Post removed

[boston bean]

4. Why thank you, Justin!

[hrmjustin]

5. And of course how dare you bring up such a point.

[boston bean]

7. Wouldn't an extremely principled candidate who is so against something

try and do something about it?

I mean really try, not just moan and groan their way around the issue.

There is something he can do. Will he do it?

[hrmjustin]

10. Honestly I think he just might. But yes he and those who complain about this should be challenged.

[boston bean]

13. Why would someone so principled want to participate in something that is "rigged"?

[hrmjustin]

18. Great question. If he feels it is rigged maybe he should stand on principle and not participate.

[seabeyond]

19. i do not think he would. he talks a good game, but he wants to stay in tight with dems

i am watching his campaign. he knows the hand that feeds him and he is walking this very cautiously. he probably wont win and needs to be able to go back to the dem party as his outsider self.

[hrmjustin]

22. Yes. He wants to keep the party at arms length but won't let go.

[seabeyond]

34. and i am ok with that. this man is a politician. i get that. i do not hold him to a standard

that just is not true. i am good with that. smart thinking. i admire his independent self and how he has walked this. i am good with him on our side in senate. not so good as president with the dem title.

[hrmjustin]

39. I just wish his followers would show a little realism.

[seabeyond]

43. supporters justin. i am a believer. we are supporters

not cheerleaders, fans or followers.

[hrmjustin]

45. Fair enough.

[seabeyond]

49. ah....

you are just a sweetie. most people yell at me. lol

[hrmjustin]

52. Never me. And i get yelled at more often now.

Most don't really mean it b6t I am a vocal hrc supporter so...

[Rosa Luxemburg]

85. O'MALLEY has also complained

[seabeyond]

86. yes. and he and his family are within the democratic party and have been a lifetime and will

continue to be their lifetime and always always be supportive and a part.

he is not stating he is outside of parties cause they do not have the integrity, and he will buck the system.

a huge difference on the two campaigns run.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

94. I don't think there is a difference

You could say that Webb was a Republican. People are not necessary card-carrying members of the Democratic Party. They might show up to meetings and campaign. I don't think we should make divisions Bernie caucuses with Democrats.

[seabeyond]

97. and i do think there is a difference. so we disagree. nt

[hrmjustin]

90. Then he can test the dnc.

[Andy823]

101. Yes he did.

And he complained at the DNC meeting yesterday, he stood up and said it to their faces. Why didn't Bernie do the same? He had a chance. He was the first one to complain about needing more debates. He has, or had, a petition on his site for people to sign demanding more debates, but now all of a sudden he is silent. Why?

[rhett o rick]

51. Except H. Clinton wouldn't come out of hiding to participate and the DNC would then exclude him

from their debates. That's exactly playing into the hands of Clinton that is afraid to face Sander and O'Malley in debates.

[boston bean]

61. Oh, poor bernie, participating in a process he feels is rigged.

He is the one making that accusation. He can do something about it. But doubt he will.

But what it tells me is he isn't principled enough to take his words and put some action behind it.

[seabeyond]

62. but principle. right? character. morals and integrity. here is the thing. of course,

as apoitician it would not be wise. hence.... being a politician he will not do it. hence..... no more integrity driven that our other dems. you know. politicians. but... the difference being, sanders supporters do hold him above all the rest. now i, that am much more far and pragmatic, do not hold him being a politician against him.

[cali]

82. lol

You do set the bar low

[hrmjustin]

89. Not as low as you.

Cheers.

[Scuba]

2. I miss the unrec button.

[villager]

9. Me too.

n/t

[Snotcicles]

35. Especially for these ultra trash-worthy threads. nt

[DonViejo]

67. I look forward to reading your comments in this "ultra trash-worthy" thread....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=555176

But I'm not holding my breath

[Le Taz Hot]

69. Yeah, me too.

Just like their corporate masters, the Vichy Dems continue to believe the electorate are idiots.

[Fawke Em]

3. Only people who have something to hide like this schedule.

Like your right-pointing candidate.

[BlueCaliDem]

17. Only a poor orator would think six debates isn't enough to get his points across.

Especially after someone's enjoyed such favorable and broad coverage for the past months, and has drawn tens of thousands of supporters in almost every State.

[seabeyond]

36. o. k.

[boston bean]

50. bernie playing five dimensional chess! LOL

[sheshe2]

56. If you say so, Genghis Khan. eom

[seabeyond]

63. Genghis Khan. raping of women. i always wonder about the new poster that

chooses such a name and generally as a feminist not disappointed.

