The presence of such a divisive figure on our Democratic stage will only harm us.

[Maru Kitteh]

History is a fine tutor if we will listen.

Do we believe the Russians will just whistle on by this time, choosing not exploit a cadre of plug-and-play separatists?

This is DEMOCRATIC Underground, and I for one am so very glad we have many excellent and true DEMOCRATS running who have carried the mantle of our party proudly at ALL times, not just use us when it suits them.

Totemic figures of division must not be allowed to repeat their poisonous and selfish dischord, and facilitate once again the existence of the Trump regime.

[redstatebluegirl]

1. Yes, and we will be giving 45 another 4 years to finish destroying our country.

[apcalc]

2. Agree... terrible news for the country...

[allgood33]

90. I am trusting that true Democrats, right, left, middle, will not be fooled again by the Russians

or the media.

[BannonsLiver]

92. Good luck with that.

I’d say it’s a virtual certainty that all of the above happen again.

[SumDave1933]

109. Likewise.

[UniteFightBack]

3. I don't think it's going to be that bad. There is a lot more people now..he shall be diluted. nt

[Blue_true]

118. He has a number of important things to explain.

"I will do better this time" won't be good enough. Saying that his wife is doing his tax returns and because of that they will at some point be released won't be good enough.

[Eliot Rosewater]

129. My worry are the young or first time voters. They are being told that

a perfect candidate is not only possible but , well you know .


Many of them arent sophisticated in our system enough to know one person cant do shit, without tons of support.

They wont look at 30 plus years of experience, see basically ONE achievement and ask why?

[watoos]

4. The only way we lose in 2020 is if we fight among ourselves.

[NRaleighLiberal]

5. THIS (and Russia)

[Maru Kitteh]

6. Exactly why we need to purge divisive figures before they can continue to exact harm

on our party and all the fine candidates we have who support our party at all times rather than using us at their convenience.

[honest.abe]

7. +1

[Tom Rinaldo]

8. "Purge" by definition is decisive. Literally.

No members of the Senate Democratic Caucus leadership represents a "fringe" viewpoint within the Democratic coalition. No potential Democratic Party presidential candidate polling in double digits has an insignificant following among Democrats.

Talk of purges divides us.

[panader0]

10. "purge"?

[Maru Kitteh]

12. yeah, purge.

As in, be gone with totemic figures of division. (see above)

Like I said, we have many good and true DEMOCRATS to choose from. To hell with self-serving "friends" who have proven only to harm and divide, thus enabling the Trump regime.

[panader0]

13. The word conjures up visions on Hitler, Stalin and Mao to me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge

[Maru Kitteh]

14. Cleave away just sounds so awkward. Anything that means discard, reject, throw off, amputate

. . . substitute whatever you like.

I have never thought of purge as you apparently do. I have always used it in the medical/behavioral context.

[G_j]

47. I don't think that word used in a political reference

is generally thought of as a medical term.

[JHB]

56. In politics, the dictatorial connotation generally predominates

It's not just the one poster above. Your medically-based sense of the word is actually fairly rare.

Conservatives regularly use the term to paint Democrats as practically Stalinist, e.g., Obama "purged" the military of generals critical of him (bunk, but what has that stopped them?).

[Voltaire2]

113. it is a form of the equivocation fallacy

The arguer uses one meaning of a word in one context and then when a counter argument uses that meaning the arguer shifts to a different meaning of the term.

[JHB]

121. Oh, they can be even shiftier than that...

In one breath they'll hail us at the Leader of the Free World, and then barely into the next rail at "European socialism", as if it was practiced by Warsaw Pact police states instead of the very same countries that make up the free world they had just referred to.

[lapucelle]

40. Isn't it a term more recently used in cleansing diets? I makes me think of getting rid of toxins. N/

[George II]

85. I remember what my doctor told me when I was scheduled for my colonoscopy.

[Maru Kitteh]

95. I'm pretty sure some people just want to distract from the greater point by nitpicking

a very, very common word.

Purging the voter rolls, for example. Or, "Conservative writer urges GOP to purge the racists from among their ranks."

But you know - Some people . . . . .

[lapucelle]

98. Apparently not everyone's first definition immediately defaults to the authoritarian line. N/T

Merriam-Webster's doesn't.

[LanternWaste]

97. The word conjures up an evacuation of the bowels to me.

Which isn't a stretch, as that's the actual (rather than trendy-narrative-based-on-bias) definition.

