I love how Clinton supporters go from "Debates don't matter" to "Bad Bernie's avoiding debates"

[Armstead]

Up until the last few days, the Clintonian Meme was "we don't need more debates because....." With all sorts of ever-so-sincere reasons given for "why debates are unnecessary and a waste of time" and supporting DWS stupid decision to limit debates, and Clinton's, er, acquiescence to that.

Suddenly Clinton sees an opportunity to score some cheap points by being "eager for more debates" and criticizing Sanders over a process issue.

So now we're hearing "Bernie is avoiding debates. Ohhhhhhhh Bad Bernie."

The turnabout is amusing. I suppose they'll be for single payer healthcare next.

But it's not amusing that once again Bernie's position about something is being lied about. He is not trying to avoid debates. He wants more debates. But he is trying to do it in a clear way rather than find himself on the outs with the DNC.

[daleanime]

1. K&R.....

[VulgarPoet]

2. Debates don't matter until Hillary's calling for them

Polls don't matter unless Hillary's leading them, advertisements don't matter unless they're in favor of Hillary, and the establishment doesn't exist because the status quo is so clearly working. I thought you'd gotten with the program!

[840high]

123. .^that

[hobbit709]

3. If we could harness that spinning, we could get several gigawatts out of it.

[HerbChestnut]

55. I think you've just found the solution to renewable energy.

Who needs nuclear fusion when you've got politics?

[sarge43]

64. They're going to spin themselves right through the earth's crust

right down to the magma. Thermo energy?

[PatrynXX]

90. LOL

alright BTTF is into politics

[Mnpaul]

150. Someone better oil that weathervane

smoke must be rolling off it now.

[aidbo]

4. Not to mention going from..

..'he's too radical' to 'if he's such a radical, why doesn't he support reparations?'

[Uncle Joe]

5. None of them seem to be taking Schultz to task, that's for sure.

Thanks for the thread, Armstead.

[SixString]

6. DU Rec.

[Eko]

7. Turnabout is funny.

"Sirry to disagree but Clinton could come out FOR more debates And, it could cause the DNC to buckle if all the candidates were pushing or it. And even if it doesn't, it'd sure press the momentum in that direction, and show their obvious error in limiting public exposure to he democratic candidates in the primary."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251642987#post74

[Armstead]

10. And your point (despite my usual too-fast typing errors) is.......?

I'm fine with Clinton calling for more debates. Wish she'd done that two or three months ago. My position is the same as then, and so is Bernie's. More is better.

What's funny though is how the crew that was lambasting Bernie and O'Mallety supporters for wanting more debates have done a 180 degree U-turn.....and the same sincerity and fervor they formerly argued for the opposite position.

[Eko]

18. And the same crew

that was lambasting Clinton for not pushing for more debates back then are now using the same reasoning those defending her were using to defend Sanders. Politics is funny.

[Armstead]

21. Well there is a difference

Clinton was not pushing for more debates then.

Sanders IS pushing for more debates now.

There is a little tiny process difference, but Sanders is NOT opposing debates. He agrees with Clinton's (new) position on debates.

That's the difference.

But yes, politics IS funny.....sometimes.

[Eko]

23. Ok.

Clinton didnt push for debates then = bad.
Cliniton pushing for more debates now = bad.

[Armstead]

25. NO

Clinton not pushing for debates then -- Bad
Her pushing for debates now -- Good

Changing "deeply held" opinions on the merits of debates based on what one's candidate decides that day -- Funny and kind of hypocritical

[Eko]

35. Ok.

I mean the amount of people calling for Clinton to buck the DNC back then can be somehow overlooked. It does seem a bit ironic that a lot of the same people criticizing her for not doing so are now giving the same excuse for Sanders to not be blocked from DNC debates. Quite a few people commenting on this thread argued the exact opposite on that previous thread.

[Armstead]

40. Personally I would have preferred all three to "coincidentally show up" somewhere with a camera

But the difference between Bernie and Clinton at the moment are miniscule....They both profess a desire for more debates.

[Eko]

46. Im cool with more debates.

I am criticizing neither Sanders or Clinton. I just find it ironic that people for both candidates are using the opposite arguments now than they used a while ago.

[zentrum]

199. She

…wanted to avoid debates then because she didn't want to give national exposure to this unknown upstart—Bernie Sanders.

She thought the WH would be a cakewalk and she wanted to delegitimize him and basically silence and hide him. Hence weekend, limited debates that few would see.

But now she's falling behind and it's become more iffy for her, and she needs the exposure. Even going outside the rule structure she and DWS insisted on when thy set up the debates then. It's laughable.

[Eko]

208. Nice to know you have everything figured out.

Without a shred of evidence. See, that is actually important to some of us.

[frylock]

142. Simple solution. Sanction the debate.

Have you called the DNC yet?

[Eko]

145. To me its not a problem.

So, no, I have not.

[GoneFishin]

12. I agree. The real story is that Hillary is pretending to want another debate, but won't give DWS

the thumbs to have one. Meanwhile they are accusing Bernie of not wanting a debate when he actually does want one. What a bunch of childish bullshit.

[Eko]

26. What?

How do you know she is pretending?

