Why I feel betrayed by Bernie Sanders

[NCTraveler]

When Bernie Sanders announced he was running for president last April, I was ecstatic about his candidacy. I was intoxicated by the idea that he would pressure Hillary Clinton – a sometimes maddeningly dedicated pragmatist and incrementalist eager to skip the primary election entirely – to uphold the highest liberal standards on everything from environmental protection to financial reform and foreign intervention.

snip

This was made worse by his campaign’s subtly sexist attacks on Clinton’s ambition, as New York magazine’s Rebecca Traister has observed. There was Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, telling CNN’s Jake Tapper: “Don’t destroy the Democratic party to satisfy the secretary’s ambitions to become president of the United States,” in the wake of a Sanders win in Wisconsin. There was Devine proclaiming in a call with reporters that Clinton’s “grasp … on the nomination” was based “almost entirely on … victories in states where Bernie Sanders did not compete”. And there was the suggestion that her difficulty accommodating an earlier debate schedule in Brooklyn stemmed from a workaholic nature and disregard for other people’s schedules.

Even Sanders himself seems to have reneged on his earlier promises not to go after Clinton personally, as when he recently suggested his policy differences with her made her “unqualified” to be president. Bill Clinton was among the voices to push back vociferously, telling MSNBC the following day the comment was “so silly” and that she was “more [qualified] than I was in ’92”. And a day later, the old Bernie was back, insisting that “of course” she was qualified to be president and adding she would be an infinitely better president than either of the Republican candidates.

But his tone-deaf comment still stuck in my craw. It was a reminder of the times Sanders suggested Clinton stop “shouting” about gun control (women are frequently inappropriately accused of shouting or being overly emotional) and his campaign condescendingly suggested they’d welcome Clinton as Sander’s veep.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/bernie-sanders-betrayed-hillary-clinton-attacks

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

1. Damn you Bernie for trying to win! First of all, How dare yuo!

[seabeyond]

15. How dare he be about attacking our party and Democrats and candidate fro his self interest, yes.

I agree. His purpose appears to be to weaken us. How dare he.

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

17. His purpose is to win...

I thought Hilli Vanilli was vetted? How is an old ass socialist from rural Vermont weakening her? My god think what the repukes will do!

[seabeyond]

19. There is a responsibility to our party, so the purpose is to WIN GE. Ya think?

[Betty Karlson]

66. Then I urge you to vote for Sanders: Clinton is a GE disaster waiting to happen.

Her dismal trust numbers, and negative cross-over appeal, would speel doom all down the ticket, even if by some miracle she manages to win herself. If she had any commiment to the Democratic Party, she would bow out as soon as possible for the good of the party. But as she is VERY self-involved (me me me back to the issues IIIIII think are important) she will, as usual, be the last to read the writing on the wall.

[seabeyond]

71. Nope, Clinton has got this.

[Betty Karlson]

73. So far, she has not secured the nomination, even if every other week we hear "she has got this".

Her campaign has been a string of overestimations of her popularity, and it's like a scary repeat of 2008. She is going down, and the sooner we admit it and abandon her "bland ambition tour" (she ain't Madonna), the sooner we can begin to build a GE campaign around the candidate who will make West-Virginia a swing state: Sanders.

[seabeyond]

74. Clinton is kicking Sanders ass.

[Betty Karlson]

75. By losing eight of the last nine primaries? By double digits?

Yeah, I think you lost some credibility when voicing such "perceptions" of Clinton's "victories".

[seabeyond]

76. 2.4 million more votes than Sanders, includes his Repug, Libertarian, baggers voting open caucus .

[Betty Karlson]

79. Oh, that cobbled math again. Caucuses yield less votes than primaries. Hence the difference is

completely irrelevant, just like it was in 2008 when Clinton kept claiming right up to the convention: "but I still won the popular vote!"

[seabeyond]

84. Ha ha.

[Betty Karlson]

108. I am confounded and compelled by the depth of your counterargument. eom

[anotherproletariat]

48. He can't see reality...he was never going to win, why bring down the candidate from the party

to which he is supposedly loyal?