[TheFarseer]

50. Purge his voters too

Make them know they are not welcome to vote for our candidate

[BannonsLiver]

91. You mean like last time?

[JudyM]

111. Aw, no fair to argue in a reasoned way

[Iggo]

143. I agree, and I'm starting right now.

[elleng]

46. Yes, Thanks.

[MadDAsHell]

142. We lost 2016 with the most qualified candidate in history.

If we think we got this in the bag simply by not fighting amongst ourselves, it's 2016 all over again...

[BostonBlue]

9. If HRC were President I have no doubt Sanders would be challenging her

He's addicted to the attention and he has the full backing of Putin.

[Maru Kitteh]

11. Russia certainly egged on all kinds of separatists.

They were so easy to lead around. Look how that worked out.

[George II]

79. To see the extent of that all one need do is read Mueller's Feb 2018 indictment of...

...13 Russian individuals and 3 Russian entities.

[Voltaire2]

116. So you are claiming that Sanders is a Russian plot?

[BostonBlue]

153. Just a useful tool.

The Russians are just taking advantage of the facts on the ground. Messianic politician who divides the opposition to their boy.

[radius777]

136. Both the alt-right and alt-left

seem to be aligned (to varying degrees) with Putin in some form of global white populism against what they see as a Western establishment that has become (or is becoming) overly diverse... hence the sudden anti establishmentism when all along most of these demographics were voting for Reagan, Thatcher, etc.

IOW, I don't see them as merely dupes or hacks (some are of course) but as sharing a similar ideology, aligned in a similar struggle.

[BannonsLiver]

93. He wanted Obama out of office in 2012.

Called for “someone” to primary him. Of course he lacked the fortitude to try and do it himself.

[Voltaire2]

114. We can all project alternate histories and demand that they are valid.

I for one have no doubt that if Sanders had won the 2016 primary he would be president instead of Shitler.

[Grasswire2]

132. you just joined DU in order to oppose Bernie? Or what?

Sow disinformation?

[Alea]

139. How do you know he/she is wrong?

Maybe you're just beating up on a new person.

[BostonBlue]

152. The Russian fascists are the ones sowing disinformation

Sanders is just one of their vehicles. Is that Bernie's fault? Not necessarily but his camp's inability to acknowledge it is frankly Trumpian.

[MrsCoffee]

17. Can you list the policies that the party adopted that were Bernie's ideas please.

His original ideas. Not things already introduced by Democrats in the past or their past platforms.

Thanks in advance.

P.S. - Your personal attack of the OP is totally out of bounds.

[floppyboo]

19. Were you around for the 2016 convention?

I believe a majority of his platform was adopted - a few stances not. Google it.
Here's one pre-platform you might remember: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanders-scores-platform-concessions-from-democratic-national-committee/2016/05/23/e9ee8330-20fc-11e6-aa84-42391ba52c91_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9098a851bc95
It's the Washington Post, so of course they make a big deal of the Palestine angel. But read through that.

Here's the Party Platform https://democrats.org/about/party-platform/

yes, the language i similar to the political platitudes of the past - But since that Philly moment, Sanders has advanced bills which really walk the talk.

It's this boldness that is mistaken for ego. It is mistaking action which has been agreed upon by the Party as some kind of rogue agenda. Sanders has proven himself again and again to be a democrat and to work for the Democratic Party platform.

[lapucelle]

20. Believe what you would like. Facts and history say otherwise.

I'll wait for your response.

[MrsCoffee]

34. The level of cognitive dissonance is familiar and disturbing.

I don't think I can take another 2 years of hearing how Bernie invented sliced bread while simultaneously declaring bread makers corrupt.

[lapucelle]

36. I wonder what Cardi B has to say about all this.

[MrsCoffee]

39. Lol!

[lapucelle]

57. I just got his email...he wants 1,000,000 recruits in each state.

1,000,000 x 27 x 50 = 1,350,000,000.

"Not the billionaire" indeed.

[MrsCoffee]

59. What?!?

Oh my goodness.

I hadn't considered the amount of money to be made. I imagine there will be another book as well.

[lapucelle]

64. Marketed, sold, and distributed through Amazon to maximize sales. N/T

[George II]

84. I got his email this morning, too....

The subject is "I'm running". More than 1500 words, one reference to the "Democratic" nomination.

[George II]

99. I just got a followup email asking for money, 229 words but not a single mention of Democrats!

[lapucelle]

124. Cha-ching, baby.

[GWC58]

89. I'm with you, Mrs. Coffee!

Plus, after BS knew he would not/COULD NOT get the nomination, he continued bad mouthing Hillary. That, as far as I’m concerned, accomplished not a thing. It did accomplish something, but it was for Trump/Russians. 🥺😳

[Cha]

100. No, you're Wrong.. and NO BS has NOT.

Sorry, he's too divisive.