[Fuddnik]

44. Not pretending. Lying through her teeth.

Yeah, for a LONG TIME......like yesterday?


http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/clinton-calls-sanders-join-democratic-debate-n505251


Clinton Calls on Sanders to Join Democratic Debate

by Alex Seitz-Wald

ADEL, Iowa - Hillary Clinton called on Bernie Sanders to join a proposed Democratic debate next week in New Hampshire, telling MSNBC's Chris Matthews that she is "anxious" to make the debate happen.

"I'm ready for the debate, and I hope Sen. Sanders will change his mind and join us," she said in the interview, which will air on "Hardball" Wednesday night. "I think the DNC and the campaigns should be able to work this out. I've been for, you know, for a long time, that I'd be happy to have more debates, and I hope we can get this done."

Asked if she wanted the Democratic National Committee to sanction the debate, Clinton replied, "I would like the chairman of the parties and the campaigns to agree we can debate in New Hampshire next week."

(snip)

[Eko]

47. How is she lying?

[litlbilly]

62. How are you not yet on my ignore list. ohh, there it is, bye bye

[stonecutter357]

65. add me also.

[Eko]

83. Ignore list for asking how she was lying?

Wow, when you get to big kid britches let us know. Till then yes you can take your toys and go home, we wont mind at all.

[Ed Suspicious]

97. Because you are playing dumb, and some people have no time or patience for that.

[Eko]

120. Yes, playing dumb.

that's what I am doing. No patience to answer one question? I dont see where she lied, could you show me?

[awoke_in_2003]

214. They may not be playing

[litlbilly]

156. through her teeth, that's how

[Eko]

159. I'd ask how

but I'm sure we would have a long conversation and in the end it would boil down to you having no proof but that you feel like she just is lying.

[bvar22]

216. DWS is a Hillary toady whose job is to do what Hillary tells her to do.

If Hillary really wanted more sanctioned debates, DWS couldn't fall down to her knees fast enough to get them scheduled.

[stonecutter357]

219. test

[retrowire]

96. it's because of her history of not wanting more debates

her actions now seem expedient.

[Eko]

119. Oh yeah, her history of not wanting more debates.

"I am open to whatever the DNC decides to set up. That's their decision," she said during a stop in New Hampshire. "I debated a lot in 2008 and I would certainly be there with lots of enthusiasm and energy if they decide to add more debates, and I think that's the message that a lot of people are sending their way."
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/252845-clinton-open-to-more-debates

[retrowire]

121. And it's that statement that makes it fishy.

"I am open to whatever the DNC decides to set up. That's their decision,"

She was all for whatever the DNC decided when O'Malley and Bernie wanted more debates. But now that her numbers are scary, she wants to go against the DNC.

The rule of being disqualified from sanctioned debates if one participated in something unsanctioned only came along BECAUSE of Bernie and O'Malley teasing the idea. Hillary didn't care for unsanctioned debates then. She does now.

That's why it's fishy.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/9/21/1423552/-Hillary-Clinton-campaign-only-wanted-four-debates

[Eko]

125. I can understand why someone might think it's fishy,

but you still haven't shown her history of not wanting more debates at all.

[retrowire]

127. I edited my last post with evidence.

here it is again: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/9/21/1423552/-Hillary-Clinton-campaign-only-wanted-four-debates

[Eko]

131. Well

your evidence is "according to a senior Democrat with knowledge of those conversations." mine is an actual video of her saying she would be open to more debates. I guess you got me there.

edited to add video

[retrowire]

134. While a video is more concrete that she said she was "open" to more debates.

It is in no way indicative that she ever "pushed" for more debates.

So you heard straight from Hillary's mouth that she was "open" to debates. That is all that means. Nothing more.

Furthermore...

"Asked to comment on this version of events, DNC spokesperson Holly Schulman didn’t immediately dispute it, but declined comment. A Clinton spokesperson didn’t immediately return an email."

The DNC and Hillary didn't exactly denounce that assertion either.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/hillary-clinton-dnc-debates-2016-wasserman-schultz-213667

"With the fault lines drawn, many Democrats believe that it would take nothing less than a direct call from Clinton’s campaign headquarters in Brooklyn — or the White House — to change Wasserman Schultz’s mind.

And that, they say, reflects poorly on Clinton — who now maintains she would be open to more debates, but whose reluctance to press the issue with Wasserman Schultz appears to reflect her true intentions."

You asked why people think she's lying. This is why.

[Eko]

135. But you said she has a history of being against debates.

You are now moving that to she never pushed debates, and that is why she is lying. For doing something you agree now that she never did, being against debates. And it was a stupid question?

[retrowire]

136. Not pushing for debates implies that she's against the idea, yes.

Who said there was a stupid question?

[Eko]

139. No it doesnt.

I can be open to going to the movies with someone without pushing for it. Simple concept. Stupid questions was an earlier thread, sorry.

[retrowire]

140. That's the movies.

This is the candidacy for Presidency of the United States.

So let's see if the complexity of that scenario becomes a bit weird when you insert that.

"I can be open to having more debates to show the people what kind of a fighter I am without pushing for it."

