2016 Postmortem

Response to jknudsen (Reply #71)

Post removed

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

249 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Bernie: Dems lost because they "took they bait," meaning "Wall Street money." [View all] ucrdem Jan 2017 OP

So, if he's dredging up the primaries WhiteTara Jan 2017 #1

Well I guess we'll find out. ucrdem Jan 2017 #4

... WhiteTara Jan 2017 #5

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the media's favorite Democrat ucrdem Jan 2017 #9

Sanders has been barnstorming the country selling his book. lapucelle Jan 2017 #209

You just don't get it do you ?? jknudsen Jan 2017 #71

Post removed Post removed Jan 2017 #74

He's welcome to fight FOR and WITH us, but not to fight us. Hortensis Jan 2017 #106

THIS .... BlueMTexpat Jan 2017 #138

Great post Cary Jan 2017 #202

He fights his own fights DFW Jan 2017 #192

He does have a book for sale. George II Jan 2017 #120

Ding! Dong! BlueMTexpat Jan 2017 #139

Well, at least he lost to, according to some, the best candidate for president, ever... dionysus Jan 2017 #17

Bernie didn't just lose to HRC, he got thrashed. Charles Bukowski Jan 2017 #24

+1!!!!! Cha Jan 2017 #33

Will he ever stop trashing the party he used to run with under our brand then went back to ... brush Jan 2017 #89

This! JustAnotherGen Jan 2017 #99

He couldn't care less about Dump NastyRiffraff Jan 2017 #168

Dumb! ProfessorGAC Jan 2017 #206

If it's so dumb, give a sound argument as to why. Did he not retreat to being an Independent again.. brush Jan 2017 #208

Dumb ProfessorGAC Jan 2017 #211

Try reading some of the other post in this tread. You're out of step with most here. Now that's dumb brush Jan 2017 #213

Oh, he is not stupid. He knew well before that lunamagica Jan 2017 #130

That's true only if you don't know the history of post-1968 primaries aikoaiko Jan 2017 #199

Sanders lost because he failed utterly to appeal to voters beyond a narrow base of white voters Gothmog Jan 2017 #147

That's It? ProfessorGAC Jan 2017 #205

Don't worry. SaschaHM Jan 2017 #2

Let's see. Russ Feingold is a Democrat. Russ lost. Therefore Russ must have taken the "bait" still_one Jan 2017 #3

Right, BS endorsed Feingold, and Teachout and they lost .. did they take Cha Jan 2017 #35

just simple logic. If A B, and B C, then A C still_one Jan 2017 #68

Yes, it is simple logic and we're being asked to defy it. Cha Jan 2017 #69

Well said n/t emulatorloo Jan 2017 #58

He also lost by a greater margin NewJeffCT Jan 2017 #116

your correct. In Wisconsin for President it was Hillary 46.5% to trump 47.2% still_one Jan 2017 #117

Meanwhile, the president-elect is the most Wall Street friendly candidate EVER! Garrett78 Jan 2017 #190

Russ told Clinton she needed to get to Wisconsin Goblinmonger Jan 2017 #162

so that is why the incumbent republican Ron Johnson, right to work, anti-union candidate won. still_one Jan 2017 #164

Are you from Wisconsin? Goblinmonger Jan 2017 #165

Wisconsin, the state that was given every chance to throw out Scott Walker still_one Jan 2017 #166

I don't think it was progressives that lost Wisconsin for Clinton/Feingold. Goblinmonger Jan 2017 #167

No doubt it is purple, however, if those who had voted Jill Stein, who I assume were progressives, v still_one Jan 2017 #172

Bernie, please go somewhere and sit down. EffieBlack Jan 2017 #6

He's hardly in the way. NWCorona Jan 2017 #14

Exactly with statements like these. Cha Jan 2017 #36

Sanders has to, at long last, stop running for President. baldguy Jan 2017 #7

+100000000000 Justice Jan 2017 #88

Part of his appeal is that he never stops fighting for what he believes in HoneyBadger Jan 2017 #102

Apparently he believes in the RW lie that there's no difference between the two parties. baldguy Jan 2017 #107

Incorrect. He picked the Democratic Party as the less corrupted... Orsino Jan 2017 #143