[Maru Kitteh]

18. You read like a Russian troll. "Hillary corporatism Totem" you say?

See, you'll notice if you care to learn, Russia actually supported a few people - and NONE of them were our Democratic nominee.


- You must get your news from "feeds." That's too bad, but it does explain a lot. I get my news from respected journalistic institutions.

[R B Garr]

22. Excellent response! I was just replying to that but it poofed.

Looks like the revisionist history types are trying to switch the narrative about Russian trolls. But the entire fact base is against them. Russia helped those who attacked Democrats because of the divisiveness they fomented—proven fact now (corporatists, etc).

[Maru Kitteh]

26. Why thank you RB Garr!

I was wondering if somebody would "poof" that post!

[calimary]

60. It does make me wonder how many, last time, actually DID fall for that trolling.

I think most of them were well-meaning, or believed they were.

Shit - when the avowed enemies of not only America, but OF US DEMS push us toward division, and fighting among ourselves: what do we get? An actual hostile foreign power’s instrument IN OUR WHITE HOUSE.
A
In June, 2015, the freakin’ damn National Review argues that GOPers should support the renegade in order to hurt and destabilize Democrats.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nationalreview.com/2015/06/bernie-sanders-republicans-myra-adams/amp/

All THAT particular enemy wanted, bottom line, whether it’s political leanings or philosophical wet dreams was to get us at each other’s throats. Limbaugh got onboard early, calling for what he described as “Operation Chaos.” Basically aggravating a situation by encouraging “enemy partisans” to help a divisive candidate who would likely fail but weaken the brightest prospect sufficiently for the bad guys to sneak past the scrum for the win.

Please just stop for a moment and consider the whole idea of an “Operation Chaos.”

Just stop and consider what happens when one side is deep in divisive internal battles while the opposing side is in lockstep together.

PLEASE stop and consider the lessons for Democrats from BOTH 2016 AND 2018:

In 2016, with Operation Chaos in full flower, what was the result? trump in OUR White House. A full-on fucking Russian ASSET for crying out loud!

In 2018, with the Democrats fully united, what was the result? Democrats took back the House of Reps.

We HAVE TO stay UNITED to get ANYWHERE significant, guys!

We have no other option. We HAVE TO be UNITED to win! There IS no other option.

[JudyM]

119. Very good point.

A popular candidate.entered the race today and the attacks against him embody this divisiveness. Fighting here against a front runner, alienating those who are interested in his positions, not his age, his religion, his speaking style or his wife’s employment history. Let’s focus on ideas at DU.

[radius777]

16. It's an argument that needs to be had

in the open, and let it resolve itself... better than letting Sanders' narratives go unchallenged.

The Bernie wing has one vision (white-centric populism, old leftism) of the party, and people like myself who are Clinton/Obama Dems have a much different vision, what they may call 'rainbow capitalism' or 'identity politics', but what I may call 'civil rights liberalism' or simply 'equality'.

I think this time Sanders will use a similar strategy against people like Kamala that he used on Hillary - but this time the blowback will be far more intense - and his own background will be scrutinized that was overlooked last time, when Hillary pretty much knew he had no mathematical chance after March 8th, and held her punches for the most part.

[jalan48]

21. If we keep our focus on the issues and not the individual we will be fine.

[Maru Kitteh]

23. That's why we have to reject individuals who insist on making themselves the issue.

Individuals who specialize in flipping in and out of the Democratic Party faster than an IHOP grill master. Individuals who apparently believe that they "they alone can fix this" and end up fixing things alright - but not so much for Democrats.

I believe in and will support a Democrat for the Democratic nomination, not a weather vane.

[jalan48]

25. Health care, climate change, income inequality, social justice, economic justice, etc.

Where do the candidates stand on issues like these? That's what I want to know.

[BSdetect]

24. He's a kidney stone candidate. Time to retire from the fray.

[Maru Kitteh]

28. Interesting! Kidney stone. It's miserable, you know it's going to be miserable

in its passing, but you also know it has to go.



Don't care where ya go but you can't stay here!

[justhanginon]

44. And having suffered from many kidney stones in my life, I must

say, the relief when they are gone is tremendous. If you get my drift!

[shanny]

27. lol

[calimary]

29. We just lost 2020, folks. Four more years of trump.

[HipChick]

145. Yep....

[Hermit-The-Prog]

30. the 'trash' button works for Schultz and Sanders

Too bad it doesn't work beyond DU.

