than 57% of Democratic votes cast. Bernie Sanders virtually only won caucuses, which are the least democratic aspect of the primary process. And most of those he won only because she decided to save her money for the General election. He won very few primaries, except for his “home states” and Michigan and his clock was cleaned in virtually every other state that mattered. Demographically, he only won white liberals. The fact that YOU think he made it close, or only lost because of “Super Delegates” is a hallmark of your delusion. Bernie Stans largely didn’t seem to notice that she reached out to you repeatedly and you bit her hand off, making you more like Republicans than you should be comfortable with.

Sanders could not win the popular vote and was in the process only due to caucuses

[BainsBane]

93. And money

He raised and spent unprecedented amounts of money for a primary, and that money enabled him to stay in the race three months after it was clear he couldn't win.

Besides, he spent a fair bit of time with rich people, some of whom he relied on as surrogates. Clinton wasn't the only one with high profile Hollywood supporters.

[Gothmog]

94. Sanders was running for media coverage and got it

[bettyellen]

162. More Sunday show appearances than any other candidate by far

[Gothmog]

163. Twice as many as the next person

[Orsino]

31. Sure, but Republican leaders are even further out of touch.

That they pander to the worst impulses of white, straight, male Christian America doesn't make them any more aware of the concrete needs of ordinary citizens.

There's just too much goddamned money in our politics for many successful politicians to be able to read and identify with people who work for a living (or who need to). Only a few big political names are even partially in touch, and none of them are Republicans.

[bettyellen]

37. Bernie only gives credit to Bernie and denigrates other Dems who've worked hard for us.

He's the choice of the spoiler vote, out selling books instead of talking about the horrid cabinet picks and Trumps dangerous conflicts of interests and foreign debts.

But the MSM wants him to attack Dems, so he complies to get face time.

[Orsino]

38. Some, obviously, will never forgive him for primarying Clinton...

...and will have persuaded themselves that his long-shot presidential run was just some sort of ego trip.

[Gothmog]

46. No, The Systems Not Totally Rigged. But That Idea Sure Helped Donald Trump.

Sanders had no chance of being the nominee after Super Tuesday but continued his campaign which hurt Clinton. Here is a good example Sanders really hurt Clinton I am still mad at the number of times that trump used Sanders' claims against Clinton. Sanders' baseless charges that the system was fixed and rigged were used by trump to great effect and hurt Clinton http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rigged-system-donald-trump_us_5855cb44e4b08debb7898607?section=us_politics

And if Sanders’ rhetoric during the primaries started that stew simmering with his talk about the system only working for the rich, Trump brought it to a full boil with his remarks blaming undocumented immigrants and trade agreements that he claimed were forged as the result of open corruption.

I think he was able to thread a certain toxic needle. But he did win, and we’re all going to pay the price.
John Weaver, aide to Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s presidential campaign

The underlying irony for those who sought to end what they perceived as corruption is that they may well have elected a president whose record through the years and whose actions since the election signal it could be the most openly corrupt administration in generations.....

And if Sanders’ rhetoric during the primaries started that stew simmering with his talk about the system only working for the rich, Trump brought it to a full boil with his remarks blaming undocumented immigrants and trade agreements that he claimed were forged as the result of open corruption.

Sanders' bogus rigged process claim hurt a great deal

[bettyellen]

56. I did not think his run was any more of an ego trip than it was for Hillary-

But I think he is being harmful now. The media uses him to bash Dems from the "inside". It works to promote his book. And I think he's promoting a false analysis as to what went wrong in the election, and it's not helpful.

I wish the country was as liberal or appreciated the safety net enough not to hate "tax and spend" Dems, but they now have less trust in government than ever. They just wanted someone to "show them the money" and weren't going for populism at all. His tax hikes and environmental regulations would have buried him with those voters.

[oasis]

40. I hope this guy is not seeking a comeback. nt

[Paladin]

42. Take your whining and go piss up a rope, Bernie. Enough, already. (nt)

[GeorgeGist]

44. The Russians and 65M Americans would disagree.

Sorry Bernie, but the immediate problem is Donald Trump
becoming President.

[Gothmog]

45. Sanders ran solely for media coverage and the latest comments continue this pattern

Sanders was never really running to win. After Super Tuesday, it was clear that Sanders would not be the nominee. Hillary Clinton had a delegate lead that Sanders could not over come. Sanders was not really running to be the nominee but to get attention

Second, even Sanders admitted that he was running for media coverage and money http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/bernie-sanders-independent-media-coverage-220747

Bernie Sanders on Monday told NBC’s Chuck Todd that he ran as a Democrat to get more media coverage.