[Hortensis]

59. Relatively speaking, tho, I don't think Bernie's

been all that bad against Hillary. I normally agree with NCTraveler, and I know a lot of people have higher standards than I do for people campaigning for enormous stakes, but to me some negativism is allowed in a campaign, and if he wafts sexism a bit toward our first real female candidate for the presidency, to me an oh well. How many male candidates wouldn't be reeking like polecats by now?

And I believe that so far (fingers crossed here) Sanders has done the party more good than harm. By and large we wanted to move farther left than the badly designed polls pre-Sanders suggested was possible.

Sanders has lied to and mislead those who believe in him, though, encouraging them to believe that he could make the change he promises happen, and that is definitely not okay. Nor is failing to try to help other Democratic candidates get elected. Nor is repeatedly gravely insulting the Democratic Party, liberals, and the sitting president I voted for (all triple swipes at me).

My final opinion will wait, though, while I see how he handles himself through the rest of the primary and the GE. ITM, though, Sanders has (so far) protected the party from the truly nasty virulence any candidate can unleash on another, and we should acknowledge that.

Thanks, Bernie, for not being truly nasty and more than just occasionally somewhat dishonest. Relatively speaking, IMO you've been pretty much okay that way.

[BeanMusical]

57. A moron alerted on your post:

On Tue Apr 12, 2016, 09:58 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

His purpose is to win...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1712720

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Don't be fooled this new DU poster, they are a troll and make it increasingly clear everyday. I'm sick of the name calling, it needs to end. I'm sick of the trolling it needs to end, this is a democratic site and calling the potential nominee "Hilli Vanilli" is a step to far. This website isn't what it used to be and you as a jury can put a small stop to it right now. The poster has been responded to in thread saying that name calling is not okay, they don't care. Please hide this disruptive over the top post, and stop the damn name calling. In 30 days they have racked up 3 hides, it's clear what they are hear to do.


You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Apr 12, 2016, 10:03 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I've seen Bernie called worse terms with posts alerted on and left alone. It's the primaries.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Obvious Troll is Obvious. ADMINS, this is NYC_SKP still trolling this forum.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sorry, I don't see an issue here.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Offensive to everybody, full stop. Just hide it.

[Betty Karlson]

65. Projection: back for an encore!

[workinclasszero]

80. "How dare he be about attacking our party and Democrats and candidate fro his self interest, yes."

I agree!

[Admiral Loinpresser]

89. What a joke!

Bernie Sanders is the first candidate in decades not suffering from Potomac fever. Hillary Clinton simply is indefensible either with respect to ethics or truth telling in general. Business As Usual is all we will get from her.

[seabeyond]

90. Sanders si all politician along with the rest. 30 years has allowed Him to craft

his political non political caricature.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

93. If he has Potomac Fever, why did he wait to run until he was in his seventies?

Sanders is sui generis. If you read his book, "Outsider in the White House," you will see his history of fighting Establishment Repubs and Dems from way back to the betterment of people's lives in Burlington and throughout Vermont. That is why he is so widely respected throughout Vermont. That is why early on he was leading in presidential polls in Vermont in both the Democratic AND Republican primaries.

[seabeyond]

104. What, three decades in politics simply doesn't matter if not running Pres?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

105. In conventional wisdom, identifying

as a Democratic Socialist for decades is not a path to the presidency. Please. let's keep it real. You can make credible arguments, but this is not one of them.

[seabeyond]

106. What is ridiculous is claiming he is outside establishment or not a mere politician.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

107. Let's poll the people of Vermont. n/t

He's the only viable candidate who is not underwater in national favorability ratings. I wonder why...

[seabeyond]

110. Because he has been a quiet do nothing, for 25 yrs.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

111. ROFLMAO. Good one. n/t

[seabeyond]

113. Fact

[Admiral Loinpresser]

114. Pure bullshit. Ask a veteran. Better yet try doing research.

For starters you can google "king of the amendments." Are you ignorant or just dissembling? Hillary was the do-nothing senator. I wish she had been a do nothing SOS as well. When the Clintons accomplish something, people suffer and oftentimes the planet suffers.