[seabeyond]

93. lmao. and i can fuckin respect that and be tickled by it.

thank you for the giggle and well.... fuck, and integrity in trolldom. you made my day.

[frylock]

55. Once again, it's the exclusivity clause that is at issue here..

get rid of the clause, and allow candidates to debate whoever, whenever.

[BlueCaliDem]

6. With all the positive coverage Senator Sanders is getting on weekends and for his huge rallies

while Hillary Clinton, in contrast, is being crucified daily by U.S. M$M in the same way they had covered the Clintons with regard to Whitewater and Vince Foster (lots of trumped-up accusations, zero evidence), six debates is MORE than enough for Senator Sanders to convince the American people he's the one for 2016...and it will be a test of his skill as an orator - something he'll need to master in order to deal with Congress and heads of States as president.

I don't see why this is a problem.

[boston bean]

8. Ask Bernie. nt

[seabeyond]

11. shows you want to complain but won't take any action.

this is a key

[Armstead]

20. If Sandrs were to do that he's be attacked for not "playin well with others:"

Just like when he runs as a Democrat in the primaries, instead of mounting a third-party "spoiler campaign" he's accused by the status-quo partisans for being a hypocrite and not being a "real Democrat."\

You might not like Sandders for whatever reason. But please don 't misrepresent who he is.

[seabeyond]

29. he has a history. that history tells him that running third party is a loss. he isnt stupid.

why would he consider a third party run when it has always been a fail for not only him, but everyone? he is a politician. he knows how it works. he is using the system to work with his independent self.

and again armstead. people can say happy fun things all they want. it is in the doing. that is what i am looking at.

[Armstead]

42. First of all, he is certainly not saying "happy fun things"

If he were into just saying happy fun things he could emulate Hillary, and dance around the core problems we face, and gloss over them except in safe politically poll-tested vague cliches and generalities.

Instead he is telling the difficult truth.

More importantly, this claim that he is superficial and does not act on his beliefs show either ignorance of all he has done in his life -- or a willful distortion.

As ever, it doesn't matter if you choose to disagree with him. But please don't distort who he is.

[seabeyond]

46. are you SERIES!!1!1. lol. htis, you and i disagree. free college, 15 an hour, free health care,

break up banks, take down wallstreet, get rid of money in campaigns

not happy shit?

[Armstead]

64. Those are called goals -- all candidates give them

Amazing how when he acts in accordance with normal political principles 101, he's accused of being weird. Sanders - and those of us who support him -- are fully aware of how it works.

As for his "happy talk" no, he is stating goals that would make this a hell of a lot better and healthier country. People like Clinton make vague claims that are similar -- except she avoids mentioning the real underlying causes or the necessity for significant reforms to solve them.

Personally I think we should break up banks -- which have been allowed to grow to destructive scale -- or we should at least bring them down to more reasonable size, through anti trust and other regulation -- which can be done as history has proven.

Take down Wall St. -- Not "take it down" but regulate and control it again. (See first point.)

Get rid of money in campaigns. Seems to me he and Hillary and O'Malley say the same thing about that as a goal. Bernie has at least taken steps by promoting a large amount of grass roots donations, as a step in that direction for his main find raising strategy. He has also introduced legislation for public financing that Clinton could, if she chose, express support for.

[seabeyond]

73. i see omalley and clinton addressing the same issues as sanders. i see their plans though

much more doable and not such extreme promises.

i would love a nation of 15 an hour, and free health care paid thru taxes. and then reality sinks in and i see their propsals much more doable, though i want more.

clinton was the first to go after citizen. and she is honest about it. thru an amendment. sanders states he will get rid of it. he does not have that power.

just a whole lot of that back and forth i listen to.

i am a very pragmatic person. innate. since a child.

someone promising the moon doesnt even get on my radar cause i know it cannot be done.

omalley has been creative and articulate in spelling out how he would do it, and seems to be the most can do. so he is the one i am looking at. clinton on omalleys heels. i too want things fixed. because we are not sander supporters do not mean we are not side by side with sanders supporters. we simply see more a chance with another.

[Armstead]

77. I like many of O'Malleey's proposals too. But here's an uncomfortable truth. You are right.

You are correct that campaign promises seldom get fulfilled in the form they are given in campaigns.

Bu O'Malley is not being any more realistic than Sanders, and neither is Clinton.

They are actually less truthful in a way. These wonderful 20-point detailed plans, almost never see the light of day.