During a town hall-style event in Columbus, Ohio, the independent Vermont senator said, “In terms of media coverage, you have to run within the Democratic Party.” He then took a dig at MNSBC, telling Todd, the network “would not have me on his program” if he ran as an independent.

Money also played a role in his decision to run as a Democrat, Sanders added.

“To run as an independent, you need — you could be a billionaire," he said. "If you're a billionaire, you can do that. I'm not a billionaire. So the structure of American politics today is such that I thought the right ethic was to run within the Democratic Party.”

The latest comments are all part of a pattern of Sanders continuing to seek media coverage

[George II]

48. Again today? Do you read DU, particularly this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2674364

Of course when it comes to winning elections (primaries) Sanders is not one to use as your model.

[jalan48]

55. I think the fact that Hillary made millions on speeches to Wall Street really hurt her.

That's not something we normally associate with a Democrat.

[onecaliberal]

57. Trump did not win. Hillary did with almost 3 million more votes.

[Mike Nelson]

58. Huh?

...Hillary Clinton won the vote; it was not even close. We need to focus on how they suppress votes and use the media (and the Russians).

[Nick Otean]

64. Trump is a billionaire who wants to do away with the minimum wage

And he's not out of touch?

[JCanete]

70. Sanders has had nothing nice to say about Trump. This is the problem with comments being taken

out of the context of the greater whole, I guess. The issue with democrats not waging a class war is that we aren't clearly defining ourselves as the antithesis of the Republicans and their crony capitalism, and we aren't steadfastly, and as a unit, standing up against corporate media either, which means the media has all the power in the world to falsely equivocate our sins to those greater ones of our opponents. We need to give them no fuel that can be used to undercut a populist message...hell, we need to take up a populist message....not one of compromise and everybody working together...banks and poor people and rich moguls hugging it out like some Jehovah's Witness pamphlet cover.

[George II]

74. He's had very little nice to say about Clinton or Democrats in general.

[George II]

75. You have a problem with Jehovah's Witnesses?

[JCanete]

80. hahaha! just pamphlet covers with carnivores being ridden by children...like what do they eat now?nt

[George II]

82. Double down.

[lapucelle]

67. I don't like opportunists who use my party when they need something

And then badmouth it after. What kind of person does that?

[NastyRiffraff]

68. I couldn't care less what Sanders says

I mean, for Chrissakes! He's "schooling" real Democrats? Give me a fucking break! He just loves the publicity, doesn't he? I'd hate to get in between Sanders and a TV camera..I'd be knocked over and trampled to death.

[oasis]

72. Democrats need to advance candidates well versed in making speeches

with grandiose visions of pie in the sky. That's the ticket.

[ciaobaby]

107. Are you referring to Obama ? Cause that is what was said when he was running

and Hillary was all over it. Short memory ?

[George II]

73. "One of the reasons that Mr. Trump won is that we have millions of people....

....who have given up on the political process".

Is he for real? Two million MORE people voted in 2016 than in 2012. And THREE million more people voted for Clinton than for Trump. Does he just make this stuff up as he goes along?

[JCanete]

78. Just saying more votes were cast does not mean a higher percentage of the voting public was involved

?tid=a_inl

www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/15/more-votes-were-cast-in-2016-than-in-2012-but-that-doesnt-mean-turnout-was-great/?utm_term=.39bbd2c0c2a5

I'm not taking this at total face value as a refutation of what you just said, because saying the population has increased by 18 million in 8 years isn't the same as saying the voting population has, but its worth being less effusive about the uptake in actual votes.


weird, I didn't expect it to actually post the chart rather than the link.

[George II]

92. Guess what? None those people born since 2012 voted.

And if you were following the primary campaigns, the Clinton campaign was actively registering tens of thousands of new voters, or even more. On the other hand the Sanders campaign was complaining that the DNC wasn't registering voters at HIS rallies.

So he can complain as long as he wants about low voter turnout, but he did little or nothing to help that, even when his candidacy was involved.

[JCanete]

100. But the article does go on to say that there was a downtick of eligible voters who voted per capita.

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2017, 05:34 PM - Edit history (1)

Still, I agree about your point, that those newborns weren't voters, thus me pointing out the silliness of the article using that metric. I should have skipped that myself, but I thought it illustrated that eligible voter total does change from election to election, just as the population does(not as a direct corollary).

As to Sanders complaining that the DNC wasn't registering voters at his rallies, I don't have enough information on either Clinton or Sanders or the DNC's operating procedure to comment, but I'll look into it.