[seabeyond]

116. Fact, consistently what peers have said. About the only thing he has adding his name to other's work

[Admiral Loinpresser]

117. Perhaps you are beyond educating about how he got that title. n/t

[seabeyond]

119. I will run you in the dust about Sanders, his history and the caricature he has spent an adult

lifetime creating that contradicts him every step of the way. Sure.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

121. I've seen nothing but inaccurate spin so far, so dust away! n/t

[mariawr]

78. Paging Graves, Brock and Capehart. Shit needs flinging aisle three. Stat

[Admiral Loinpresser]

112. Who is Graves? n/t

[SidDithers]

2. DU rec...nt

Sid

[yodermon]

3. I know. He clearly doesn't know his place. n/t

[merrily]

4. Another fake supporter of Sanders claiming to have changed her mind, just like so many on DU.

[Lizzie Poppet]

5. Fails the sniff test like Hillary fails the honesty test.

That is to say, spectacularly...

[Agschmid]

14. More name calling.

Because when you've got nothing else to do why not mock other democrats?

[blm]

24. He's not a Dem and said yesterday he wants to see the party collapse and die.

Last edited Tue Apr 12, 2016, 11:56 AM - Edit history (1)

Some are falling for his act, but, not all of us Sanders voters are easily led into the circular firing squad some of the RandPaul crowd (posing as Sanders supporters) are trying to form here at DU.

[Andy823]

53. Both sides have this problem

New posters come in constantly, and when they start out bashing the other candidate, and continue to bash day after day instead of actually talking about the GOOD things their candidate has done, it'e pretty obvious. Sadly they are accepted as "true" supporters, and right wing bullshit talking points gets overlooked by their own group.

I am glad that you and others on both sides are starting to see these poster for what they really are.

[blm]

55. Been seeing it here for over a year. It's ramped up the last few months.

GOP operatives have followed this pattern since the first primary here at DU in 2003-4.

Sh…..we aren't supposed to notice.

[Agschmid]

94. Thank you for this.

[cwydro]

72. That one's been a member of DU less than a month and has three hides already.

1631 posts in 90 days.

Truly a prolific new poster, eh?

[Agschmid]

92. Yup.

"Prolific"

[blm]

97. seventhsonitis

DU's afflicted

[m-lekktor]

16. The Guardian commentors aren't buying it either. Poor Lucia Graves. nt

[merrily]

18. It was obviously another top down campaign strategy and it's laughably transparent, tho' not

intended to be.

Poor things.

[m-lekktor]

21. These people aren't too sharp. nt

[oberliner]

22. She's written pretty favorable articles about Bernie throughout the early campaign

If you look at her coverage around Iowa, for example, she definitely seemed like she was a fan.

[merrily]

27. She can't see the light and switch to Hillary if she didn't at least seem like a fan, can she?

[oberliner]

33. You think she wrote articles for the Guardian pretending to be supportive of Bernie?

So that months later she could publicly switch to Hillary?

You think this might be some kind of planned strategy by this person that she hatched before the Iowa caucus?

[merrily]

34. What I think is perfectly clear from Reply 18 and my other posts on this thread.

I know you are trying your best to make my view of most to all of the switchers from Sanders to Hillary seem far-fetched and implausible, but we've seen too much of it, both on DU and in other articles and other contexts. I'm not buying it. If you do, that's your business.

[oberliner]

37. Fair enough

Personally, I think it is reasonable for a person to switch from one candidate to another, and it seems like that is what happened with this person, but obviously that's just my opinion.

[seaglass]

91. It is reasonable but if you were not always and consistently all-in for Bernie you are suspect. Very

black and white thinking which I am not a fan of.

[azurnoir]

69. They were not really supportive they simply did not demonize him as she does oh so desperately now

they were of the well Bernie may have won but.........

[bjo59]

61. That's exactly right and it is so obvious.

[Nanjeanne]

6. Thanks for sharing Lucia, whoever you are.

[oberliner]

38. She covers the US elections for the UK paper, The Guardian

For a non-US paper, they have covered our elections pretty extensively.

[DURHAM D]

8. Sad ending -

Perhaps it is inevitable that a guy who’s idealistic enough to run on a message of revolution is not practical enough to realize when he can’t win and is instead doing the party harm.

[redstateblues]

9. Tad Devine has severely damaged Bernie's brand

He is a typical Rovian campaign manager-he's intellectually dishonest and doesn't care about the Democratic Party. He's has become wildly wealthy getting Bernie to disparage rich people- nice work if you can get it.