Can't really take someone as an assertive fighter when they're just "open" to debating in public contests. And since this is the presidency we're talking about, there is an audience. We're not just going to see her being "open" to something, yet not putting her best foot forward as a good thing. That "openness" just comes off as empty words in that case.

It's like a relationship. I can say I'm "open" to going to the movies with my wife, but if she doesn't trust me (like many people have trust issues with Hillary) then my "openness" to going to the movies just seems empty and like I'm just saying it to look good.

I guess when it comes down to tacks, it's a trust issue. That's really what it comes down to.

[Eko]

143. You still havent shown that she has a history of being against more debates.

Except for a quote from an unnamed source. One. Do you still think she has a history of being against more debates?

[retrowire]

148. That was the history I was referring to.

Again, it's a trust issue. You clearly trust her. I don't. Many don't.

But it's really not just that sole quote. It's her history of acting on expedience and convenience. That is public knowledge. Some call it evolving, some call it expedience.

Combine that along with her clearly close ties with the woman who controls the debates, and there you have it. That's the reasoning that many people are following.

So, yes, I still think she has a history of being against the debates.

[Eko]

152. I just have to sit back and shake my head at that one.

An unnamed person with a possible quote is her history of being against debates. Of course Clinton is not trustworthy to you but some unnamed person you will believe.

[retrowire]

155. I clearly stated it was attributed to more than just one quote

but your reading comprehension has rendered my head to start shaking as well.

[Eko]

172. didnt see that anywhere.

Could of missed it, can you show me where?

[retrowire]

175. Oh, it only starts at the second line, easy to miss.

But it's really not just that sole quote. It's her history of acting on expedience and convenience. That is public knowledge. Some call it evolving, some call it expedience.

Combine that along with her clearly close ties with the woman who controls the debates, and there you have it. That's the reasoning that many people are following.

I tried resigning politely with you when I stated it came down to trust. I don't wish to carry this conversation any further with you, it's become clear to me that you ignore some parts of communication to further your own angle.

I respectfully disagree with you in other words.

[Eko]

177. No, I thought you were talking about more than just one quote,

as in you had more quotes.

[retrowire]

179. A valid misunderstanding. That's fine. nt

[Eko]

181. Thanks,

miscommunication there, Sorry, lol.

[Eko]

180. see, when you say "more than just one quote"

it implies more than one quote. If you said more than just a quote.

[retrowire]

182. It's in the way I speak.

I meant more things than just a quote. Again, that's a valid misunderstanding, I get it, and won't fault you for it.

[frylock]

144. "I'd be open..." seems pretty concrete, like standard language you'd find on a contract..

get real.

[Eko]

147. I dont understand

the point you are trying to make.

[frylock]

149. That Hillary wasn't really open for more debates..

otherwise, she would have said, yes, we need more debates.

[retrowire]

154. That's exactly what I'm trying to say.

I don't want any tongue in cheek implications from my next president. Do you want to fight for us or do you not? FFS

[Eko]

164. So yes,

according to you Clinton has a history of being against more debates because of some unnamed persons quote and you dont like the way she acts on other things. With that knowledge you know she is against more debates. I think you have confirmation bias.

[retrowire]

169. I have an opinion formed by information available to us all.

And you the same.

[Eko]

157. Nope.

Ive gone to many movies with my girlfriend that I was open to but would never chose that movie on my own. Doesn't mean I am against going to the movies with her though does it?

[frylock]

158. I don't know you or your girlfriend.

[Eko]

163. I dont believe you are capable of having a even remotely honest discussion.

Obviously you dont want to talk about concepts or proof or anything like that, you just want to troll around.

[frylock]

165. Take it up with the DNC and their sanctions.

[Eko]

167. What does that have to do with us having a actual conversation?

Instead of you trolling? Or are you saying I should call the DNC and tell them frylock cant even have a remotely intelligent discussion? Is that what I should call them about?

[frylock]

170. The conversation is about the rules set forth by the DNC as it concerns debates.

Bring yourself up to speed and then come back when you're ready for that conversation.

[Eko]

173. Sorry no,

This conversation is about Clinton having a history of being against more debates. Follow the threads.

[frylock]

200. Yes, you want concrete video evidence of her explicitly stating that she did not want more debates.

You're not going to get it. I don't know how old you are, but many of us have finely calibrated bullshit meters and have learned, oftentimes the hard way (see Hope and Change), to read between the lines. "I am open to whatever the DNC decides to set up. That's their decision..." is just weaselly-ass lawyer speak. You could drive a truck through that.

[Eko]

209. Sure,

something to actually believe in other that your conspiracy theorist bull. "So and so did this", cool, show me where, "here" no you presented an opinion. "your right, but this and this" Still opinion, may be true but has not had enough evidence to prove it "Your not going to get it. Insult age, we know because we are the shit and ancedotal evidence". You are full of it alright. Lol.

[frylock]

213. Don't stop thinking about tomorrow.

[retrowire]

166. But what if the girlfriend doesn't trust you?

And since you're running for president, shouldn't you have more assertiveness?

[Eko]

171. Wow.

The girlfriend trusting me or not in no way changes my being open to seeing movies with her that I would not normally see. That does not in any way make me against going to the movies with her. A president should always be assertive? What if ISIL wants to open a dialouge with the president, should they be open to it or should they be more assertive and be like "Yeah lets do this!" The world is not black and white.