Candidates put then in a drawer after the election, rather than actually taking them to Congress. If they are honest, onve in office they they propose more modest things, and use some watered down version as a starting point for negotiation than might lead to something -- but never what they sold during the campaign.

Sanders is giving out his broad goals. If you look at his record and statements, there is ample examples of the specific proposals he would pursue if elected.

And he is totally honest about the prospects. He always emphasizes "This will never get done, if we don't actually come together and work hard to bring them about after the election."

[seabeyond]

92. this is not a new and unknown concept and not like it is not repeatedly said by dems.

"This will never get done, if we don't actually come together and work hard to bring them about after the election."

the only thing is, what i have seen on du is obama is called a liar.... and sanders is raised above that.

you and i, i think, mostly agree and see the process about the same.

we like sanders. he isnt my choice. i like omalley, then clinton and then sanders.

i would campaign hard for all, enjoy the race with all of them, and be fine with any of them as president.

[Armstead]

100. Here's how I see it

I have been paying attention to Sanders for years, as he was one of a handful of people in Congress who actually were expressing my own observations and beliefs and values. (See my icon for another, and there have been others on either specific issues or in general -- Kennedy, Sherrod Brown, Jan Schiakovsky, Barbara Lee, etc. pardon my spelling.).

Sanders campaign has actually taken those aspirations -- and critiques of the problems -- and injected them into the mainstream presidential campaign.

The underlying problem -- and related issues -- transcend the usual partisan division. It is much bigger.

IMO, what he is doing is expanding the dialogue of the campaigns, and taking it beyond the same old, same old bi-polarized nature of elections. He is pressing to include both the bigger problems and bigger goals. IMO that is crucial if we are ever to shake off the gridlock and apathy and political stagnation that prevents real reform.

[BlueCaliDem]

23. Lot of hot air, little action.

The more I learn about this man, the less I like him.

If something doesn't go your way, don't complain - do something to change it! He aims to be the leader of this country? LEAD already.

[seabeyond]

31. supporters keep saying, people get to know sanders he will gain ground. i got to know the man.

though he is a good enough joe, and i like him in senate, it did not convince me he was presidential material. the opposite.

[BlueCaliDem]

60. This is exactly how I feel. His legislative accomplishments are wafer-thin. And it's

his legislative accomplishments and votes in his 24+ years in Congress that I look at in order to determine whether or not he's qualified to be president. So far, I don't see it.

Considering that we're not a dictatorship, but a government consisting of three co-equal branches that need to compromise in order to get anything done, I see his lack of allies in Congress as a huge stumbling block for him.

[seabeyond]

66. i really do look at the candidate that i think will get the most done. that is high on my priority

list, for sure.

a HUGE factor on who i vote for

[Armstead]

72. I'd suggest that you look at WHY more of the things he has proposed don't pass

Some of his proposals are out of the ordinary. Okay,

But many others are basically the same things that many other politicians claim o support as goals -- but don't follow up and actually work to support them when it actually comes down to it. It's referred to as "calling their bluff."

The allies that don't support him says more about how corrupted and/or ineffective Congress has become more than it does about Sanders.

[aikoaiko]

12. Or go a step further and enter the General Election as a third party candidate

HRC fans, "Oh noo no no no no no. Don't have that much integrity."

[BlueCaliDem]

26. What? And break his oft-repeated promise to not be a spoiler?

What will that do to his integrity then?

[aikoaiko]

57. Hey, Im not the one suggesting Bernie break rules to show integrity.

That's the "logic" from the OP that is getting recced by HRC fans.

I'm confident Bernie is acting and will act with integrity throughout this presidential election and thereafter.

[boston bean]

65. Right, he will just follow the rules of a process he feels is "rigged".

You know once someone says something like that, and their entire candidacy is built on principles bucking the system, he has a duty to:

1 - not participate in something that he feels is rigged
2 - take a truly principled stand with some action to fight it

He will do neither.

[aikoaiko]

78. I know you HRC fans are sensitive to the integrity issue given perceptions of your candidate..

... but trying to make up an integrity issue where there is none is laughable.

Please continue.

[boston bean]

80. Bernie feels there is an issue. And he has said he feels it is rigged.

He makes that accusation, he needs to provide some evidence, and take action.

A principled person doesn't just complain and still participate. Unless.....

[aikoaiko]

84. Unless what? Seems you're having trouble finishing your sentence.

Be careful...lest what you say be used to incriminate HRC on other issues.