[merrily]

28. You can't be serious. Bernie has been saying the same things about economic justice for 50 years.

[frylock]

58. Tad Devine is the new boogeyman.

[DemocracyDirect]

10. Stand back for the coronation you message candidates you.

I've never seen so much crap so tightly condensed.

It's like a 1000 horse apples compressed so hard it comes out as a black diamond.

[G_j]

11. doesn't pass the smell test

something not believable about this...

[Cheese Sandwich]

13. Probably written by a Hillary employee

[DanTex]

12. Sanders camp needs to learn that the hatred that Bernie Bros have for Hillary is not shared by the

overwhelming majority of Democrats.

[restorefreedom]

20. anyone who actually believes sanders has a scintilla of sexism....

clearly does not know much about him or his record, or his life.

i would strenuously recommend further study.

[Armstead]

23. I think Bernie screwed up with that remark....But "betrayed? absolutely NOT

In the legalistic Rovian mumbo jumbo of the Clinton campaign, she was careful not to use the exact word "disqualified" in their campaign to muddy Sanders.

But that depends on the "meaning of is" because she and her surrogates said as much.

So even if Sanders got pissed and said something he should not have, the objections of the "betrayed" writer are either stupid or disingenuous.

[blm]

26. People are definitely exaggerating to fit their narratives.

Both sides are doing it, even in this thread.

Geez….what is DU turning into over this primary?

[merrily]

30. Good question! I've never seen so many people faking support for a candidate before.

[blm]

43. You CHOOSE to believe that Bernie supporters all want to see Dem party collapse

if Sanders doesn't win the nomination, but, many of us here do not. So, you've put yourself in charge of who is an acceptable Sanders supporter to this board and who is not.

You must not have a very good memory, merrily, because if you did, you would have KNOWN that there aren't many on this board who have a longer ARCHIVED record here of opposing Clintons than I do. A few of the long timers supporting Sanders became aware of Clinton's deceits over the years BECAUSE OF MY POSTS in the past. For the 100th time I will repeat that the ONLY reason I no longer target HRC aggressively and publicly here is because I shifted my party activism focus to GOTV and I am not the type to cut off my nose to spite my face. It is hard work here in NC to overcome the obstacles we must endure to prevail in November.

You CHOOSE to believe that someone who has been here less than a month is a REAL Sanders supporter because they post hundreds of anti-Hillary and anti-Dem party posts a day, while, at the same time you CHOOSE to believe that those who have been here for 15 years must be lying about voting for Sanders because they are ever-mindful of keeping the party united for November's massive GOTV efforts and express wariness of those new to the board targeting the party, itself.

I choose to believe you are just being misled and not actually acting out of misdirected vengeance or malice. After all, it is your first presidential primary experience here at DU.

I doubt you can process this post, though, because you only hear what you WANT to hear.

[merrily]

44. I am not even reading past your subject line until you link me to posts of mine that support what

you claim in that post that I CHOOSE to believe. Because the subject line alone looks a hell of lot more like stuff you usually imagine and spin than anything I actually believe or have ever posted and I am done with addressing any more bullshit on this thread.

[blm]

45. Sorry this is your first primary here at DU.

Sometimes you just need to get a primary under your belt here to understand that not all your 'perceived' enemies are really your enemies, and not all of your 'perceived' pals, are really your pals.

seventhsonitis can be a transmittable disease in election years

[merrily]

46. So, no links to my posts for all the crap you claimed I "CHOOSE" to believe?

And no apology for making false claims about me, either?

My powers of thought and observation or my sense of smell do not depend on how many primaries I have endured on DU.

[blm]

49. The poster you CHOSE to believe is a real Sanders supporter

conveniently just blocked me so I cannot retrieve any of the posts. But, I'm sure you can have that discussion with that new Independent member (who clearly stated yesterday that he wanted to see the Dem party collapse and die) in your shared space that you have deemed too precious for any Sanders voter who disagrees with the level of vitriol against the party and against the opposing candidate and against other candidate supporters.

Some of us here at DU are Sanders supporters because we truly BELIEVE in common sense values, and also choose to work within the Dem party just like he has said he is doing. Sorry that doesn't appeal to you.