The article in the OP shows otherwise. baldguy Jan 2017 #194

No, it doesn't. Orsino Jan 2017 #223

Seems you didn't bother to actually **READ** it, did you? baldguy Jan 2017 #228

Read the sound bite in the OP? Orsino Jan 2017 #229

So, you really didn't read the article. baldguy Jan 2017 #230

There's no article posted or linked in the OP... Orsino Jan 2017 #231

The Google machine too complex for you? baldguy Jan 2017 #233

Thank you. Orsino Jan 2017 #234

Being an "anti-establishment candidate" requires the belief that the Dems and the GOP are the same. baldguy Jan 2017 #235

No, it doesn't. Orsino Jan 2017 #236

He only ran as a Dem because he needed their money & organization to run nationally for Pres. baldguy Jan 2017 #237

+1 nt JTFrog Jan 2017 #238

Your assertion does not support post 107. Orsino Jan 2017 #239

Sorry, but it does. baldguy Jan 2017 #240

"Did something extraordinary" is okay, as far as it goes... Orsino Jan 2017 #241

Your assertion is what's unsupported. baldguy Jan 2017 #243

Of course, it comes down to which sound bite you want to believe. Orsino Jan 2017 #248

And where he could get the most media coverage to sell the most books Gothmog Jan 2017 #227

not even when it means we wind up with Trump in the white house Fresh_Start Jan 2017 #245

Yes mcar Jan 2017 #176

Yes, yes, YES! NastyRiffraff Jan 2017 #187

If candidates "win" based on NOT taking money ... NanceGreggs Jan 2017 #8

Never have seen a follow up on all of his DURHAM D Jan 2017 #10

Perhaps That's Because Me. Jan 2017 #12

You saying he laundered campaign money to personally enrich himself, eh? dionysus Jan 2017 #16

I'm Saying Me. Jan 2017 #21

Out of curiosity ... NanceGreggs Jan 2017 #30

Thanks for articulating what so many of us have wondered about why Cha Jan 2017 #37

It was, IMHO ... NanceGreggs Jan 2017 #44

And, of course, the M$M never pinned them down for a Cha Jan 2017 #45

Same as when he ran out the clock to avoid reporting at the end of his campaign seaglass Jan 2017 #112

He's still required to file that Personal Financial Disclosure each year as a member of the Senate. George II Jan 2017 #125

But we have to remember, Jane Sanders was in charge of media buys, and a person in that position.... George II Jan 2017 #124

Anyone know who the principals of "Old Towne Media, LLC" are? George II Jan 2017 #121

No, I don't think s/he' saying that at all. lunamagica Jan 2017 #133

Shhhh! You're not suppose to talk about that. It's all about Cha Jan 2017 #34

you are correct that lone individuals who don't take money will usually not even be heard of JCanete Jan 2017 #49

If we had a party ... NanceGreggs Jan 2017 #63

If they knew why do you think they wouldn't care? seriously. I'm with you, the knowing is the hard JCanete Jan 2017 #72

They don't know. NanceGreggs Jan 2017 #78

They are swayed daily, by a media who's job it is to sway them. Could we effectively counter-message JCanete Jan 2017 #80

And like Sanders, the average vote doesn't understand Federal campaign finance laws. George II Jan 2017 #122

Bernie is facing reality & offering constructive criticism so we can learn from our mistakes mtnsnake Jan 2017 #11

You know who also stopped accepting corporate money? dionysus Jan 2017 #15

True, but did you mean one toke mtnsnake Jan 2017 #20

I'm not sure if you just did what i think you did. dionysus Jan 2017 #22

What reality? That national campaigns cost millions? ucrdem Jan 2017 #18

Or Martin Lockheed, the sugar industry, etc, we must not shield ourselves into thinking Sanders Thinkingabout Jan 2017 #200

His message isn't middling. I'm not going to defend the contributions as coming only from JCanete Jan 2017 #210

Do you think he only received from employees? Thinkingabout Jan 2017 #212

What did the admission of net worth say. I'm just not familiar with this story. nt JCanete Jan 2017 #214

Do a search on his reporting of his net worth for several years, his Thinkingabout Jan 2017 #215

I have no idea what you're looking at. His net worth for a Senator is like at the bottom. He has JCanete Jan 2017 #216

