"Oh My Lord Jesus, No. It Did Not Happen." (Nina Turner on "Chair Throwing" At Nevada Convention)

[liberalnarb]

[stonecutter357]

1. Here's what several men had to say for themselves after threatening Roberta Lange and calling her a

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511999793

[liberalnarb]

2. No chairs were thrown, friend. Thats the point of the video.

[JackInGreen]

3. They don't care, arb

Their narrative is 'Anyone but Clinton = the most despicable people on the planet' and will lie, cajole, falsify, and play headgames until it takes root or goes away.

[Orrex]

8. It's helpful that you're so eager to tell people what they think

Perhaps you could wag your finger while you're at it, because that really seems to fire up the the crowds in the waning days of one's primary campaign.

[JackInGreen]

10. I call em like I see em

and how did you know I was waving my finger!? Are you psychic? I bet you can even tell which one.....

[Orrex]

14. I can infer where your thumb probably is, too.

Anyway, the narrative is this: the strongest candidate from among the available choices is the best candidate to represent the party on the November ballot.

Judging from primary results and a realistic examination of available facts, Clinton fills that role.

People tout Sanders' famous "60 point gain" since he announced his candidacy, which is lovely, but it's not as big a deal as people think. Sanders was essentially anonymous and unknown on the national stage prior to deciding to be a Democrat, and a huge upswing in poll numbers is a logical result of increased awareness of any populist contender.

Further, Sanders has been subjected to exactly zero negative media attention, and the GOP has wholly ignored him. For some zany reason his supporters claim that this is because the GOP is "afraid" of him, but in reality they see that he's not worth wasting resources on since he's not going to be the candidate in November.

So we have a candidate who went from completely unknown to more-or-less nationally recognizable, with a crowd-friendly message and no negative media coverage. It would be an utter farce if any semi-viable candidate failed to show a similar upswing in such an environment.

Sanders says a lot of great things, I voted for him in the primary because I like a lot of what he stands for, and I would happily vote for him in November, but that doesn't mean that I think he's ultimately the strongest candidate.

[mountain grammy]

4. The decision on who would be the nominee of the Democratic party

was made before the first vote was cast. Selected, not elected.

[Orrex]

9. And, inconveniently, also borne out by the electoral process

Selected perhaps, elected definitely.

[mountain grammy]

12. I wish I had more faith in the electoral process.

[Baobab]

11. If she was not a liar whose lies caused 1.5 million deaths..

people denied modern health care over 20 years by a lie.

READ THESE LINKS:

(1) http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.405.5725 (Hillary's real health care 'solution')

(2) http://www.iatp.org/files/GATS_and_Public_Service_Systems.htm (Makes it impossible to fix without international agreement)

(3) http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publication/EUA_Statement_TTIP.pdf (Clinton's started the WTO, they say, with its war on public higher education, and health care globally so that in the future, they could trade teachers and nurses jobs away for perks like eliminating generic drugs)

If Hillary was not such a liar, I would feel differently.

We are all those people. Jobs are going away. Another thing she lies about.

Life is too short for wasting my votes on liars.

Other people, I cannot tell others who to vote for, only myself. I wont vote for Trump. I will probably write in Bernie Sanders.

[SCantiGOP]

5. Let's all be rational

and agree on two things: 1) Correct, there were no chairs thrown; 2) the primary is over and Clinton will be our nominee.

To dispute either of these is to ignore the facts.

Let's get to work for a Democratic victory in November against a most dangerous opponent.

[Lucky Luciano]

7. Thank you. nt

[d_legendary1]

17. Agree with point #1

Point #2 is wishful thinking. Until everybody votes this thing is still ongoing. Neither are getting the delegates needed to become the nominee. The Supers are gonna have to vote her in officially at convention to make her the nominee.

[noiretextatique]

20. Unless she is indicted eom

[sulphurdunn]

6. I expect this kind of infantile personality cult behavior

from republicans, but I expect something more intelligent and policy based from democrats. First, Sanders was a racist. Then he was, ironically, an anti-Semite. Now, Sanders is a misogynist, and his supporters are thugs. Next, I suppose he'll be a pedophile because one of his supporters name's is found on a sex offender registry. The people who own and run this country have always believed they are entitled to do so because the masses are too stupid and easily manipulated to do it for themselves. I'm beginning to think there is some merit to that argument.

[mountain grammy]

13. +1

The whole smear campaign is depressing.. we must be punished. No one must ever question the established order or selection.

[Orrex]

18. Let's have some citations:

First, Sanders was a racist.

Citation, please.

Then he was, ironically, an anti-Semite.

Citation, please.

Now, Sanders is a misogynist,

Citation, please.

and his supporters are thugs.

Citation, please.

Who made these claims? People with influence in actual positions of authority? Or anonymous internet trolls? If the former, then it should be easy for you to provide citations, since were able to recall their comments so readily. If the latter, then what's the big deal? Anonymous internet trolls arguably predate the internet itself.

I'm not saying that your claims are baseless, but rather that we would all benefit from your shared information, so it would be helpful if you'd document your claims.

[sulphurdunn]

19. Sure

What I wrote are paraphrases of comments on social media, especially DU, mostly from Clinton supporters. I don't know if that makes all of them trolls or not. Here are a few citations from online publications, written by people who I assume to be serious. That puts most of them a notch above most MSM pundits/propagandists. I'm not sure how you define "people of actual influence in positions of authority." Such folks could be paid trolls, pundits or executives of major media outlets.

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/socialist-bernie-sanders-just-insulted-millions-americans-saying/

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/18726#.V0etT-T64-s

http://www.shakesville.com/2016/01/the-inherent-misogyny-of-sanders.html

[Orrex]

21. Well, here's how I'd look at it...

The claim all along has been what the mainstream media have been working on Clinton's behalf, giving her the spotlight while minimizing Sanders. Aside from the fact that the media have in fact been broadcasting GOP talking points about her more or less nonstop for a quarter century or so, I'd say that that's where we should look for the lind of anti-Sanders attack you describe.

Your first and third examples are individual people posting their own views, and I'm not even convinced that the first isn't a parody site, given its over the top tone. There will always be peiple whose opinions you dislike and who say thing on ways that you don't like, but these two quasi-anonymous people are of minimal influence, and I can't beloeve that they have much influence on anyone. They're the equivalent of ranting on a street corner; some people might listen, but most see it as a rant and move on past.

Your second example, I believe, is an aggressively pro-Israel propaganda outlet that attacks anything that it perceives as contrary to Israel's interests, and anti-Semitism is its favorite accusation to make. It's a more disturbing example than your first and third, but again I think its influence is minimal.

Strictly speaking I suppose you're correct, in that people are indeed makong the claims about Sanders that you suggested, but I don't accept that the people making those claims are likely to sway an audience that wasn't inclined to that sort of thinking already.

Of course, we could say pretty much the same about a ton of anti-Clinton rhetoric online, so maybe it's a wash.


(sorry for typos; my phone keyboard doesn't like my thumbs...)

[sulphurdunn]

22. It's been a nice chat. Thanks

[Orrex]

23. :thumbsup:

[Baobab]

15. The Three Drama Queens should all resign. Step down. Leave.

When will they be out?

Can we have a date?

[Geronimoe]

16. Cover up story to distract

from rigged system in Democrat primary process. Fake news for the 99%