2016 Postmortem

George II

(67,782 posts)

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

Fri Jan 6, 2017, 06:11 PM

Jan 2017

....case in point (not even subtle):

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/our-revolution-an-evening-with-bernie-sanders-on-book-tour-tickets-28397960063#

DATE & TIME: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 7:30 PM. Doors open at 6:30 PM. Seating is first come, first served. Ticket package required and includes a copy of his book.

LOCATION: First Unitarian Universalist Society Meeting House, 152 Pearl Street, Burlington, Vermont 05401

Please leave large bags and personal items at home. We are expecting a full house and want everyone to be safe and comfortable.

THE PUBLISHER HAS PROVIDED US WITH A LIMITED NUMBER OF PRESIGNED BOOKS. There will be no booksigning at this event.

ADMISSION PACKAGES: There are two available options

The first 250 admission packages will include one presigned copy of Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In. The remaining admission packages will include one unsigned copy.

$34: 1 seat / 1 book. Admission for one to the event, one copy of Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In
$40: 2 seats / 1 book. Admission for two to the event, one copy of Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In

All admission packages will be available at the First Unitarian Universalist Society Meeting House starting at 6:30PM the evening of the event. Admission packages may only be picked up at the venue the evening of the event, and cannot be picked up in-store beforehand.

EVENT FORMAT: Bernie Sanders will discuss his book in an interview format. After the interview there will be a moderated audience Q&A. There will be no booksigning.

DISCLAIMER: Tickets are non-refundable and non-returnable. Anyone unable to attend the event will be able to pick up books at our Burlington store up to one month after the event.

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