I think this started out as seeing a large increase in his net worth, more than his salary as Thinkingabout Jan 2017 #219

It actually totally can compute because assets, specifically property values can jump that high JCanete Jan 2017 #220

I did not do the report on his net worth when he was claiming he only had $350,000 net worth, I did Thinkingabout Jan 2017 #221

Where did Hillary's SuperPac money come from? Exilednight Jan 2017 #249

Perhaps you can explain how if Democrats lose when they take corporate money mythology Jan 2017 #43

She lost because of a 25-year swiftboating campaign Hortensis Jan 2017 #110

You are oversimplifying something. Sanders laments the power of money on our elections, so I don't JCanete Jan 2017 #218

No, he's not. It's always one-way with Sanders, he is incapable of listening to any other viewpoint SharonClark Jan 2017 #64

Being that Bernie LOST the primaries ... NanceGreggs Jan 2017 #66

+4 Million! Cha Jan 2017 #101

Which are we more concerned with right now? Goblinmonger Jan 2017 #163

What a concept! mcar Jan 2017 #191

This message was self-deleted by its author brush Jan 2017 #92

Both the Clinton and Sanders campaigns made mistakes. What campaign doesn't? brush Jan 2017 #93

Yup. Hortensis Jan 2017 #111

It's constructive criticism only when Sander's people do so. When Clinton supporters do the same LanternWaste Jan 2017 #225

As he did in the primary radical noodle Jan 2017 #13

That guy is good. TheCowsCameHome Jan 2017 #19

The best! InAbLuEsTaTe Jan 2017 #25

Bernie talking about "Dems" like he's not a Democrat... SidDithers Jan 2017 #23

Right... we've been told he is a Dem.. so is he talking about himself, too? Cha Jan 2017 #39

I see what you did there. JTFrog Jan 2017 #232

He has become such a scatter brained Independent. NCTraveler Jan 2017 #26

So how isn't this consistent with what Bernie has been saying? NWCorona Jan 2017 #27

Bernie has become the.... NCTraveler Jan 2017 #28

Trying to be considerate of big money's interests while helping the middle class and the poor JCanete Jan 2017 #31

Truly makes little sense. NCTraveler Jan 2017 #65

Exactly! It makes no fucking sense at all, which is why we keep losing. Glad you're keeping up! JCanete Jan 2017 #70

No need to address such unfounded aggression. NCTraveler Jan 2017 #76

Let me ask you something. When you post, do you just do it for the circle jerk, or do you want to JCanete Jan 2017 #79

The problem is that there's absolutely no evidence of the kind of quid-pro-quo ucrdem Jan 2017 #81

I'm not talking about anything illegal. I never said the Clinton's did anything illegal. I don't JCanete Jan 2017 #83

Graft is illegal. Promising favors in return for political donations is a crime. ucrdem Jan 2017 #87

But adopting policies that are acceptable to corporations so that they don't destroy you, and so JCanete Jan 2017 #90

Yes but if it happened there would be evidence -- meetings, emails, gifts, memos, wire transfers, ucrdem Jan 2017 #91

Hey ucrdem, appreciate the civil discussion! I'll just say that I don't think anything like that has JCanete Jan 2017 #94

Let it out. NCTraveler Jan 2017 #82

heh...okay. If you want to attribute anger or upset to my post that's fine. I wish instead, that JCanete Jan 2017 #84

. NCTraveler Jan 2017 #85

Except for a few small matters ... Putin, Comey, Crosscheck, vote suppression and other repug cheats brush Jan 2017 #123

All of which are effective by the grace of our own intentionally ineffectual media, owned by our own JCanete Jan 2017 #152

It tends to make some voters stay home of vote 3rd party. Not a good tactic if you want your party.. brush Jan 2017 #160

Sanders ran solely for media coverage and the latest comments continue this pattern Gothmog Jan 2017 #150

okay... media coverage is kind of important when you are delivering a message to the American JCanete Jan 2017 #151

That Sanders was not really trying to be the nominee but is only concern about his media coverage Gothmog Jan 2017 #154

I don't think Sanders thought he could win, given the upward battle. I think he was ready and JCanete Jan 2017 #155