[George II]

104. The complaints were that the DNC wasn't setting up registration tables at Sanders rallies....

....not realizing that the candidates in primary races set up registration tables at their events.

The Sanders campaign never thought of doing that, whereas the Clinton campaign was actively registering new voters throughout the primary campaign (and into the general election campaign)

[Blue_Tires]

76. Sanders seriously want to hold Trump to his nebulous campaign "promises"?

*NOW* who's the one that's out of fucking touch, Bern?

[JCanete]

81. he's doing it to make Trump into a liar and hypocrite, and to continue to hammer that home for the

public while tapping into issues that affect them directly. Why are you trying to read it as something else?

[Blue_Tires]

89. Because Trump was already proven beyond all doubt to be a liar and hypocrite

years before he ever got involved in politics...

People.do.not.care... Because if they did, then he wouldn't have gotten elected in the first place because all this info is well know to the public.

There isn't going to be some mythical "emperor has no clothes" moment because this goddamned country voted him in knowing full well the whole time that he was already butt naked! The country isn't going to "wake up" all of a sudden and "discover" Trump's real nature. So Sanders is wasting his time thinking Trump's boorish ineptitude will be exposed, and he damn well knows that.

What I want from Sanders is a full, 100% campaign of unrelenting obstructionism in the Senate, assuming of course that he's as big an enemy of Trump as he claims to be... He can do no less at this point, since he's supposedly the savior of the Democratic party now... And now that he is the de facto leading voice of a party he spent the entire past year shitting on, he should know better than to entertain bullshit post-election narratives about the mythical white working class, Dems supposedly being out of touch, and so-called "identity politics" because that only plays further into the GOP's hands...

[Blue_Tires]

77. Last I checked almost three million more Americans preferred the Dem candidate

so we can't be that far out of touch...

[TheCowsCameHome]

84. That's helpful.

But it means jack on January 20th.

Maybe her campaign people screwed up.

[Blue_Tires]

90. Or maybe...

...the time for recrimination, Monday Morning Quarterbacking, and finger-pointing is over and we should finally look ahead to the pivotal races in '17 and '18... Because loosening the GOP stranglehold on state capitals and winning back one house of congress has to be the top priority...

[yodermon]

83. PLEASE LISTEN TO THE ACTUAL INTERVIEW

That headline is NPR's spin, and David Greene was an asshole of an interviewer.

Bernie's POINT is to hold Trump's feet to the fire, which DUH, all Democrats should be doing right now, in spades.

[BainsBane]

91. We've heard it all a million times

if Bernie's point were to hold Trump's feet to the fire, he wouldn't continually take aim at the Democratic Party. You are angry that NPR "spun" what Bernie says every chance he gets. The way to avoid a certain kind of headline is to refrain from making those comments.
The claim that a billionaire cleptocrat was elected because Clinton spent time with rich people defies any semblance of logic.

Bernie has made this same statement repeatedly since the election, not as a result of actual data on voter decision making but because the election defeat is an opportunity to repeat what he's been saying for decadess.

[pansypoo53219]

86. DC consultants.

indeed.

[BainsBane]

87. It's unfortunate that Sanders spends so much time attacking Democrats

i disagree that the Democratic Party is America's greatest problem. I think Trump threatens to plunge the country into fascism, yet Sanders remains focused on dividing and undermining the opposition party.

[TheCowsCameHome]

96. Be prepared to lose again next time around.

If we don't learn from our mistakes, we are destined to make them again.

Listen to the man and learn.

[BainsBane]

98. To listen to him

He is the only answer. What's to learn from that? Also he has made those same comments about the Democratic Party for decades. It's not like he is drawing from data from this election. In fact most of his comments directly contradict exit poll data.

And if I'm a voter that is annoyed with rich people, why would I choose a billionaire cleptocrat for president?

And why are the rich people Clinton hung out with so much worse than the rich people Sanders hung out with and used as campaign surrogates?

[TheCowsCameHome]

108. Ok, go down the same path again.

Don't change a thing and let's see how it works out next time around.

I give up.

[BainsBane]

113. I don't go down a path

I cast one vote, and as make that choice base on the qualifications and ideas of the candidates in a given election. That simple fact seems to escape most of those talking about the party as a whole or even worse comments like yours to me imaging that each of us controls the other 30 million Democratic primary voters. My path includes researching the candidates, their voting records and gauging their competence and capacity to get things done. You don't have to share my concerns, but you nor anyone else determines my vote.