[DFW]

31. In all fairness.....

You are correct only if he appears on said democratic stage.

He seems to like the limelight. Let him appear on his own party's stage.

[RAAD2]

32. Someone Wants To Take On The Oligarch Control Of Our Country As Their Main Platform

All is lost.....

[MrsCoffee]

42. You mean like taking on Russian Oligarchs with sanctions?

I guess that leaves Bernie out.

[Maru Kitteh]

49. LOL! Also: Someone Who Capitalizes Every Word Like They Write "Presidential" Tweets

May In Fact Support Candidates That Russia Supported Before.

[uponit7771]

88. +1

[beastie boy]

58. First off, I have yet to see Berrnie's "wants" translated into "done's"

Second, there are plenty of REAL Democrats who want the same thing, and some of them are running. Guess who I will be voting for?

Third, Bernie is a compromised troll bait. He has a well established record of having been used to divide the forces opposing Trump, whether he did anything about it or not. He, or more accurately, his supporters, bolstered by the aforementioned trolls, played a significant role in electing Trump, and Bernie hasn't learned jack shit from the experience. Or maybe he did, and he doesn't care anyway. He is doing it again, but this time, if there was conceivably some doubt about it the last time he ran, with full knowledge of what he is doing.

The sooner he drops out, the better it is for every single American who hates Trump.

[BannonsLiver]

94. I hope there is an oligarch drinking game on DU this time

Every time a Sanders follower reaches for the O word we have to drink. We’ll all have cirrohosis by March.

[RobertDevereaux]

33. Please calm down and unite behind WHOEVER wins the primary.

We all know the terms DINO and RINO. Democrat In Name Only, etc.

Well, I regard Bernie Sanders as a DIABN (my new coinage), a Democrat In All But Name.

[Maru Kitteh]

51. Well, how did I exist before you, and however will I go on without you?

Thanks so much for the mansplanation.

[Cryptoad]

35. OOOOOOh NO,,,,,,

Not the OLe Purity Test again?

[dlk]

37. Third Party Candidates Gave Us Trump The Last Time

How steep is the learning curve for some?

[RAAD2]

41. The FBI Gave Us Trump

Fact.

[Maru Kitteh]

66. Pffffft. Fucking idiots gave us Trump, too many of them claiming to be progressive

while undermining the only chance to stop his attainment of the presidency.

Three neurons in a petri dish could see through the FBI thing - but JPR types are not possessing of such a resource.

Fact.

[LongtimeAZDem]

120. +∞

[Cuthbert Allgood]

67. No, they did not. Not at all.

Comey had a lot to do with it.
White voters mad about having had a black President had a lot to do with it.
Not campaigning like we needed in WI, PA, and OH had a lot do to with it.

Third party candidates had basically nothing to do with it. Sanders voters voted for Clinton at a higher percentage than Clinton voters voted for Obama. He did his job.

[tiredtoo]

38. IMHO

This thread is divisive and should be removed. But that's just me.

[RAAD2]

43. Agreed

[flotsam]

52. I agree

Talking about "true" democrats and "purges" sure doesn't sound very democratic to me. Also demonizing a guy who has announced he is going to run for the democratic nomination (even if you "cleverly" don't write his name) seems to me to be a rules violation.

[sellitman]

82. Agreed

[pangaia]

128. Too many like this....

It's endless....

[Grasswire2]

133. Agreed

So it's not just you.

[The Truth Is Here]

45. As far as I'm concerned, Bernie Sanders is qualified to run as a Democrat for the POTUS in 2020

The others who have issues with that can step out of the political foray.

Ageism? Already solved: Bernie is far healthier and wiser than the Orange Shitgibbon in the White House. Older brother, Larry, is very much alive as well and dabbling in politics in England.

Racism? Look again. Bernie's organization, has plenty of minorities and POC on staff, including the CEO, Nina Turner.

Sexism?: See Racism.

Any questions?

Bernie will win the Southern primaries this time around now they are much more informed about him.

[ehrnst]

53. So Democrats in the South were "uniformed?"

Really? In what way? Why do you think the South was "uninformed" concerning Sanders?

[BlueMTexpat]

54. BS is only and

always a Democrat of convenience.

Next to the other candidates who are ALL Democrats for the long run, he'll go poof.

As for winning the Southern primaries ... that IS a stretch!