No, The Systems Not Totally Rigged. But That Idea Sure Helped Donald Trump. Gothmog Jan 2017 #175

Well as a nation, we do tend to have a pretty certain trajectory, that entirely by coincidence I"m JCanete Jan 2017 #179

You know that many of Sanders most recent comments are to help him sell books Gothmog Jan 2017 #180

No I don't know that that's the reason, and you just totally ran away from your own bullshit to come JCanete Jan 2017 #181

Using legal terms is amusing coming from a layperson Gothmog Jan 2017 #184

Resorting to ad homonyms does not strengthen your argument, but since you're the expert, you JCanete Jan 2017 #186

Again, I do not care about your feelings Gothmog Jan 2017 #189

Even running as a Democrat MadCrow Jan 2017 #156

Sanders was treated very fairly-look at the number of times he appeared on the Sunday shows Gothmog Jan 2017 #158

editing cuz, post was needlessly dickish: I don't know if using one metric, "Sunday talk shows," JCanete Jan 2017 #161

These media appearances were important to Sanders and are helping him sell his latest book Gothmog Jan 2017 #185

And for some of his appearances around the country, if you want to see him you have to buy a book... George II Jan 2017 #193

I agree that Sanders is in the process of cashing in on the media coverage earned during primary Gothmog Jan 2017 #195

wow! that DOES rise to the level of scandal. $34 DOLLARS, and you have to take the book! JCanete Jan 2017 #217

I don't know if you've noticed but almost every politician has been giving their reasons NWCorona Jan 2017 #38

Exactly, NCTraveler. Such a divider.. has he ever said why he lost? Cha Jan 2017 #40

Sanders hurt the party and helped get Trump elected Gothmog Jan 2017 #159

+1 uponit7771 Jan 2017 #96

He's being honest. We get corporate backing. I don't think that's in question. He's talking about a JCanete Jan 2017 #29

That's just baloney and why I can never get behind him Cha Jan 2017 #32

Nonsense. J_William_Ryan Jan 2017 #41

Please don't bash our Candidate who got 66 Million Votes even Cha Jan 2017 #42

Thanks for this, Cha. Keeping it real. She was obviously popular R B Garr Jan 2017 #56

Enjoy your stay, but just a few small matters ... Comey, Putin, Assange, Crosscheck, vote suppressio brush Jan 2017 #126

If you continue like this, BlueMTexpat Jan 2017 #142

Do you have more than that one qoute? And where did you get it? NWCorona Jan 2017 #46

It's promo that ran several times on this evening's All Things Considered. ucrdem Jan 2017 #47

"I heard it again after posting this and the word Bernie uses is actually "swallowed." Cha Jan 2017 #48

The word that comes to mind is "bash." ucrdem Jan 2017 #50

Yeah, divide divide divide. Cha Jan 2017 #53

Thanks I'll check it out in the morning. NWCorona Jan 2017 #61

OMG. He's just a noun, a verb, and Wall Street. R B Garr Jan 2017 #51

Bwahaha. ucrdem Jan 2017 #52

lol, R B Garr Jan 2017 #55

I know, right! Cha Jan 2017 #57

Snap! lunamagica Jan 2017 #135

Bingo, R B! Cha Jan 2017 #54

You forgot corporatist SharonClark Jan 2017 #62

This is a laughably misguided comment, based on complete perversion of facts. JudyM Jan 2017 #242

He doesn't want to admit the electorate was fine with an oligarch! bettyellen Jan 2017 #77

+1 uponit7771 Jan 2017 #97

Thank you, R B! brer cat Jan 2017 #105

That's perfect... SidDithers Jan 2017 #113

Make that "Wall Shtreet" (no, it's not a speech impediment, it's a gross mispronunciation) George II Jan 2017 #119

LOL! BlueMTexpat Jan 2017 #144

I don't think we lost at all. I think it's clear this was a coup. MadamPresident Jan 2017 #59

This isn't a coup though. Russia is not as powerful as our corporations, because our corporations JCanete Jan 2017 #75

It was a coup in the sense that Putin, Comey, Crosscheck, et al helped the repugs steal the election brush Jan 2017 #128

I'll accept that answer, but I feel like the same forces are in power in this nation that have been JCanete Jan 2017 #145

