= new reply since forum marked as read
as able to win. They are two entirely different things but that might be difficult for you to understand. 
Is that something that would be "too difficult" for you to articluate?
"I know you are but what am I" reposte.
To God’s ears!
Why WOULD they bother to vote? 
Oh Yeah!
to the Dems!
Gracias, TexasT
His desire to get rid of entire industries and turn their work over to the government certainly lost him a ton of voters. And hating on the rich is stupid. People want to be like the rich, not chop their heads off in Central Park.
Link to tweet
Why is it always an "invisible hand" and never his own actions and words? Why is Bernie somehow "incapable" of miscalculating how his message is actually coming across, or the accuracy of his own theory of how people identify politically, or making even the most minor of mistakes, let alone huge ones? Or that anyone who disagrees with him is utterly wrong at best, and utterly corrupt at worst?
Since you may not have read the article, here is a very huge mistake that Sanders made:
For some of these voters, Sanders may have been a protest vote against a woman closely identified with progressive social causes. When the alternative was Joe Biden, a male Democrat with working-class appeal who’s widely perceived as a moderate, they seemed to have preferred him over the Vermont socialist.
Third, the Sanders-socialist theory rested on a misunderstanding of the way identity works in contemporary American politics.
.......................
“The future of [Bernie’s] agenda lies with young people, but college-educated and suburban voters are increasingly interested in the progressive agenda,” Sean McElwee, co-founder of the left-wing polling outfit Data for Progress, tells me. “Sadly, we [progressives] are about four years behind in reaching out to those voters because people don’t read enough fucking polling data.”
Bernie has shown he doesn't trust data that doesn't simply his own assumptions, no matter the source - if they disagree with him they are therefore wrong. That is a fatal flaw in anyone aspiring to leadership. He surrounds himself with "yes" men, because anyone else is considered a heretic. Both Clintons and Obama listened to those who told them possible negative outcomes of their ideas. They had the self-awareness and humility to admit mistakes and understand that they could actually be wrong. Bernie lacks those attributes from what I've seen.
But I'll bite - when has the legitimate free press called Bernie "kooky?" When they fact checked something he said, and found that it wasn't accurate? When they asked a followup question that indicated that he hadn't answered something completely or that he left out an important point, like responsible journalists do with any politcian?
Bashing the free press for not simply fawning on him and being his stenographer is something that the RW does for Trump.
And it's dangerous at this point in history.
I also see you're still "undecided" about what candidate you are going to support, despite the fact that the Democrats have a candidate.
You were the one blaming the press... and you haven't been able to provide an instance of them calling them kooky.
It's clear that you're the one that isn't 'getting over it," Hon.
Perhaps you can explain now your post bashing the entire free press as corrupt and unreliable is "aligning with the mission to get Trump out of office in November." And how that lends credibility to one's position...
What are you hoping to accomplish with your posts in this thread, other than kicking the OP? You seem to get testy when someone responds.
Look in a mirror. And then take it up with the author at VOX, along with the rest of the "corrupt" media.
I'm just sharing it.
Their illusion of being the only ones capable of understanding what they do is constantly proven by the inability of others to reduce enormous complexity to simple minded, delusion-serving conviction.
Back in the 1970s I got a new boyfriend and new circles and just "disappeared" some then, even though we were still in the same city. No internet then, though.
Last edited Mon Apr 13, 2020, 10:34 AM - Edit history (1)
This post is from a long time Democrat who first voted for JFK. My opinion only,take it with a grain of salt..
Bernie Sanders did not turn the Democratic Party any way than from what they have always been for the most part with some mistakes.
I am reminded of the Freedom Caucus that did serious damage to the Republican Party. Tear down was their plan. Most of them are now gone except Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan and MCCarthy, who is wishy washy. The little Congressional group that surrounded Sanders, denigrated Pelosi, loud are not winning. If Nancy had been a bad Speaker but she was the first Democrat in History to get the beginnings of a decent Health Care system.
Those 4 women could have gained so much more if they had come in, learned the rules and worked from within. Instead, like the FC they were loud, insulting to their own party, accomplished little.
Bernie used the Party but tried to undermine,Force his wishes and allowed his staff to be strident and insulting to the Party that had accepted him. They did more harm than good. The voters rejected them,having learned a hard lesson that Republicans and Trump do not want them to have decent Health care or any kind of programs that help the less fortunate among us.
Now,we better hope and pray that cheating, gerrymandering and voter suppression do not let them win again.
As Pogo says,” We have met the enemy and it is us.” Those who deride Unions for not being strong enough, complain about how both parties are alike, blame others that they have lost all the cushy jobs are the problem!