[George II]

72. He won't qualify until Tom Perez receives his written affirmation that he:

A. is a member of the Democratic Party;

B. will accept the Democratic nomination;
and

C. will run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party.

Those three points and the requirement to affirm them to Tom Perez in writing are taken out of the new rules of the Democratic National Committee, word for word.

[The Truth Is Here]

73. Already did. He jumped through every hoops.

You still aren't getting it.

[ehrnst]

75. Actually, no, he hasn't publicly affirmed that he's a Democrat

I don't think you get that it's a requirement (or hoops, as you would describe it):

According to the draft rule change adopted Friday, “At the time a presidential candidate announces their candidacy publicly, they must publicly affirm that they are a Democrat.”

The draft goes on to require that any candidate pursuing the Democratic Party’s nomination for president confirm in writing to the Democratic National Committee chairman that they are a member of the Democratic Party, will accept the Democratic nomination and will “run and serve as a member of the Democratic Party.”

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/08/dnc-rule-change-sanders-supporters-634998

You're welcome.

[George II]

76. Subsequently that draft rule was passed by the DNC.

[ehrnst]

81. No answer as to what manner in which the South was "uninformed?"

No surprise..

[Hortensis]

96. Here, the South has Trump populism, doesn't want Sanders populism,

weak tea to put it in terms nice enough for this forum. I see their point. The nastier aspects of populism are far better served by right-wing candidates.

We live in Georgia, btw, and Sanders' only selling point for most around here is exactly the same as it was in 2016 -- they see Sanders as a contemptibly useful tool. Sadly, their extravagant contempt for others doesn't wash back on them, much as they deserve it.

By and large, btw, they're still pleased with Trump and themselves and looking forward to seeing Trump use him again. As they imagine it. They don't mention Putin or the people like the Kochs they so absurdly elected that depraved whack-job billionaire to get out from under in the first place.

[Quayblue]

131. They were already informed about him and the answer was "no"

Good old low info voter dogwhistling eh??

[crazytown]

48. jpr: "the dems will probably cheat him again"

The whole thing might end as a “we was robbed” like last time. Will Bernie endorse endorse another candidate before the Convention if has lost, or ‘bern’ through supporter’s money.

[James48]

55. I . for one, am very happy to see him toss his hat into the ring.

I think he makes a FINE candidate. I am ready to support him.

And if he wins the primaries- wonderful. and if someone else does, I certainly will feel free to examine and see if I can support them whole heartedly as well.


I think it does a GREAT DISSERVICE to post threads like this. Why are you so opposed to Bernie?

[beastie boy]

70. It's like 2016 never happened. Bernie does not exist in a vacuum.

He has been proven to be a divisive candidate, incapable or unwilling of ever becoming inclusive. This virtually guarantees his loss in the Primaries, let alone Presidential elections. What is of consequence is how his loss will affect the winner of the Democratic Primaries.

History shows that not only will Bernie not able (or willing) to do anything to unite the Democratic Party, but that his name and his base will be used, by foreign and domestic interests, to divide it.

Bernie knows it. And he doesn't care. And, if you didn't know it before, now you do too. Do you care?

[Tobin S.]

61. You all need to relax about this. Bernie is not going to be a problem.

He won't get nearly the traction he did in 2016. I predict he'll end up bowing out early on in the process. Or if he manages to keep going in the face of losses will just be irrelevant.

[Garrett78]

62. I can't imagine he'll stick around for as long this time.

Last edited Tue Feb 19, 2019, 02:44 PM - Edit history (1)

He's not likely to repeat his 2nd place in Iowa and 1st place in New Hampshire. And then there's NV, followed by SC. I don't think he'll be able to justify sticking around until Super Tuesday.

That doesn't mean, of course, that he can't sew division in the meantime, but 2016 was tailor-made for him in ways that 2020 isn't. Clinton is polarizing and Sanders was *the* alternative for all those who had been conditioned to hate Hillary. O'Malley was gone after Iowa and there was only one candidate left for the anti-Clinton crowd.

Plus, there will be fewer caucuses. And he'll be 4 years older.

[SumDave1933]

63. New here. I disagree, but I respect your opinion.

[Maru Kitteh]

69. And your first post! Thank you, and I hope you enjoy it here.

Truly - Welcome to DU!

[BeyondGeography]

65. The comparatively weak field in 2016 was much more of a problem

One fully ready-for-primetime player whose negatives never seemed to dip below 50 percent, some people (Webb and Chaffee, ffs) who had no business running and Bernie. I’m all for robust competition; interest and enthusiasm should be off the charts this go-round, and I don’t see the divisions of 2016 repeating themselves, for a lot of reasons.