+1, and ignores Comey, voter suppression and Russia. Sanders thinks this was a free and fair electio uponit7771 Jan 2017 #98

There ya go! Cha Jan 2017 #100

Hey Bernie. What a load of shit. Jakes Progress Jan 2017 #60

Amen! George II Jan 2017 #131

Great post Gothmog Jan 2017 #157

Should he not be fighting the republicans? blue cat Jan 2017 #67

What the fuck? Can he join us in 2017 please? bettyellen Jan 2017 #73

I think Bernie summed it up pretty accurately FreakinDJ Jan 2017 #86

Funny how he's going around telling Democrats why they lost, but can't address why HE lost! George II Jan 2017 #132

That would be taking on the DNC again FreakinDJ Jan 2017 #169

He didn't lose because of the DNC. George II Jan 2017 #170

and Hillary didn't lose because "Leaked" emails FreakinDJ Jan 2017 #171

BULL FUCKIN SHIT !!! Comey, Voter suppression and Russia all the rest of the postmortems are guessin uponit7771 Jan 2017 #95

Simplistic and wrong BeyondGeography Jan 2017 #103

Do you remember how Obama said he felt after talking the money? NWCorona Jan 2017 #114

Post removed Post removed Jan 2017 #104

There's that simplistic thinking again. nt Kahuna7 Jan 2017 #108

Enough Democrat-bashing from Bernie Sanders. Way more than enough. (nt) Paladin Jan 2017 #109

Here is the audio. I agree with most of what he said but can understand why NWCorona Jan 2017 #115

He still doesn't understand campaign finance laws! Maybe that's why.... George II Jan 2017 #118

Thank you for this, George! Cha Jan 2017 #127

Facts matter and Sanders made a ton of baseless claims Gothmog Jan 2017 #136

Much of Sanders' primary campaign served as a precursor to Trump's General Election Campaign. George II Jan 2017 #141

I agree-Sanders helped a great deal in the election of Trump Gothmog Jan 2017 #146

Kind of like Summer Stock before they move on to Broadway in the fall. George II Jan 2017 #148

That's the thing with populists.. JHan Jan 2017 #178

Sanders, you will NEVER be president. You LOST the PRIMARIES by MILLIONS of votes lunamagica Jan 2017 #129

Listen Liberal! earthside Jan 2017 #134

Thomas Frank is a hack but clueless white "progressives" cite his word as gospel. forjusticethunders Jan 2017 #224

Sanders whole campaign was based on a so-called revolution that never materialized Gothmog Jan 2017 #137

Not sure I agree. Orsino Jan 2017 #140

Sanders was on the ballot and underpreformed Clinton Gothmog Jan 2017 #149

Sanders is opposed to taking their money. HassleCat Jan 2017 #153

Bernie is just doing what he does best... Dream Girl Jan 2017 #173

Bernie is losing the plot... Blue_Tires Jan 2017 #174

At this point, we just need a Bernie speech generator. *rolls eyes* JHan Jan 2017 #177

isn't that what being on point is? We could say the same of anybody mentioning Putin and Comey, JCanete Jan 2017 #182

No. JHan Jan 2017 #183

cool. nt JCanete Jan 2017 #188

Well, if we're going to discuss "taking the bait" ... NanceGreggs Jan 2017 #196

Of course he's still running Jakes Progress Jan 2017 #197

It's served him well for 26 years. ucrdem Jan 2017 #198

Really? Seriously? eom KPN Jan 2017 #201

Kudos Bernie! Keep speaking the truth ... KPN Jan 2017 #203

Another statement to help cover up the influence from Putin. If we deny there was Russian influence Thinkingabout Jan 2017 #204

Bernie needs to sit down helpisontheway Jan 2017 #207

By this line of magical thinking, the Republicans lost the election for "taking the bait", right? randome Jan 2017 #222

Didn't seem to hurt trump to take wall street money and russia's money Fresh_Start Jan 2017 #226

Trump's the most Wall Street-friendly candidate/president-elect EVER!!! Garrett78 Jan 2017 #244

Sanders lost and befuddled MyNameGoesHere Jan 2017 #246

Taking corporate money is one of a few factors hurting the party. It, combined with other things, dionysus Jan 2017 #247