[seabeyond]

95. i am not a clinton supporter. intergrity is important in my day to day life. i know it well.

and i see when someone is being assigned integrity when they have not earned it. i also see when someone is being called on intergirty when they havent earned it. integrity being so important to me, that is generally when i speak up

hence, supporter. not fan. not cheerleader, shill, follower. but supporter.

[aikoaiko]

96. Who are you saying has not earned the assignment of integrity?

[seabeyond]

99. i think we assign a hell of a lot more to sanders than reality. he is a man, a politician.

i think we take away a lot toward clinton with stories and inherent patriarchy, like she is a woman, ergo liar and a clinton at that. two decades of rw attack creating a caricature.

with clinton, i felt the same way as most on the board. hence one of the reasons i was an obama supporter. over the last handful of months, i have looked into her history and who she is and i have learned about a hell of a lot of bullshit that i allowed to color my opinion of the woman, incorrectly. i can admit that. and still i am not quite over it and supporting omalley. i am at least honest

sanders.... we have raised to such a level and i bought that, too. over the last couple months of researching, reading history and listening to the man, i have brought it to a more realistic place to who the man is.

that is what i mean about assigning integrity.

and integrity being important to me, i think it is important to do the leg work to make sure i get it as right as i cAN.

[LWolf]

14. Interesting.

“I do,” Sanders reportedly responded when asked Friday whether he agrees with former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley’s assertion that the debate system is “rigged.”

The two Democratic presidential candidates were speaking at the summer meeting of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in Minneapolis on Friday.

“This sort of rigged process has never been attempted before,” O’Malley said in his speech earlier Friday.

Interesting headline. Interesting that only one is singled out for the headline, and for your OP, despite the fact that the "rigged" statement actually originated with someone else.

Sanders previously said he would not agree to additional debates unless all of the Democratic presidential candidates participated.

But he has expressed concern with the number of debates.

“At a time when many Americans are demoralized about politics and have given up on the political process, I think it’s imperative that we have as many debates as possible,” Sanders said in a statement earlier this month. “I look forward to working with the DNC to see if we can significantly expand the proposed debate schedule."

[boston bean]

24. He believes it is rigged. He agrees with someone else who feels the same way.

Both of them can go and set up a debate if they want.

Rigged is a pretty harsh word to be using. If they truly feel that way, why are they participating in a rigged system, if they are so principled.

Most Sanders supporters don't have to worry about Hillary with regards to this, many already think she is corrupt as I have been told umpteen times. So, it should be of no surprise to BS Suporters she would would participate, when looking at if from that point of view.

I however, don't feel she is corrupt nor do I think she is participating in a "rigged" debate schedule.

[BlueCaliDem]

54. + 1000

I don't see how anyone can believe that having SIX debates is "rigging" the debates. Hillary Clinton can get her message across in six (she hasn't complained, so I'm assuming here) so why can't O'Malley and Sanders?

The word "rigged" is a poor choice. It has a negative connotation and it casts a negative light on the Democratic Party as well as the Democratic frontrunner, while dividing Democratic voters. They don't need to do the GOP-smear and divide and conquer strategy for them.

He's promised that he won't run as a spoiler...so I'm hoping he keeps his word because I don't see how he can win the Democratic nomination without a single endorsement from Dems in Congress and States.

[seabeyond]

75. i do believe we need to get them going sooner. i am good with 6. i need 3. i compromise, lol

but i would like to see one now, one in like three weeks... and keep it going like that until late january and be done. before the elections. now... there might be reasons i do not see, but i want to hear the candidates sooner.

[Armstead]

15. Bernie Sanders has always been a chickenshit

He has never acted on principle. He just takes the easy way out and is afraid to ever speak his mind, or take an unpopular stand.

I suppose I should add this:

[boston bean]

16. Anyone can talk. He has a chance here to take a principled stand.

Buck the corrupt, rigged DNC and take it to them where it counts.

But no, he will just complain and participate in what he feels is a rigged process.

In other words, talk is cheap.

[Armstead]

25. Yes talk is cheap.

And your bullshit on this just devalued it further.

[boston bean]

27. I know sometimes it is difficult to hear someone give an opinion.

I live with it, you can too, believe me.

[Armstead]

30. Hey, you gave an opinion. I gave my opinion of it.

Don't worry. After 14 years as a member of DU, I'm pretty confident I can live with that.

[seabeyond]

21. i can stand up and say all kinds of shit that will make people happy and feel warm all over.

the point?

