Post removed

[Duckhunter935]

1. Because he is actually more of a Democrat

Than some that have that magic "D" next to their name.

[elleng]

4. Thanks, Duckhunter.

You responded more civilly than I would have.

[Duckhunter935]

15. Not always, but I try

[sheshe2]

83. hmmm

[RKP5637]

5. Exactly!!! K&R!!! n/t

[TheBlackAdder]

67. It seems like people (normally 4-5 regulars) always post these things to get high view/comment rates

[duffyduff]

20. Not an answer.

This guy ran only for self-aggrandizing, then when the inevitable failure happened, he went back to being an "independent."

Not acceptable.

[Duckhunter935]

24. Yes it is, you just don't like it

Sad

[duffyduff]

30. It's the truth, and it hurts your feelings.

He never should have been allowed to run in the primaries on the DP ticket.

He was never a viable candidate, just a joke candidate.

I saw through him quite early on.

[Duckhunter935]

42. And even though I ended up voting for the nominee

I knew she could not win quite early on.

[ancianita]

50. You didn't see much, then. He voted more with Democrats than actual Democrats did.

His vote with Democrats was 95% while the average Democrat's vote with the party was 80%.

So no, it's not the truth.

Democrats should be thanking him for drawing out political engagement. He didn't cause anything bad and brought about higher political discourse standards, which this country can still put a hell of a lot more practice into.

He made everyone smarter about media, how to frame and focus on issues important to this country's working class.

Are you sure you really saw anything? I've been voting for over fifty years, and I would have noticed if he were fake.

Good lord. Get a grip.

[babylonsister]

38. Are you trying to stir shit up?

Did you listen to him at all??? Hardly self-aggrandizing. And who gives a rat's ass what you call someone? He walks the walk.

[liquid diamond]

56. Explain

his trashing our party for decades. He is our political enemy who not only talked shit but also launched a failed coup which helped lead to President trump.

[jalan48]

62. Failed coup? OK-whatever you say.

[Duckhunter935]

74. I know, right

[Duckhunter935]

71. good god

Which is the more loyal Democrat

Joseph "Joe" Manchin III is the senior United States Senator from West Virginia. Manchin, a member of the Democratic Party, served as the Governor of West Virginia from 2005 to 2010 and the Secretary of State of West Virginia from 2001 to 2005.

Oh that's right, he supports his daughter that is killing people by raising drug prices

Or how about this one....

Joseph Isadore "Joe" Lieberman is an American politician and former United States Senator from Connecticut. A former member of the Democratic Party, he was the party's nominee for Vice President in the 2000 election.


I will take Sanders

[sheshe2]

78. ...

[joshcryer]

84. Can you name some?

[TheBlackAdder]

2. This? Again?

[Larkspur]

3. Bernie is a member of the Senate Democratic leadershp, so this thread is attacking

a Democratic leader. This thread should be removed.

[RKP5637]

7. K&R!!!! n/t

[jalan48]

16. Yeah-no bashing Democrats!

[duffyduff]

23. He is not a Democrat. However, plenty of Sanders supporters still trash Clinton. n/t

[jalan48]

26. You better hope he runs as a Democrat in 2020.

[Duckhunter935]

29. He votes more with the Democrats

Than many with that "D" by there name. In fact for decades he has been with the Democrats.

[duffyduff]

34. Still not a Democrat. We ought to be thankful for that.

There was enough material there to sink the SS Sanders, and the GOP would not have to make it up.

[dflprincess]

85. "What's in a name? that which we call a rose.

By any other name would smell as sweet"

[babylonsister]

41. And plenty don't. You're trashing Sanders, so you're doing

the thing you're complaining about.

[NoGoodNamesLeft]

36. Tell that to all the people who keep posting threads calling rural Democrats racists

eom

[jalan48]

44. Yeah-kinda funny how it works that way isn't it? nt

[liquid diamond]

59. I asked a question.

[bdamomma]

80. i agree thread should be removed

[JSup]

6. Man, I wish...

I wish the primary was over; it seems like it's lasted forever.

[TheLibIn615]

13. I fucking don't.

God damn do I miss April right about now.

[milestogo]

8. The big tent party tells a popular Senator to "fuck off"?

Are you serious? What exactly is the mechanism for doing that?

The Republicans didn't even tell Trump to "fuck off".