[retrowire]

174. But it does change her perception of what you mean by it. nt

[Eko]

176. There it is.

Perception. Exactly that. Your perception is that Clinton is against more debates, you really have no evidence to back this up, an unnamed quote is not evidence. But that is your perception so it must be true. Confirmation bias.

[retrowire]

178. Heaven forbid I believe what I see.

Did you know your opinion is also a perception?

[Eko]

184. The human eye is so easy to fool.

Ever heard of an optical illusion? Its the worst tool to use for evidence and fools itself constantly.

[retrowire]

185. My impression isn't optical. Nor is it of imagination.

Let us part ways.

[Eko]

187. Sure.

Take care.

[JimDandy]

29. No, Hillary Clinton is DESPERATE for another debate.

She is so desperate, she is willing to call for an unsanctioned debate and is suggesting that Bernie follow suit so that DWS would then sanction the debate. DWS can't do so without: 1. losing face; 2. confirming that she is in the ring for Hillary; 3. giving more momentum to Bernie right before the first two caucuses, both of which he just might sweep away from Clinton.

It's very telling that DWS has just today stated though, that she will look at that possbility AFTER the NH debate. So right before Nevada's and SC's primaries she may change her mind to try and save Hillary if Hillary tanks in the first two caucuses.

[Eko]

37. So

She is pretending and she is desperate.

[Duval]

66. And rules are rules! Kudos to Bernie for refusing because the rules are "no unsanctioned debates and

if there is one, the participants will be excluded from future debates" or words to that effect.

[JimDandy]

117. Yes, especially if the candidate debates are enforced with a contract

Last edited Wed Jan 27, 2016, 09:18 PM - Edit history (1)

And who knows what the contracts with the media say. If Hillary and MOM do an unsanctioned debate and Bernie is the only candidate left who could be eligible for the last 2 sanctioned debates, the media could probably get out of giving him a lone appearance by saying one person does not make a debate.

[Uncle Joe]

42. I believe Hillary truly wants this debate because

1. Her campaign is stalling.

2. Bernie is leading by double digits in New Hampshire and according to Nate Silver has a 69% chance of winning that state, this is the most aggressive that I've seen Hillary coming out for a debate that's not already sanctioned by the DNC.

"What I’ve said to my campaign is that I would look forward to another debate. I am, you know, anxious, if we can get something set up, to be able to be there. And so let’s try to make it happen," the front-runner for the party nod said during an excerpt of an interview on MSNBC's "Hardball" that will air Wednesday night.

Hillary didn't specify wanting more than one debate, Bernie has agreed to this if the DNC sanctions it and has asked for four more sanctioned debates in big states that haven't received much political attention this season.

I do believe that if Bernie's poll rankings start shooting up dramatically in Iowa or he wins that caucus, Schultz will turn on a dime and sanction the debate in New Hampshire in order to help Hllary.

[A Simple Game]

57. Bernie should keep the two of them twisting in the wind as long as possible.

Neither can come out of this looking good no matter what happens.

[reformist2]

160. What she wants is a rigged debate, and biased coverage afterwards. She does NOT want a real debate.

[frylock]

162. yep

[whatchamacallit]

8. They're calling him a coward

Not a principled bone in their bodies.

[FlatBaroque]

9. I don't see it

because I have every, single one of them on Ignore.

[Fuddnik]

50. Lucky you.

But don't you miss the humor factor?

[VulgarPoet]

53. Once you catch someone eye-rolling a serious question about someone deserves to die

because they got dealt a shitty hand in life and can't afford necessary medication; the humor just kinda goes out the window.

[historylovr]

72. I couldn't agree more.

[restorefreedom]

73. when did that happen?

do you have a link or clip? that is truly vile

was it at the forum? i only heard didn't see

[VulgarPoet]

74. On the forum.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511077407

[restorefreedom]

108. wow. glad i didn't see it. nt

[VulgarPoet]

109. And they claim *we're* the vicious ones. eom

[restorefreedom]

114. its the bizarro world for sure. nt

[frylock]

146. I do hope that poster isn't really a nurse.

[Matariki]

92. That was a butt ugly post

one of the worst I've seen here from someone who wasn't a fly-by troll

[FlatBaroque]

79. Laughing AT people is an empty laughter

They don't make me laugh, they make me sad. And they elevate my blood pressure.

[NowSam]

11. The sheer contempt for the voters is abhorant

That is my feeling. HRC and DWS have utter contempt for the voters. They really think we are that stupid that they can Rovian-style hang their own deficits on Bernie. Sorry. Bernie or bust. Bernie or bust. The more sneaky and desparate that other team gets the more deeply entrenched I am for my guy.

[CharlotteVale]

13. Especially when it makes Hillary look so desperate.

[tk2kewl]

14. see... bernie is establishment b/c he wont do an unsanctioned debate

hillary is cutting edge b/c she's bucking the establishment

[scscholar]

15. Why can't both be true?

Or both not be true?