[Armstead]

28. The point is that the OP is just snarky bullshit

Nothing deeper than that

[seabeyond]

40. mmm. i see more. it is something i have been considering

while weighing the three candidates. so it goes along the line of a very important consideration i have choosing a pres candidate. actually i think omalley is the most successful at can do. i want can do. i think clinton comes in second.

so ya. i think it important in discussion about our primaries.

i think this is really where sanders lacks.

after getting to know the man and his history, i see his role more in getting a grass movement going state by state and over time, taking states and doing his part in that manner. not as pres

so ya... what bb is saying works in the way i have been processing this primary with three very good candidates that i can value for their strengths. or what i see their strengths as.

[PatrickforO]

32. OK Boston, but forgive me if I point out that your post may be a little self serving in that

you support Clinton. So, if Bernie takes your dare, and then gets excluded from the official Dem debates, then it works to the advantage of your candidate.

Nice try, though.

[djean111]

37. As if that would not be met with howls and shrieks of outrage because Bernie "did not follow the

rules!!!!!!".

I am now officially ashamed, on a couple of levels, that I voted for Hillary when she pledged to not campaign in Florida, but did so anyway, in 2008. I felt the rules were unfair. Funny how that works.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Democratic_primary,_2008

[boston bean]

38. Wow, Hillary bucked the DNC! Why doesn't Bernie? nt

[djean111]

48. Oh, my, as if you are not salivating at the thought of Bernie being tossed out of the Dem

primaries for whatever reason.

Moot point anyway - I don't think Bernie is taking sarcastic advice from Hillary supporters. So there's that.

[boston bean]

59. I'm not salivating about that. I'm pretty pissed he is saying a process he is

participating in to get elected to President of the United States is rigged.

[djean111]

68. I think he is correct. As is Martin O'Malley.

In any event, I am going to vote for Bernie, and you are going to vote for Hillary. It's all good, unless you actually believe that you being pissed off would affect anyone's vote.

[boston bean]

70. You feel ok with his words regarding this, that is fine.

I on the other hand, and many others that actually belong to the party he is running in, don't appreciate the accusation of something being "rigged".

He should have never said it, and neither should have O'Malley.

If they really believe that, they have a duty to show some evidence and action (beyond a speech) to make sure it is not rigged for the American people who participate.

[djean111]

79. Yep. I am good. Thanks for the permission.

I "actually belong to the party he is running in", too, and feel Bernie is closer to being what I consider to be a Democrat (besides the D in the jersey) than an awful lot us "Democrats". Maybe it is because I live in Florida and see more of DWS' GOP-loving shenanigans than others do. Like refusing to help Dem candidates campaign because she is BFFs with their GOP opponents. Stuff like that.

If you don't think things like that make the party look rigged, that is fine.

[boston bean]

83. I wasn't giving permission. But you know that.

If you think the debates are rigged, maybe something ought to be done about that.

What are some actions you think Bernie ought to take to be sure the process isn't rigged?

A principled politician, for sure, would do something, no?

Maybe provide some evidence in those press conferences and speeches he gives to thousands of people?

Buck the rigged system?
Not participate in the rigged system?

[djean111]

98. The thing is, being sarcastic to me does not accomplish anything, and being sarcastic towards

Bernie does not accomplish anything, either. It would be ludicrous to think that you are hoping to sway Bernie's supporters. So - with that - pointless waste of time here. 'bye!

[BainsBane]

41. Funny how the establishment is awfully convenient

When it comes to using the party structure and resources to seek the presidency.

[rhett o rick]

44. You help make it clear that Clinton is afraid of debates. She is hoping to hang on to

her poll leads without exposing herself to being questioned about her baggage. Sad to see Democrats willing to bypass the democratic process just because it helps their candidate.

[boston bean]

47. oh, that's what I did.... lol

[rhett o rick]

53. Why do you seem to avoid posting in threads pertaining to actual issues?

There are lots of them. If you support fracking, be brave and speak out. Same for NSA/CIA domestic spying and the Patriot Act.

[boston bean]

58. How's about this? I'll post what I like.

You can feel free to do the same.

[sheshe2]

71. "You help make it clear that Clinton is afraid of debates.

To funny, Rhett. Nice try.

[sheshe2]

74. Thanks bb...

KnR....gotta run~

[still_one]

76. strategically you go through at least the first couple of debates before you do that

[AuntPatsy]

81. Can't help bu agree

[ismnotwasm]

87. Heh!

Point..

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

88. Is that what Hillary is doing?