Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: What's with all the threads about Sanders? This is DU. He is NOT [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)109. And he would have been mocked and eaten alive.
And he DID shrink from the kibbutz business--he flat out lied...pretended he didn't remember the name of it, refused to answer questions about it. Some wise-ass reporter in Israel dug up a reasonably recent interview to an Israeli publication where he named the place and waxed eloquent about it.
Now, he's either a liar, or he's too forgetful to be POTUS. That should have been something he confronted but he ran like hell from it--for reasons we really don't know, because no one followed up. HRC wasn't going to go LOW...I doubt Trump would have pulled punches. He would have been fucked.
Larry David was friendly and loving in his imitation, and he crucified him, pardon the mixed metaphor.
He came across as flaky, elitist, sexist, and out of touch to many. Talking like a whining granola cruncher, living like a corporate bigwig. The wife with the golden parachute who destroyed an alternative college wasn't even mentioned in the mainstream media. It would have been. Her children getting rich off that school, milking it for all it was worth before it fell to ruin, would have been highlighted and offered up as a demonstration of cronyism, theft, nepotism, you-name-it.
They'd point out that Jane served as his chief of staff, and he put her on the payroll as "ad buyer" during his campaigns. He also put his kids on the payroll.
I realize that does not comport with your view of him or how the right attacks, but that's just the truth. They would make it look like the crime of the century, just like they made it look like the crime of the century when HRC gave a pep talk to some Wall Street assholes, then took the cash, and gave it to a foundation that gives out AIDS drugs and provides clean drinking water for little kids.
These are the people that called Michelle Obama a brazen whore for wearing a sleeveless dress in her official portrait. What would they have done with Out-of-Wedlock Bernie, comporting with his now-wife while she was still married to the hapless Mr. Driscoll, in the context of his sexy past writings? It would have been a field day. And I will BET they had Swiftboaters all lined up, too.
Yes, you can bring up Melania's naked pictures, but politics is a team sport. The right would say "She's the better looking first lady."
They would have made a meal of him. Toast. And all his stuff is "new." HRC's was "asked and answered."
Not sure how you think that someone who LOST by millions of votes to HRC would magically beat her--hell, there are plenty of Trump supporters who now admit they were just trolling the left to Keep Bernie Alive, to sow dissent and hatred. They never had any intention of voting for him. It was a divide and conquer game. It worked. The Paulbots, especially, were dedicated to these tactics.
Look, get him started on that stump speech, and I can finish the sentences. He never answered questions, he just gave that same damn speech, over and over again. He was like a quirky, garrulous robot. It was cute the first dozen times, then it got old.
You seriously think they wouldn't have hacked the vote "Because Bernie?" I have a bridge....
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
118 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The problem has never been that the Democrats were not open to different people. Quite the contrary.
politicaljunkie41910
Dec 2016
#115
The fact that you said that suggests that you're the one with the rash, not me. nt
MADem
Dec 2016
#70
The more voices the merrier. Especially with Hillary no longer in public office.
SMC22307
Dec 2016
#10
It won't matter how beneficial he is in fighting Trump b/c many believe he cost someone her crown.
MadDAsHell
Dec 2016
#16
Let's hope he does a better job than in the primary. He lost that contest and in the process
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#25
Sigh. More out of touch denials from you. There is a Bernie Sanders group here.
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#54
Speaking of losing. Why did Bernie lose California, a state Hillary carried twice?
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#85
Why couldn't Bernie get single payer passed in Vermont? His adopted home state with a measly
R B Garr
Dec 2016
#86
Yes, and someone is the Dems Savior because they caucus with the Dems, and they will save
Fla Dem
Dec 2016
#96
And what about your incessant trashing of Bernie and his supporters? You can't see that's generating
JudyM
Dec 2016
#89
but are prefectly fine with, or blind to the opposite? Nobody polices their own here,
JCanete
Dec 2016
#102
Does a D next to his name mean more than what he is fighting for on our behalf?
PatsFan87
Dec 2016
#12
Enough guys. Hillary and Bernie are both great Democrats/Democrat caucus members.
StevieM
Dec 2016
#21
It's puzzling to me that so few of our political leaders are publicly challenging tRump. Warren is,
JudyM
Dec 2016
#95
If Sanders had won, I would have found myself voting for a flawed candidate.
stonecutter357
Dec 2016
#72
But he fights for Democratic principles, and we need as many people like that as we can get!
GreenPartyVoter
Dec 2016
#84