[Armstead]

17. You believe we need more debates, or you don't. This is not an "on the other hand" question

[TheBlackAdder]

16. If HRC breaks her promise, that will haunt her. If HRC & MOM both do, will SBS have stage alone?

.


Besides the bad optics of breaking signed rules and going Sarah Palin Rogue, HRC and MOM might force an end to the next two scheduled debates--something that seems to be the plan. Now, with this backlash, HRC is requesting the authoritarian head of the DNC to sanction the NH debate. If SBS joins, the next two debates scould be cancelled, benefitting HRC in South Carolina, as she performs poorer in a debate format--better in a forum format. If DWS does not, where does that leave the two sanctioned debates?


Will they be cancelled, since you need more than one person to hold a debate?


Will they still go on, forgiving HRC & MOM?


Will the time slot just be given to SBS as a national Q&A forum?


or is something else schemed?


===


This really looks like some chess is being played to set up future debates, as it looks like DWS is a firewall.


.

[Duval]

71. You nailed it.

[TheBlackAdder]

77. HRC/MOM would like to prove SBS is just as UNTRUSTWORTHY as THEY ARE! nt

[arcane1]

130. Exactly, and the Clinton crowd knows it, despite pretending otherwise.

Fooling no one.

[JonLeibowitz]

201. Excellent analysis. They're all thinking 2 or 3 moves ahead. I think Weaver is even further ahead...

[closeupready]

19. It's the same dynamic with polls - if they look good for HRC, "look at this!!!!"

If they look good for Bernie, ignore them, dismiss them, "the only vote that counts is on Election Day", biased methodology, etc.

[farleftlib]

20. Same thing with polls, endorsements, predictions, whatever

when it favors Clinton it's indisputably good and reliable, when it favors Bernie, not so much.

[Warren DeMontague]

22. You noticed that too, huh?

[Electric Monk]

24. It isn't *all* Clinton supporters who are so unscrupulous, just a particularly noisy subset/clique.

nt

[stillwaiting]

27. Cellophane. nt

[Yupy]

28. They are just like their leader, what else can you expect?

[BainsBane]

30. How odd that you aren't more concerned about Bernie

getting you all to complain about the debate schedule when it turns out he didn't want more debates at all.

If I were a Bernie supporter, I'd feel manipulated.

Random people on the internet aren't the ones seeking to run the country. Bernie is.

[dorkzilla]

48. He DID want more debates but agreed to abide by DNC rules

This is unsanctioned, and until and unless DWS agrees to more debates, Bernie will continue to keep his word.

This isn’t at all how you presented it and I believe you know that.

[BainsBane]

59. I didn't present it as anything

I had no strong views about the subject one way or the other. I simply asked what the average number of debates were, and I got attacked for daring to even ask the question.

I remember seeing Bernie supporters complain for some six months now that there weren't enough debates. I even saw threads to that effect yesterday.

I could have predicted this would happen after the first debate because the fact is he doesn't perform terribly well in them (though I did think he did better during the Town Hall.) I'm guessing his internal polls show the debates hurt rather than help him.

Now you want us to believe Bernie is so loyal to the DNC that he wouldn't consider debating in a non-sanctioned format, only he just did a non-sanctioned Town Hall on Monday, and before that he and O'Malley participated in an event run by that African American group that opposes Black Lives Matter. The argument that he--and not Clinton or O'Malley--won't debate without DNC sanction is so ludicrous and unbelievable that I'm amazed you can present it with a straight face.

Rather than applying any critical evaluation to the candidate, you decide to attack those who responded to Bernie supporters incessant complaints about the number of debates. Now that the circumstances have changed--because Bernie--you're mad that the Clinton supporters who respond to you have adapted to your ever shifting justifications.

I have to say it's a good thing Bernie won't be president because I shudder to think of what it would be like to have an administration whose supporters insist not be subject to any accountability whatsoever.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

68. CTDBM127 nt

[Duval]

75. Bernie plays by the rules. eom

[BainsBane]

102. I think we know that isn't entirely true

Last edited Wed Jan 27, 2016, 11:09 PM - Edit history (1)

Two words: data breach.

Then there is the fact he is (or was) waging a lawsuit against the DNC. Yet we are expected to believe that he, more than two life-long Democrats, is so loyal to the DNC that he won't debate without its approval.

Please. That doesn't pass the laugh test.

[retrowire]

113. Who ever claimed Bernie was loyal to the DNC?

I just recall people saying he's playing by their rules.

[Lage Nom Ai]

122. Did the DNC sanction it?

I don't remember him saying he wouldn't debate just that it wasn't sanctioned. So if DWS sanctions it it kind of proves (not that you would admit) that the Clintons' run the DNC. O'M has nothing to lose and neither does Hillary because DWS wouldn't take action against her. And please stop the Data Breach poo, if you work in IT and you don't test your work prior to re-enabling the Firewall, you shouldn't be in IT.

[Iggo]

141. Life-long Democrats.

Good one.

[dorkzilla]

78. Wow, that’s some impressive twisting you did there!

It was really something to behold!!

[BainsBane]

87. I take that as confirmation

that you can't justify what is clearly a complete about face.