[elleng]

49. Happens often around here.

[ancianita]

54. No kidding. Too damned much infighting around here. This Bernie bashing can go suck it.

[Duckhunter935]

57. sadly so

[liquid diamond]

68. He was not a member of our party!

Did the DNC consider his criticism of our party before they gave him a platform? What pisses me off even more is that Bernie repeatedly bit the hand that fed him. The DNC better learn from his behavior. He better not be allowed to run as a dem in the future.

[milestogo]

79. Our party was lucky to have someone like Bernie run for the nomination

He was a positive influence on the democratic party and he enriched the discussion.

[saltpoint]

9. Bullshit. eom

[RKP5637]

10. DUH!!! n/t

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

11. Did you notice that the primaries were over several months ago?

In any event, Bernie was, and is, at least as good a Democrat as a whole lot of people who claim to be Democrats.

[jalan48]

12. I guess to give the appearance of a real primary.

Then Bernie started kicking ass and it got out of hand for the DNC.

[MADem]

14. We won't make that mistake again. nt

[jalan48]

18. You want more Ralph Naders?

[MADem]

40. What does that even mean?

If people want to run, LET THEM.

If they want to be bitter, nasty critics, LET THEM.

But let them fund their own primary campaigns against OUR nominees, and develop their own databases. There shouldn't be a mechanism whereby you invite people into your tent and they take a crap all over your carpets.

If you aren't an actual Democrat, as opposed to "caucusing with," you should not have access to Democratic Party assets when you are running against an actual, real-life Dem.

If you want access, join the party. For real. Not temporarily, to get the goods.

I think this should apply to Sanders, as it should have applied to Lieberman after he pulled his little stunt with LaMont, and it should apply to Angus King as well.

That doesn't mean we can't help, raise money, provide cash from the DSCC (assuming there is no Dem Primary challenger), but we shouldn't give outsiders who are unwilling to commit to the party access to or any control over our databases.

Never again.

[jalan48]

47. A third party candidate on the left would sink the Democrat running.

It happened in 2000 and will happen again unless the Party moves to the left.

[MADem]

51. A lot happened in 2000. Bush won, five to four.

Selected, not elected. And Pat Buchanan (3rd party on the right) did most of the damage in Fl--at least as much as Nader.

If the party moves too far to the left, it loses all those conservative Democrats and "traditional" members that some people here (a small, but vocal, segment) like to pretend don't exist.

I got news for you--those conservadems and moderates--they're the ones who vote in the off years. They're the ones who get to the polls every. damned. election. They need a little love, too--they don't need to be coddled like some, but there's only so much they'll put up with before they hold their noses and either jump over or stay home.

Move left and we LOSE them--and there are more of those reliable voters than there are the ones who yak on reddit and elsewhere, and go to the rallies, but not to the polls.

[jalan48]

69. The ConservaDems just lost to one of the worst Presidential candidates in our history.

I'd say it's time to try something different.

[MADem]

82. Wait a minute--we didn't "lose." Our candidate is well north of TWO MILLION votes

ahead of the "winner" of this contest.

The EC has on four occasions denied the winners--Democrats, all--the White House.

I'd say THAT's the thing we need to fix.

[Maru Kitteh]

43. Instead we had Nader on the inside this time. Fuck that. Never again.

[jalan48]

53. It's not what I want but it's inevitable if the Party leadership doesn't change.

[kacekwl]

45. Careful what you wish for

Next time Bernie will run as an Independent and screw both dem and rep. And win.

[MADem]

48. No, he won't. Have a peep at his birth certificate.

He's an old man. He was really too old this time round.

[Duckhunter935]

60. and she is just about the same age

your ageism makes you look bad

[liquid diamond]

72. Plus 1,000

The DNC better learn from this debacle. A candidate should at least be a Democrat of good standing for at least 5 years to run on our platform.

[unblock]

17. File the paperwork and pay the fees, you can run.

Going around saying you are or are not a party member is not a requirement.

It's actually not a requirement for republicans either.

[duffyduff]

19. Excellent question. It should not have been allowed. n/t

[apcalc]

21. Please stop these divisive threads. They do nothing for us. I encourage

Everyone NOT to be drawn into this. Progress, not regress, please.

[tecelote]

58. Totally agree.

The Democratic Underground should be a place of unity.

So much hate being spewed among our own members is startling.