"With all your power…..with all your power…..with all your power…. what will you do?"

[seaglass]

95. I'll vouch for you blm, you have been consistently pro-Kerry anti-Clinton as long as I can recall.

I may have missed something but I have been here since 2001 and that's what I remember about you.

[blm]

98. According to some, I'm a troll because I bother to correct exaggerations from some

of my fellow Sanders voters. They booted me last week.

Same thing got me booted from HRC group last year.

Those who do not believe that accuracy is helpful to this board and something we should all strive to maintain are the ones ruining this forum, imo.

[seaglass]

99. Agreed. Especially when someone posts an OP, it's pointed out as untrue and they keep the

OP up just to get more recs or spread disinfo whatever the purpose may be.

I was reading DailyKos yesterday and I don't spend a lot of time there but the level of conversation was so much higher than it is here - it is what DU conversations should be.

[blm]

100. This board was one of the sharpest after MWO and Bartcop.

.

[seaglass]

101. I used to actually learn things here, not so much anymore. Oh and btw I remember

seventhson who was so unbelievably anti-Kerry but once gave me sound advice in a PM on a personal matter. Am I remembering correctly that he was a lawyer? I wasn't here the night he exposed himself but have seen it referred to many times.

[blm]

102. He once said he was a paralegal.

He was definitely a GOP operative here working through both the primaries and the general.

I didn't trust him at the time, and I have a pretty good sense of GOP operatives working these boards since…..including now.

[islandmkl]

25. HEY...LOOKIE HERE!!...another devoted Bernie supporter/biggest fan/progressive (maybe)...

who has become un-enamored with/by Bernie....

well that proves THAT....

myself, I was all for Hillary until she couldn't get the token to work on the subway...

which makes me and Lucia Graves equally shallow...and equally believable...

[BillZBubb]

29. Oh BOO HOO! Hillary has betrayed Democrats for decades.

When we were protesting w bush's war based on lies, Hillary was in the Senate endorsing it.

When we were fighting to keep and even strengthen the social safety net, Clinton was there pushing to "end welfare as we know it".

When we thought the trade agreements sold out the American worker for corporate greed, Hillary went with the corporations.

When we were disgusted at the ridiculous number of people of color incarcerated in the US, Hillary was all in for getting those "super-predators" (wink, wink).

When we needed those corporate crooks responsible for the collapse of the US economy brought to justice, Hillary was raking in millions giving them speeches.

[BeyondGeography]

31. Hillary has her own rough edges

This line of argument really doesn't do much for me.

[Martin Eden]

32. Saying that HRC is ambitious or unqualified is not gender specific, and therefore not "sexist"

Not even "subtly" sexist, except in the mind of someone who chooses to interpret it that way.

As far as I'm concerned, every politician who voted to give GW Bush authority to invade Iraq disqualified themselves.

[Bluenorthwest]

35. She's been writing this 'I changed my mind' piece repeatedly for months. This one is Feb 12, two

months ago to the very day.....
Sanders squandered his lead while Clinton shone at the latest debate
The senator from Vermont had almost parlayed a win in New Hampshire and a near-tie in Iowa to frontrunner status. And then he reached for petty one-liners.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/12/bernie-sanders-squandered-lead-hillary-clinton-democratic-debate

In that piece she cites Rebecca Traister on the subject of 'who is very sexist'-
"This was made worse by his campaign’s subtly sexist attacks on Clinton’s ambition, as New York magazine’s Rebecca Traister has observed."

Rebecca Traiser, 2008 in Salon:
Hey, Obama boys: Back off already!
Young women are growing increasingly frustrated with the fanatical support of Barack and gleeful bashing of Hillary.
"Yet some female voters have begun to express nearly as much disenchantment with the Obama-mania of their peers as with their Clinton-promoting mothers. And even while they voice dismay over the retro tone of the pro-Clinton feminist whine, a growing number of young women are struggling to describe a gut conviction that there is something dark and funky, and probably not so female-friendly, running below the frantic fanaticism of their Obama-loving compatriots.