Actually we had signs of this some months ago when O'Malley was trying to arrange debates outside the DNC format and Bernie wouldn't go along then. Unfortunately, O'Malley isn't able to draw the level of attention that Clinton can so it didn't even result in the tortured, intellectual gymnastics we are seeing today.

Don't worry. I get the point clear enough. Anything Bernie says is gospel, even when it's an about face of a previous position. No need to pause to think about whether it actually makes sense or is believable because it doesn't need to be, as long as it promotes the only thing that matters: Bernie.

[cui bono]

133. Hillary is the one who has done a complete about face. And you know that.

Bernie isn't going to break the rules and participate in a non-sanctioned debate. He's playing by DWS and Hillary's rules and desires. Now Hillary is the one who is wanting more debates when she did NOT want them before. THAT is an about face.

I won't hold my breath expecting you to admit that though, I know better.

.

[frylock]

151. Same rules apply?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251500082#post19

[NastyRiffraff]

84. +1,000

Great post, BB

[retrowire]

101. how in the hell

is this..

"How odd that you aren't more concerned about Berniegetting you all to complain about the debate schedule when it turns out he didn't want more debates at all.

If I were a Bernie supporter, I'd feel manipulated."

just you asking what the average number of debates were? what the fuhhhhh??? lmao

[BainsBane]

103. If you thought that post successfully communicated a point to me

you're mistaken.

[retrowire]

106. lmao that's a shame that you don't understand your own words. :( nt

[aidbo]

61. The facts do not support your assertion.

[BainsBane]

89. How so?

One usually follows a statement like that with an iteration of the facts in question.

[aidbo]

94. You say he doesn't want more debates now.

But that is untrue. Bernie still wants more debates. He just wants debates that are sanctioned by the DNC like he and all of the other Democratic candidates signed up for.

Furthermore, since I believe you already knew this before asking me to elaborate, I have no choice but to consider you a prevaricator.

[BainsBane]

98. I don't believe that, at all

Why does DNC sanction means so much more to him than to life-long Democrats? He has spent months rallying against the DNC and even has a lawsuit against them. Yet you expect thinking people to believe he won't move without their approval? Please.

Why then has he participated in other non-sanctioned events, like Monday's town hall?

I find it incredible that you can't tell an excuse when you hear one, especially one so transparent.

[Fumesucker]

110. Because he's an honorable person who does not break his word

He agreed to engage in only DNC sanction debates and he is following the agreement, like an honorable person would.

[aidbo]

112. The exclusivity clause for the DNC sanctioned debates has been..

..at the heart of the controversy since the paltry schedule was announced.

Why does DNC sanction means so much more to him than to life-long Democrats?

Bernie's word is what is meaningful to him. Perhaps you should ask why those 'life-long Democrats' (O'Malley & who?) are so eager to go back on their contract with the DNC and why are they trying to get Bernie to break his word along with them?

Your straw man about non sanctioned fora rather than debates is just that - a straw man.

You have no credibility with me and I would suggest other readers treat your posts with the same suspicion.

[frylock]

161. The DNC sanction seemed to mean a whole lot to Hillary Supporter not all that long ago..

what happened to change that?

[cui bono]

132. How odd that you don't see that this is about Hillary's hypocrisy since she now wants exposure.

Oh wait, that's not odd at all.

Please proceed.

.

[randys1]

31. You love it? I dont, I dont because it appears our party is being torn apart from the

inside and the folks who will benefit from that are some of the most hateful, ignorant and vicious people on the planet.

Give the GOP or teaparty a chance to destroy our democracy and our environment, and they will, count on it.

No, I am not amused at all.

Especially if whichever of our sides win they do so in such an ugly way that they alienate the losers.

[A Simple Game]

60. I know. Why can't Hillary just play by the DNC rules like the rest of the candidates? n/t

[Armstead]

69. I don't really love it....Tone of voice is missing in text

More like an exasperated "I love it" said somewhat sarcastically.

But since it's happening, might as well at least derive amusement from it.

[randys1]

91. But I think you do and I think many Bernie supporters are going to fuck this thing up

royally.

You see I believe Bernie is going to do the impossible, beat Hillary.

And what worries me is if it went the other way around, I dont think that many Hillary supporters would give Bernie supporters a reason not to vote through being antagonistic and victory dancing.

I do think way too many Bernie supporters will antagonize Hillary supporters if Bernie wins, thus creating the potential for less voting.

I hope I am wrong about that part.

I hope I am right about him winning, and if I am I hope he hires a team of physicians, physical therapy gurus to keep him active and healthy.

[aidbo]

198. I do hope that Sanders' supporters are magnanimous in their victory..

..if and when it happens.

I also believe that if & when he does win the nomination that most Hillary supporters will happily vote for him in the general election. After all pretty much every time I read a Clinton supporter write about Bernie here on DU I read phrases like 'I love Bernie, but..' or 'Bernie is a great guy, but..' I have also read many, many OPs espousing the admirable intention to vote for the Democratic nominee no matter who is elected.

Most of those Hillary supporters are also cognizant of the dire consequences of not voting for the Democratic nominee in the general election. Again, I know this because they say so all the time.