[Eyeball_Kid]

68. If Bernie can advance the issues commonly labeled as liberal or progressive, then...

IMO, his participation should be welcomed, but only as a purveyor of Democratic Party values. As a serious contender for president in 2020, Bernie's time has elapsed, and I'm pleased to see that there are candidates of one, and maybe two, generations younger who are equally committed to saving the nation from so many policies begun and perpetuated by the Trumpies. The first priority is the get Trumpy and his army of thieves and traitors out of power. Bernie isn't the answer, but he can ask a lot of questions.

[Roy Rolling]

74. "Us"? Harm "Us" ?

Who is the "us" you are speaking of?

Because "if you want money for people with minds that hate, all I can tell you is, brother, you have to wait."

[George II]

77. It's clear who "us" is in the subject line of the OP.

[Autumn]

78. The Democratic party is stronger than that.

[IronLionZion]

80. Harris and Warren are sufficiently liberal enough

to neutralize anyone coming at us from the left.

What we need is some independent conservative to divide the other side.

[fishwax]

83. The enthusiasm and energy that Sanders and his supporters brought in 2016 helped

The vast majority of the people that Sanders helped bring into the process voted for Hillary, helping her to the third-highest popular vote total in history. The vast majority of HRC supporters welcomed Bernie's supporters into the fold. Hooray for our two great candidates and our party.

Of course, there were some really divisive Sanders supporters who couldn't let go of the primary, who attacked Clinton as a candidate, and who wound up hurting us in the long run. And there were some really divisive Clinton supporters who couldn't let go of the primary, attacked Sanders and his supporters thus dampening potential turnout and enthusiasm and so wound up hurting us in the long run. I hope we see less of that kind of divisiveness this time around.

Fortunately, this time around, we have a great (and much larger) slate of candidates to choose from. I expect that we'll wind up with a great candidate next year, and one who will surpass the popular vote total from last time around and also succeed in the electoral college. I doubt it will be Sanders, as I suspect the sort of energy and response that boosted him to an unexpectedly strong showing in the primaries last time around will have other outlets in this round's candidates. But we'll see.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

86. Don't want divisive? Don't be divisive.

Be the change you want to see in the world.

[Cha]

101. Like your sig line?

[ehrnst]

104. .....

[sheshe2]

106. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[LongtimeAZDem]

108. +1

[betsuni]

123. Exactly.

[PubliusEnigma]

87. Bernie is a Pied Piper.

[David__77]

102. Horse feathers.

...

[Arazi]

103. Russia is going to hack and manipulate the vote the same as 2016

I'm damn sure the only way Trump loses in 2020 is if he's already in prison or on house arrest.

Hillary didn't lose. The election was rigged and stolen.

The Russians are preparing to do it again no matter who we run. The Republicans are betting on it, stripping and defunding every agency and committee set up to stop the hackers from doing it again while Zuckerberg and @Jack are letting the Russian bots continue to run rampant since they're corrupted by Russian investment rubles big time.

Go ahead and shit on Bernie. Putin laughs and laughs as we waste energy on this foolishness.

You want to win? Get busy pressuring your MOC to protect election integrity. Get involved at the local level to ensure Dems are involved and present at the elections to minimize mischief. Pressure the social media platforms to change their algorithms and get rid of the Russian troll farms they KNOW are there.

I refuse to derogate on any candidate running against Trump. The primary process will sort everyone out. Sure, go ahead and cheerlead your favorite but don't lose sight of the real reason Trump is in office. Putin installed him and we must ensure something like that never happens again

[Blue_Tires]

105. The good news is barring some series of epic disasters

i.e., every other Dem candidate caught wearing blackface in their college yearbooks while stabbing a kitten, Sanders will be out of the race sooner rather than later. Without the boogeyman of "Neolib Wall Street Warmonger Hillary" to look good against, St. Bern is going to be positively ordinary.

The one early problem I see is like Trump in 2015, the cable news channels are going to quickly discover their ratings bread is getting buttered with Bernie on the air, so he's going to enjoy an oversized media presence dimming everyone else's light...

[Maru Kitteh]

107. Surely they wouldn't have any interest in the corporate whore media? They don't watch that

do they? So many tell us that they would never watch that stuff.

A great portion of me shares your optimism about an early exit. I simply hope the party has learned not to allow him to wreak the havoc previously experienced on his way down, and out.

[Blue_true]

122. He will face two monumental problems right of the gate.

The issues with how women were treated in his last presidential campaign.