And the notion that a guy who lost a primary by 3.8 million votes has some unique insight into winning elections strains logic. If he knows so much, why couldn't he win? The CTs that the DNC somehow rigged the vote is a cop out and frankly idiotic.

[ciaobaby]

102. This group seems incapable of coming together.

Bernie bashing is all they know.

[BainsBane]

112. Did you read the OP?

Who is doing the bashing?

[ciaobaby]

114. I sure did.

I was referring to all the Bernie haters on DU.

[TheCowsCameHome]

115. There must be some mistake

surely not the Sen. Sanders.

[BainsBane]

117. Here's the thing

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2017, 06:23 PM - Edit history (1)

I'm a Democrat. I consider the party and the country more important than Bernie. He is one politician. That's all. Some have decided it's necessary to idolize him and expect everyone to bow before his every word. I don't do that to anyone, much less a politician. You would seem to fall into the camp that believes Bernie too important to be criticized. I disagree. That you make your point in response to an OP where he once again trashes the party tells me you think he is the one who should do the criticizing but receive none in return. Bernie seems to believes the same thing. I find that notion that he, or any public figure, is more important than mere citizens wholly offensively and antithetical to democracy. And people just get fucking sick of having him shoved down our throats 24/7. It's unfortunate his " revolution" didn't motivate his supporters to galvanize around particular issues rather than him. Then we could be having very different and far more productive discussions.

[ciaobaby]

118. I am also a democratic.

And so sorry to hear that you are "fucking sick" of having someone (?) shoving Bernie down your throat. Feel better soon.
The key to having a different and more productive discussion is to take a breath and stop blaming everything on Bernie.
The Democratic party is a mess, out of touch, full of hate, and I for one an tired of hearing that Bernie is some demon.
He cares more about this country than most.

[womanofthehills]

152. I find the Bernie bashing very sad

Bernie is one of only a few senators who spoke up against the atrocities at Standing Rock. Hell, he came out against fracking and stood up against Monsanto. Lots of Tom Hartman and Cenk bashing on here too. Hello, we need to all stick together people. I believe we are all fighting Trump and should be united.

[Dream Girl]

97. Dear leader has never accomplished anything of note

Apart from bloviating endlessly

[PotatoChip]

142. She lost. Get over it. (nt)

[Lil Missy]

110. Bernie who??

[bonemachine]

119. In other news...

The sky is blue and Trump is orange.

[baldguy]

121. Why is Sanders peddling RW talking points?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

122. Because he has no skin in the game

When the Democratic image gets tarnished, he not being one, does not have to suffer. But it does help him get media attention. So really he wins on all sides

[Cary]

124. Plus he's too old

[George II]

128. And it sells books.

[treestar]

133. bernie seems to fight the Democrats

more than he does the Republicans.

Here is he saying the Republicans are the ones "in touch?"

[Adrahil]

145. Horse shit, Bernie.

Trump is packing his cabinet with wealthy people. His supporters don;t give a shit about that.

And if Democrats stayed home because they perceived Clinton as a bad as Trump some how, they they are fucking idiots. End of story.

People have to stop this incredibly stupid argument. It will destroy us. We will be condemned to permanent minority status if the "more progressive than thou" faction keeps this up.

[NanceGreggs]

151. And Bernie Sanders lost the primaries ...

... because he's out of touch with Democrats.

But somehow that doesn't stop him from thinking he should dictate to Democrats what they need to do in order to win - which he himself obviously couldn't do.

[DetlefK]

157. Delusional Bullshit.

The Trump-voters were driven by republican indoctrination. There is NOTHING the Democrats could have promised them to make them vote democratic.

[Bettie]

179. I disagree

I supported Sanders in the primary. I think he has a good message overall.

However, on this he is not correct.

The Out of Touch thing is probably true to some extent, but in the end, it was a very tiny piece of a whole lot of things that were problematic.

Cross Check did more damage this election.

Voter Suppression of other sorts (ID laws, broken machines, etc.) did more damage

Propaganda did much more damage

Comey, coming out at the 11th hour when it was looking like the aforementioned items weren't working.

Even with all of this, she still won the popular vote and nearly won the EC. That is not a message that is out of touch, except to people who will not listen to the message because it is being delivered by a woman who has had a 25+ year campaign against her delivered non-stop.

Orange Groper ran on racism and hate. Sadly, there's way more of that out there than I thought and you can not reach people for whom this is the primary motivation, unless you are willing to throw all of the people they hate and fear under the bus.

[redstateblues]

182. What a useless fucking thread this is