Surely, if and when Bernie Sanders is elected as our nominee, most Hillary supporters would not begrudge celebration by his supporters. I can't speak for all Sanders supporters, but I will say that I would never begrudge Clinton supporters celebrating if she were to win this (what I expect to be) hard fought election. I also pledge that I as a Sanders supporter will strive to express my celebration in a good-spirited way. I will call for other Sanders supporters to follow my example.

After all, we are all in this together, and if we all stand together, there's nothing we can't accomplish.

[randys1]

212. EVERYBODY should read this post, aidbo makes an important point.

I have noticed this but you are pointing it out, yes, most Clinton supporters do indeed say stuff like "Bernie is great, but"

While the other side of the room does nothing of the sort, and needs to start.

I think you have nailed what has bothered me so much here for so long.

Thanks...

[cali]

32. It's quite amusing. I'm enjoying it.

[EdwardBernays]

33. Cmon now

They're just mimicking their candidate of choice.

This is their TPP.

[Bill USA]

34. "on the outs with DNC" -- poor poor excuse. HRC & Omalley are game. "fear of DNC" is BS.

[Armstead]

67. Okay. Whatever

[Helen Borg]

36. Lots of perspiration around the Hillary camp!

[Trajan]

38. I don't listen to their nonsense

They are gone ...

[joshcryer]

39. Both sides are flipping, it's bizarro land.

I do think it's unfortunate Sanders ruled out the NH debate completely, because if IA goes south he could use it.

Mind you I think he has a shot at IA.

[Armstead]

43. He's just trying to behave himself

I sort of wish he'd thumb his nose at DWS......But I understand his reluctance to do that because he's in a sensitive spot regarding his relationship with the Democratic Party.

However, he is still in favor of more debates,. This is just a process question.

[joshcryer]

49. I think the two front runners are just playing politics.

They are saying the same thing. This is probably going to happen.

[Armstead]

82. I agree with that..,.But Bernie is being consistent

[joshcryer]

207. That really depends on how IA goes.

I'd be shocked if he didn't do as well as expected in IA and he still refused to get the pre-NH debate sanctioned. You know Clinton would still call for it. It's not hard to say to DWS "I want this debate sanctioned in writing." So I am not buying the "sanctioned" argument. What's the DNC head going to do, ban all of them from two more debates? Silly.

This is why I think there's still a chance this debate happens.

Of course if Sanders wins IA, which I think he has an excellent shot at doing (I don't buy the geographics argument that the college towns where he'd get the most caucus-goers have only a few delegates), then I don't see him doing a NH debate.

[Punkingal]

41. K&R

[NCTraveler]

45. It's a part of the game and no one has a monopoly.

Only one perfectly clean in this one seems to be O'Malley. Tell O'Malley where to be and he will be there. He fights for it as well. Consistently.

[Armstead]

63. OM has been most aggressive and consistent. But Bernie's been consistent too

Bernie has always pressed for more debates, but has never agreed with O'Malley on unsanctioned ones. Largely because he is trying to avoid being placed in conflict with the party structure.

That's basically where he is now too.

[AzDar]

51. Ayup.

[Mufaddal]

52. This is how her campaign pivots to give the appearance of "bucking the establishment"

And yes, it's a ridiculously transparent ploy--which is precisely why I'm glad they're doing it.

[hrmjustin]

54. I never said debates don't matter.

[Armstead]

58. If you didn't, then the OP doesn't apply to you

[woodsprite]

56. I love flip-flops, but only on the beach in summer. n/t

[workinclasszero]

70. Bernie cant handle the heat

He cant live up to his own followers demands for more debates either.

[Armstead]

80. I think you know that's not true

He wants more debates. He is just trying to thread the needle and playing by the DNC rules.

[frylock]

168. Debbie Waterboy is feeling some heat right about now..

take your concerns to her. Pressure her to SANCTION the debate.

[John Poet]

76. The shoe is on the other foot now, isn't it?

If there was "no need" for more debates last August,
there's "no need" for more debates now.

Bernie is standing by the rules that were previously set up,
and were locked in stone against heavy opposition from many in the party.

But now Hillary isn't doing so well,
and wants to change the rules in the middle of the game?

FUCK THAT. Bernie doesn't need more debates.
Bernie is too busy campaigning.


If the candidates decide they'd like to have more debates
when the initially planned round of debates is finished,
it'll be time enough to talk about that when we get there.

If Hillary and her minion Debbie-WS hadn't been so set
on insisting on a miniscule number of debates to begin with,
then they wouldn't be in this situation now. Tough shit.

[Duval]

81. K&R!

[bkkyosemite]

85. I've seen Hillary supporters call him a hypocrite one that

backs out now one that is chicken (paraphrasing). What horrible attacks on a man that tells the truth not like their fav tells tales who was being attacked and they were running for safety because of sniper fire............dishonest.

"I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base." --Hillary Clinton, speech at George Washington University, March 17, 2008."

[SoapBox]

86. K & R!

Yup!

...tired of it.

[PatrynXX]

88. I literally saw someone post that (clinton minion)

and thought they were totally joking. They weren't.