And

His tax returns. If he has not released them by the first debate, he is toast because everyone standing on that stage with him likely would have released theirs, multiple years of them.

He got by last time by not having a presidential primary track record, so it was Hillary having to answer questions about paid
speech transcripts and the actions of one staffer in her 2008 campaign (even after she did the right things).

Bernie can announce that he is running sitting across from an adoring media person, but the debate questioners will be different animals entirely.

[radius777]

148. Agree - many women were deeply hurt

by the way Hillary was treated, both by the Sanders supporters as well as the Trump supporters.

Hillary's most loyal supporters were women of color (particularly black women) - the base of the Dem party.

I don't see how he gets past that, as well as several tone-deaf comments he's made about "identity politics" and "don't just vote for me because I'm a woman".. clearly (at least on some level) he and his supporters feel Obama and Hillary only got where they were due to race/gender - not their ideas or capability.

[Blue_true]

164. Your last sentence. My perception is that underlay a lot of Bernie's angst against the party.

A belief that the Democratic Party grades on a curve and favor women and people of color. It is a very republican claim, but the Bernsters throw in the economic justic and income inequality argument to throw critics off their scent. Bernie just can't seem to grasp that as long as there is discrimination in society, there can not be economic justice that encompasses everyone.

[Starry Messenger]

110. He'll be wiped out on Super Tuesday

He's not getting past CA this time either, and we're earlier this year

[Garrett78]

130. He may be wiped out before we even get to Super Tuesday.

I doubt he'll finish 2nd in Iowa or 1st in New Hampshire like he did in 2016.

[BannonsLiver]

137. He was wiped out by then last time around too

And Bernie didn’t get the memo. Whadya bet history repeats itself and by March Bernie and his followers are whining about an unfair process blah blah blah.

[Starry Messenger]

141. They are already whining about "dnc rigging"

and shit hasn't even started yet. I'm so over them.

[radius777]

150. PoC - not the DNC - destroyed Bernie

all over the country.

Wherever there were diversity and/or high population areas he was crushed.

In the Berners minds they are the left and the left is the base - simply not true.

The Dem party has always been less ideological (unlike the GOP) and more a collection of various voting blocs, and in the modern day this is heavily diverse, and center-leftish and pragmatic.

This is why Clinton/Obama Democrats were able to dominate for a generation - not due to some DNC conspiracy.

[Garrett78]

146. I don't think history will repeat itself. Here's why:

Sanders won't be in a 1-on-1 race, and he won't be running against someone who millions had been conditioned to hate over a period of decades. 2016 was tailor-made for Sanders.

2nd in Iowa and 1st in New Hampshire propelled Sanders forward. I don't see him doing as well in those states in 2020, even as they remain 2 of the whitest and most rural states in the US (how wonderful that we give undue influence to a couple of states that don't remotely reflect our electorate). If he does relatively poorly in Iowa and doesn't win New Hampshire, it'll be quite embarrassing for him. So much so that I could see him dropping out before South Carolina, if not before Nevada.

And Super Tuesday, assuming he hasn't already dropped out, will be even worse for him than it was in 2016. He'll lose badly in nearly every contest that takes place on March 3, 2020. Not to mention South Carolina 3 days earlier.

Plus, there will be fewer caucuses.

Anyway, he'll find it much tougher to justify sticking around, and I suspect there will be quite a bit of pressure on him to leave the race (including pressure from within his camp).

That there are people who seriously think he's a contender, or even the favorite, is dumbfounding. Reality will provide a swift smack.

[BannonsLiver]

149. Excellent post.

[Garrett78]

154. Thanks. :)

[Blue_true]

112. I really think that he is going to get exposed early on this time.

Hillary had so many lies told about her over 30 years that it was easy for some people to believe anything about her. This time around Bernie will have to answer a handful of significant questions, he did not have that burden last time.

[diva77]

115. Right wing media and propaganda are the things to fear and fight against.

[pampango]

117. Let this primary set a standard for our democracy at its best.

Link to tweet

?s=21

[pampango]

125. Banning Bernie thus alienating a few million liberal voters may thrill Trump.

And why wouldn’t it?

[Grasswire2]

134. again nt

[Hoyt]

127. Already run into some swarmy Alert attempts like 2016.

[ProfessorPlum]

135. you'll get over it

[Maru Kitteh]

156. It's like I've heard that before. "You'll come around after Bernie wins"

Yeah. I've heard that before. I'm sure of it.

The real question is, will Bernie get over it this time?

I hope so. I hope he's still capable of learning, adaptation and change for the better of us all, instead of himself.