I began reporting this story in part because, as a 32-year-old woman who is more liberal than either candidate, and who was quite torn until Super Tuesday, I had found myself increasingly defensive of Clinton in the face of the Obama worship that rules the mostly white, liberal, well-educated circles in which I work and travel. I was confused by the saucer-eyed, unquestioning devotion shown by my formerly cynical cohorts, especially when it was accompanied, as it often was, by a sharp renunciation of Hillary Clinton, whose policies are so similar to her opponent’s. I was horrified by the frequent proclamations that if Obama did not win the nomination, his supporters would abstain from voting in the general election, or even vote for John McCain. I was suspicious of the cultlike commitment to an undeniably brilliant and inspiring man –- but one whom even his wife calls “just a man.”
http://www.salon.com/2008/04/14/obama_supporters/

Traister 2016 on Bernie Supporters sounds very much like Traister 2008 on Obama Supporters....it's like a template she rolls out.

[riderinthestorm]

42. I was just about to post that this kind of article appears on a regular basis

And now you find its the same person recycling her piece, just inserting the lastest sins Bernie’s committed as rationale?

[Bluenorthwest]

81. To agreee with Traister today one has to either agree with her about Obama supporters or explain

how she was wrong then but right now with the same Template Tantrum. The OP will not bother to address those smearings of Obama. I assume the OP agrees with them.

Many paid pundits are recycling pieces from 08. Krugman, Joan Walsh, it's all Templates and Tantrums. 'Obama boys' becomes 'Bernie bros' and somehow they get their employers to pay full price for used materials. Some chumps those employers are.

[riderinthestorm]

83. It must have "sold" well then so why change anything

I suspect if we went back farther we'd see even more repeats from Gore's run. Its so easy to cross check now.

Template tantrums!!!!



Thanks for the laugh. I needed that.

[Marr]

87. +1. Wow.

Well, that's embarrassing.

[Bluenorthwest]

115. What's sad about all the people doing this 'I was for Bernie and switched' posturings is that if

they dropped that affectation and just stated their support for Hillary they might be heard, they might have some credibility. But there are so many of them doing this 'I just switched' routine every few weeks, they did it in 08 when they bashed Obama.....it's just embarrassing as you say.

[jillan]

36. Who cares?

[Blue_Adept]

39. Conspiracies everywhere!

[Surya Gayatri]

40. K & R most enthusiastically.

[Bluenorthwest]

41. Hey OP, you should comment on Traister's 2008 smearing of Obama supporters

since you felt like bringing her here as an authority to be cited I have to assume you agree about Obama supporters being very sexist themselves.

[CalvinballPro]

47. The wheels on the Bernie Bus fall off, off, off!

Mr Integrity morphed in Mr Negativity, and then some.

[NurseJackie]

60. Ha! :-D

[Vinca]

50. So it's sexist to question a candidates qualifications.

Let's see how that works in the general. I assume Hillary will be the nominee and I would hope she will question Donald Trump's qualifications. Will it be sexist then?

[CrowCityDem]

51. The sexism...

... comes from the fact that Bernie said Hillary wasn't qualified, while he (to the best of my knowledge) has never leveled the same criticism at President Obama, despite him fitting many of the criteria Bernie says are disqualifying, combined with his advisor talking negatively about Hillary's "ambition". That word has long been code for sexist arguments.

[Vinca]

54. Oh that's just ridiculous.

I'm a woman. An older woman who fought the fight. What you are citing makes your chosen candidate sound like some poor cowering female in a corner afraid to say boo to the big bad men. Get a grip. You're demeaning all women and especially Hillary as a candidate. She must be embarrassed if she hears stuff like this.

[Lucinda]

52. TY ~ KNR

[frylock]

56. Dear Penthouse Forum...

[TheFarseer]

62. Why would you be excited he decided to run

And then be outraged when he tries to win? It makes no sense because it's a total fabrication. Btw, sanders could hit much harder but you just can't go nuclear in a primary. The republican may or may not, depending on who it is.

[idic5]

64. FLash: Bernie is in an election ; and he was reacting to gaslighting strategy from Clinton

Bernie NEVER said he was not interested in winning. In fact, he always said that he is in this to win. The 'attacks' the author refers to were REACTIONS to the concerted SMEAR campaign of CLinton - as one pice below suggests the patent mendacity as well as the 'what I did nt say that' bears the marks of the mental abuse technique called 'gaslighting'...