[99Forever]

93. There is no hypocritical stance too blatant or bizarre for Camp Weathervane to embrace.

[libdem4life]

95. I'll never forget the clip that asked HRC if she was aware Bernie was coming up on her.

She laughed dismissively and said, Oh I don't listen to the Polls...then went immediately into Her Poll numbers. It was Seth Myers who caught that one...and yes, he made mincemeat out of it. It was Hilarious

[Feeling the Bern]

99. Hillbots. . .same as before, only eight years older and eight years more bitter

Saw their candidate taken down by an unknown guy in 2008.

Seeing their candidate being taken down by a Socialist in 2016.

Iowa is a dead heat, NH is Bernie's completely, SC is tightening. Bernie is winning more endorsements daily and his message resonates with all people.

[Todays_Illusion]

100. So fine let Hillary and O'Malley debate themselves, then everyone could see the DNC rules

are only to stop Bernie.

[arcane1]

104. Whatever It Takes(tm)

[polichick]

105. Tweety doing HRC's dirty work right now - trashing Bernie...

for being too cowardly to debate and for attack ads.

HRC is lying through her teeth.

[Armstead]

107. Now he's using the Clintonian right wing talking points

[polichick]

111. Two lying liars! How rich that HRC wants more debates now that she's losing!

[blackspade]

115. +1000

[Beowulf]

116. The ball is in DWS's court.

All candidates agreed to participate only in sanctioned debates. To do otherwise invites expulsion for any future DNC-sponsored events. The only person who can clear the way for new debates is DWS. Bernie would be reckless to agree to an unsanctioned debate.

[mhatrw]

118. Why the bizarre "disagreement" between Clinton and her toady, DWS?

Here's why!

[cui bono]

124. Principles are not their strong suit.

[Faux pas]

126. It would be funny if

it wasn't so pathetically pitiful. LOLOLOL

[arcane1]

128. You got the memo. At least we know the distribution is working.

The lies are failing, but the infrastructure is sound

[thereismore]

129. What is there to debate really. Does Hillary have anything new to say?

I'd say the differences between the two are crystal clear. Anybody with half a brain can see what they are about.

[awake]

137. Hillary does not want not to debate Bernie after NH

If Bernie agrees to debate in an unsanctioned debate then the DNC can keep him out of the rest of the sanctioned debates which will help Hillary not to have to answer any uncontrolled questions in the latter states. By getting Bernie to debate in the one state he will win walking away Hillary could get out of ever having to face him again.

[jillan]

138. Bernie was right. Debbie said no no no.

[draa]

153. K+R!!!

Well put Arnstead.

[uponit7771]

183. Nah, its just Sanders is not too much different than the statu quo... he's another face of the

... same coin.

[lastone]

186. Couldn't of said it any better!

Kinda fitting the pic I've found to go along with the post.

[link:[img][/img]|

Thanks Armstead!

[ronnykmarshall]

188. Which supporters, dear?

[Armstead]

189. Only those who have actually done it

[ronnykmarshall]

190. Oh ok .....

Thanks hon.

[Armstead]

191. Anytime

[ronnykmarshall]

193. smooches!

[asuhornets]

192. Ok. So..

Bernie wants more debates but not that particular debate. OK. I see. now.

[Armstead]

194. Here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511079211

[Autumn]

195. I am fucking loving this.

What the fuck happened to the 6 debates is enough, you Sanders supporters whine over everything !!!!

[ecstatic]

196. I think people are moreso intrigued by the hypocrisy

more than anything else. Some Bernie supporters have been shouting about wanting more debates, and now it turns out, Bernie doesn't want more debates if he doesn't think it will benefit him. It's more of an amusing/ eye roll situation, I don't think anyone is angry.

[frylock]

202. Nonsense. Bernie will participate in a SANCTIONED debate..

the ball is in the DNC's court.

[JonLeibowitz]

203. No, you are mistaken. Bernie is calling for even more SANCTIONED debates.

See: http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511079211

[ecstatic]

204. Doesn't sound very revolutionary... nt

[JonLeibowitz]

205. When bernie speaks of a revolution he is talking about massively increasing public engagement w/ pol

When bernie speaks of a revolution he is talking about massively increasing public engagement w/ political process, and massively increasing voter turnout, while removing big money influences. All so that government represents what most Americans want.

That is what his revolution is about. You should listen to some of his speeches, you might know what he's actually talking about rather than some vague notion of a "revolution".

[Smarmie Doofus]

197. It's ludicrous.

She's ludicrous and THEY are ludicrous.

[Indepatriot]

206. You don't HAVE to be a contortionist to support Hillary...

but it sure as hell helps...

[Fumesucker]

210. You do if you want to talk about her campaign on DU

[Helen Borg]

211. Yup. It's pathetic.

[Ivan Kaputski]

215. LMFAO ...the stupid it Berns

grumble mumble hrmf ...something about cake and eat it too

[Eleanors38]

217. Well, if you want to create an issue, ya gotta be fast; Innertubes & all.

[totodeinhere]

218. Most, not all but most Clinton supporters are totally without conviction or morality.

All they care about is getting her in office by any means possible and the best interests of the Democratic party and the people of this country can be damned.

I have committed to voting for the nominee of the party next November but if it's Hillary it is going to be a very gut wrenching thing to have to do. And Hillary will lose and we will be stuck with President Trump and a GOP controlled congress. What a nightmare.