[meadowlander]

138. Insisting that your brand of Democrat is the only "true Democrat" is what will harm us.

I like everyone who's running including Bernie Sanders. I'm interested to hear what all of them have to say. In about eighteen months, when it's actually primary season, I'll be happy to check back in and make a very difficult decision between a lot of good candidates.

What I hope is that I'm not going to have to check out of DU for the next two years because of how boring it is to read "fall in line or else you're a divisive, selfish, gullible, not-real Democrat" while whining about how it's the other candidate's supporters who are tearing us all apart.

Can we all just slow our rolls and remember that we actually agree about 99.9% of what we're talking about and that it won't kill us to treat each other with respect and a genuine desire to understand where the other person is coming from?

[Garrett78]

147. "In about eighteen months..." We're about 1 year away from the Nevada caucuses.

[Trumpocalypse]

151. No it is insisting that someone who is a member of the Democratic Party

is a true democrat. Not someone who has repeatedly refused to join the party spoiler, not someone who broke his promise to join the party and not someone who has gone on FAUX News to attack the party.

[meadowlander]

157. We aren't going to win by narrowing down the definition of a democrat and telling everyone else

to shut up and fuck off. How well has that worked in the past?

There's a difference between "attacking" and "offering constructive criticism" and I don't think that the Democratic Party is either (a) perfect or (b) so weak that it's going to be disabled by someone publicly discussing what they consider its flaws to be. Having that conversation is what makes us stronger. Insisting that any criticism is rank betrayal and anyone offering it needs to be expelled makes us weaker.

I'm a liberal progressive who has voted straight Dem tickets in every single US election for the past 24 years. I am a true Democrat and I'm interested in what Bernie Sanders brings to the table. I agree with basically everything he says and I think he offers a powerful progressive voice and a focus on the real issues that we need to be addressing - income inequality, rising college and healthcare costs, and climate change.

I accept that there is a more recent wing of the party that is more moderate but I don't accept that the party moving to the middle means I'm not a real Democrat anymore.

And if you think trying to exclude people from the party or shut them down is either what the "true party" is about or is somehow going to help that party win in 2020 then you are sorely mistaken. Again.

[Trumpocalypse]

158. What a totally dishonest argument.

It is not not narrowing the definition of a democrat by saying that they actually be a member of the Democratic Party. Nor does it have anything to do with positions on issues. It is about supporting fellow Democrats and the infrastructure of the party by joining and contributing it instead of being a leech that uses it every 4 years then walks away.

[meadowlander]

159. Yes it is. Look up the definition of "democrat".

"A democrat is a person who believes in the ideals of democracy, personal freedom, and equality."

Party membership is not a prerequisite. Nor is "blind obedience to the party structure" especially consistent with the values that define a democrat.

And I've respectfully given you credit for the sincerity of your beliefs and would appreciate the same courtesy since, as I've pointed out several times, we are actually on the same side.

[Trumpocalypse]

160. Stop playing dishonest games.

This is about the Democratic party (cap D not small d) so cut the BS. Anyone who wants to use the resources of the Democratic party should be a member of it and contribute it. So party membership is a prerequisite.

And I did look up the definition (https://www.yourdictionary.com/democrat) and everyone includes:

democrat

dem·o·crat

noun
The definition of a democrat is a member of the Democratic political party or someone who believes in equality for all people and ruling by the majority.

democrat
a person who believes in and upholds government by the people; advocate of rule by the majority
a person who believes in and practices the principle of equality of rights, opportunity, and treatment
[D-] a member of the Democratic Party

democrat
noun

a. An advocate of democracy.
b. One who believes in social equality or discounts distinctions in rank.
Democrat A member of the Democratic Party.

Very dishonest to have omitted that.

[meadowlander]

161. Those are alternative definitions, not a list of conditions all of which must be met.

And I'm not interested in continuing this discussion if you're not able to maintain a minimal level of civility.

The convention is to capitalise the "D" when you are talking about the party and to use a lower case "d" when you are talking about the ideological system. So nothing that I posted was either incorrect or "dishonest".

I can't believe you think you're doing yourself or the party any favors taking this tack. In any case, I have better things to spend my time on - like getting Trump out of office. So have a wonderful day.

[Trumpocalypse]

162. Sorry but

this has and has always been about being a member of the Democratic Party and nothing else. The attempts as diversion are dishonest.

[Cha]

140. BS is Too Divisive.. the Excellent, Qualified

Democrats running are inclusive.

[highplainsdem]

144. +1,000,000

[Scurrilous]

155. Boink.