We should be above it all by now and work for the future.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

22. Having one of the most popular Senators run on your party's ticket is a good thing, I think.

http://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-most-popular-senator-453479

[duffyduff]

25. Not if he doesn't actually walk the walk. n/t

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. He walked the Democratic walk better than a lot of alleged Democrats.

In any event, the primaries are over and threads like this are divisive and stupid.

[Duckhunter935]

37. He has been walking that walk for decades

[Ace Rothstein]

27. Lame thread.

[FBaggins]

31. Allowed?

So what you're really saying is "why should millions of Democrats be allows to vote for the candidate that they think best represents their values?"

Whew... that would be a morally compromised position to run with during the primaries. It's morally bankrupt to hold it after your preferred candidate just handed all of the keys of power over to the other side.

[Demsrule86]

55. Sander's run lead to President Trump...so honestly, it was a bad idea.

Some of us think winning elections matters...we don't look at voting as self-expression...Look at the shithow Trump is planning...nothing could be worse...so for anyone reading this thread who did not vote Clinton in the GE...shame on you.

[Duckhunter935]

63. actually is was a nominees poor campaining

in several very key states that caused that. Ignore states and people may not come out to vote for you.

[FBaggins]

66. One has to wonder...

Quite a bit of reporting sounds like Bill Clinton was advocating for a very different strategy in the closing weeks.

How quickly will they find a way to blame the campaign's failure to take that advice on Sanders' supporters?

[FBaggins]

64. Sorry... that's dishonest spin

It also ignores the point of the post you replied to. Why should Democrats not be allowed to vote for whomever they prefer to represent them?

Hillary's team helped Trump get the nomination. I know that desperation is making some think that the people who forced the losing candidate on us really bear no responsibility and it's really the fact that everyone else didn't just genuflect and get out of her way that caused the loss... but the one thing that can't rationally be claimed is that the people who preferred a different strategy should bear the blame over the people who actually ran the campaign.

Sorry guys... one advantage of winning is that you get to claim that the win was caused by (insert favorite cause here). But when you lose you don't get to point fingers anywhere else.

[still_one]

33. Because he officially changed to be a Democrat, and therefore is entitled to run as a Democrat. I

absolutely have no problem with that happening.

What I do have a problem with is, after the primaries were over, and Bernie endorsed Hillary, and urged his supporters to vote for her, why so many of those supporters and self-identified progressives refused to vote for Hillary.

That is who I am especially pissed about. Not at Bernie, but at those idiots who not only refused to vote for Hillary, but didn't even bother to vote. Russ Feingold and Zypher, Teachout both lost as did every swing state Democrat against the establishment republican incumbent running for Senate. While I believe they have no valid excuse for not voting for Hillary with the stakes so high, the absolutely have zero excuse for NOT voting, and thus we lost the Senate

[TDale313]

35. Not this shit again.

[Duckhunter935]

39. Yep, lol

[Grassy Knoll]

46. .

[elleng]

52. Because THIS:

https://www.democracynow.org/shows/2016/11/29

[jack_krass]

61. So... You'd rather him run a 3 way race against HRC and trump as a 3rd party candidate(?)

He would have split the left vote right down the center , and surely would have won many states.

Or.. are you saying he should not have run at alll... that he should just sit home and shut up?

[earthside]

65. Sanders' run for the nomination ...

... was a valiant effort to save the Democratic Party from the disaster that befell it on November 8.

Besides, he qualified and had every right to seek the nomination.

The better question ought to be 'why was Hillary allowed to run on our ticket'?

[JHan]

77. So Sanders is Mr Perfect and did no damage?

[Azathoth]

70. Yeah, that's what we needed. An even smaller primary field. n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

73. Because he might have been the best chance to actually win the GE

That. Is. Why.

Get over yourself.

[putitinD]

75. I would much rather see Bernie Sanders being innaugerated on Jan 20th, than Donald J. Trump.

[Fichefinder]

76. Sorry. Have to disagree.

I voted for Hillary. BUT
Never saw her walk a picket line
Never heard her push card check
Never saw her attack the rich and powerful for the social vampires they are

Hillary never fought to win, she fought to not lose. Two different things.

Actions speak louder than labels. If our elected leaders didn't tell us which party they were in, would we be able to tell which is which?


"Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." Orwell - Animal Farm

[JHan]

86. I can critique HRC AND SANDERS and as for Sanders...

He stayed in the race longer than he should have and he framed Clinton in a way that fit perfectly into Trump's "Crooked Hillary" narrative.