THe data is so obvious: Bernie had momentum from winning like the last 6 states HANDILY and , because she as the establishment candidate cannot win the argument against an anti establishment Bernie, resorted to cheap sleazy delegitimization methods ala ROve and what she also engaged in against Obama in '08.

THe beat reporter for CNN reported this strategy the night of WI returns coming in. WIth SOc media we see this stuff for what it is.

THis author was probably not a real a bernie person. Real Bernie people 'get' such obvious propaganda methods. She is employing the classic 'con game' -- act like you are one of them, then lower the boom revealing your true predatory colors.

1) 'TUESDAY, APR 5, 2016 08:43 PM CDT
Bernie wins big in Wisconsin: Sanders has now won seven of the last eight Democratic contests against Clinton'
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/06/bernie_wins_big_in_wisconsin_sanders_has_now_won_seven_of_the_last_eight_democratic_contests_against_clinton/

https://www.facebook.com/usamurica/photos/a.777825648996141.1073741828.777824458996260/835324816579557/?type=3&theater

2) Clinton Campaign LEAK - Plan to Bury Bernie, "DISQUALIFY HIM" -
Running out of Patience'
Published on Apr 6, 2016 (early hrs , 1:30 am - I saw it)

3) ' Clinton Superdelegate Just Admitted That Hillary Lied About Bernie and Guns (VIDEO)Jacqueline Pine | April 6, 2016'
http://usuncut.com/politics/clinton-superdelegate-lie/

4) 'Bernie Sanders Can't Explain How He'd Break up the Banks
by Chris Matthews @crobmatthews APRIL 5, 2016,'
http://fortune.com/2016/04/05/bernie-sanders-big-banks/

5) ''Clinton questions whether Sanders is qualified to be president'
By Juliet Eilperin and Anne Gearan April 6'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/04/06/clinton-questions-whether-sanders-is-qualified-to-be-president/

6) '@HillaryClinton
.@BernieSanders prioritized gun manufacturers' rights over the parents
of the children killed at Sandy Hook'
12:32 PM - 6 Apr 2016
https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/717797172154998784

7) 'Hillary Clinton says she isn’t sure Bernie Sanders is a Democrat
Dylan Stableford April 6, 2016'
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-isnt-a-real-142724784.html


.

8) 'Hillary Clinton Using Sandy Hook Victims as Political Props Just
Backfired CompletelyAmanda Girard | April 7, 2016
Some of her supporters are even switching sides.'
http://usuncut.com/politics/clintons-sandy-hook-attack-backfires/

.9) 'Hillary Clinton Is Gaslighting Bernie Sanders and It Is AbusiveAmanda
Girard | April 7, 2016'
http://usuncut.com/politics/hillary-clinton-gaslighting-sanders/

[ThePhilosopher04]

67. Call the WAAAAmbulance. If you're that sensitive, get out of politics.

[pantsonfire]

68. Blinders on....

[w4rma]

70. Meanwhile, logical people feel betrayed at Clinton for her smear campaign. (nt)

[Skwmom]

77. More political ploys. Could you be more obvious?

[Bluenorthwest]

82. Why I feel betrayed by Hillary Clinton:

[realmirage]

86. The fact that Bernie's campaign is about to die has

made him desperate and now you're seeing what happens to him under pressure

[deutsey]

88. Bless the author's poor little heart

[Karmadillo]

96. Waaaaaaaaaah!

[jmg257]

103. "now, as the primary stretches into mid-spring, his message is increasingly about beating Clinton"

NOOO!!!!

"His team has grown more and more obsessed with helping their candidate clinch the nomination"

AAAAHHH!


And of course, the obligatory "sexist" charges...

his campaign’s subtly sexist attacks on Clinton’s ambition,...There was Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, telling CNN’s Jake Tapper: “Don’t destroy the Democratic party to satisfy the secretary’s ambitions to become president of the United States,”

OMG That pig!!



Oh. The Horror.

[DemocraticWing]

109. The author only votes for candidates not interested in winning?

[hellofromreddit]

118. That makes no sense at all

sexist attacks on Clinton’s ambition

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511712433

[BreakfastClub]

120. Actually THAT makes no sense. nt

[fun n serious]

122. KnR nt