Saying NO ONE likes or likes working with Bernie is a lie --- Proof

[Rilgin]

Yesterday in total bad faith, one of the people who posts a lot of OP and response posts a day always bashing Bernie said it was truth and his proof was that every senator didn't bow down, jump on a soapbox and refute the statement. Well that's an exaggeration but the point should be obvious. When its pointed out that millions of people actually love and support him including some that might not even vote for him, the goal posts change and obviously its just his peers and why didn't each of them take off from their lives to jump on a soapbox..

Well today, Senator Klobucher on the debate stage disagreed with Hillarys statement and said she likes and has worked with Bernie including citing a specific issue they worked closely together on. Are you going to call her a liar because she refused to back up a total smear. Amy is Bernie's opponent too and disagrees with his issues which is fine but she does not do what the people on this site do which is lie, smear and twist every single mention of Bernie. Have concerns, disagree with his issues, but do not lie. This isthe problem with Hillary's comments. If she had said, I am slightly biased because I just got out of a contentious election with him or even said she doesn't like him that would be fine. Instead she said NOONE likes him. Not even SOME PEOPLE. Hillary is definitely entitled to her opinion of Bernie and can even not want him to be the Democratic candidate. However, she did not do that. She smeared him

Now to get to more proof than Amy.

Bernie was one of the founders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus which is composed of Bernie's Peers .

Here are the other founding members U.S. Representatives Ron Dellums (D-CA), Lane Evans (D-IL), Thomas Andrews (D-ME), Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

Obviously these people wanted to work with him. To forestall attacks. Theyse six didn't like working with him and didn't like him so much that they made him the Chairman of the caucus. After that many more members of Congress joined a caucus headed by Bernie Sanders a person NOONE of them liked or wanted to work with including …Major Owens (D-NY), Nydia Velázquez (D-NY), David Bonior (D-MI), Bob Filner (D-CA), __________(D-MA), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Jerry Nadler (D-NY), Patsy Mink (D-HI), George Miller (D-CA), Pete Stark (D-CA), John Olver (D-MA), and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and ___________ (D-CA).

All fine progressive democrats who according to the people on this site are "NOONE". So obviously if they are to avoid being NOONE, they must have recognized pretty fast that they actually didn't like him and dont like working with him and history proves you are again correct. These fine democratic peers disliked Bernie so much that they made him chairman the next 7 years until he joined the Senate. Oh I forgot a few names Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank.

Hillary herself worked with Bernie and honestly thanked him for his hard work working with HER on health care. The recent problem with Hillary's comments are not that she said something but the fact that she deliberately exaggerated or lied with the purpose of smearing a leading candidate who may win the Primaries. If so, we need unity and popping in to smear someone with a lie (see above proofs that the use of NOONE is a lie). Its like thinking that everything your divorced friend says about his or her ex-spouse is 100% the truth. If you can not see that the use of NOONE turns something that is her experience and emotional belief into a total smear, you are being inauthentic.

So I hope that I do not see this lie again but know that is a false hope because there are many people on this site who may honestly be concerned that he is not electable and may honestly not like his policies vs some other candidate but all they actually do is lie and smear against him and people who like him, creating division in the Democratic Party. Support your own candidate, don't tear down others.

[dchill]

1. K&R. Divisiveness is so unbecoming and counterproductive.

[JoeOtterbein]

2. K n R ! Thanks for posting!

I like Bernie!

[apcalc]

3. Time to give it a rest. We have BIG FISH to fry.

[cwydro]

4. And you're still undecided, eh?

Alrighty then.

[Rilgin]

8. Actually I support Warren this Primary season. I just hate the attacks on one of our candidates NT.

[cwydro]

10. I understand that.

Seems to be a group, supporters of two specific candidates, who regularly bash the others.

Gets tedious actually.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

5. Get thee to the greatest page

Glad for this post .

[George II]

6. No it isn't.

[StevieM]

7. Your argument goes off the rails with the word "recent."

She gave a series of interviews over the course of a long period of time. I believe her comments were made in 2018, which was before Bernie even became a candidate for president. So they couldn't have been made with the intention of derailing his campaign, since there was no campaign to derail.

The issue with Bernie isn't if he can occasionally make a friend. The issue is that he wants to spend all his time fighting for things that don't even come close to having the votes to pass.

[Rilgin]

11. Your criticism is your opinion and fine and fair discussion.

Everyone likes their own candidate for some reason or other. I have my own concerns about Bernie as I do about each candidate but also like parts of all our candidates. And I will not attack your choice or even your opinion because you are expressing your concern which is legitimate debate. Even your slight snark saying "occasionally make a friend" is forgiveable given the directness of my OP but understand that NOONE was an attack and a smear.

And in this regard, the smear was recently. Her original statement was from 2018 but she also recently voluntarily affirmed by her after which she ADDED to them. I think you seem honest. Do you think her attacks are divisive or unifying. If he is not the primary winner will it help the winner unify or will young people feel totally disrespected. And if he is the candidate, do you think it helps him beat trump to have her inflame her supporters who already feel anger.

[StevieM]

13. I think you have to remember two things.

First, HRC was the Democratic candidate during what I call the Second McCarthy Era. She was swift boated into oblivion. Since then, the media has totally piled on her. 100 percent of her comments have been declared to be controversial. No matter what she says, if she says anything at all, it will be declared to have been wrong and shameful. Under those circumstances it is hard to avoid making controversial comments, because your filter is hopelessly damaged, through no fault of your own.

Second, Bernie has repeatedly nullified her victory over him and declared her a cheater. Unlike every other major party nominee in history, Hillary alone is said to not have deserved to win, or to have been the rightful nominee of her party. The claim of a rigged system is nonsense, but Bernie has never stopped pushing it. He usually doesn't need to do it himself, since there are so many other people who have done it for him. But it is nonsense. And it has no doubt been painful and humiliating towards her, just as it was designed to be. You can't expect her to completely erase that from her thought processes moving forward.

[Rilgin]

17. Bernie does not address her these days. She attacked him

If you read my post I acknowledge exactly what you are saying. She could have said, "I had a contentious election with him and don't like him". Instead she smeared him when what we need is unity. She has a lot of supporters and people who love her. See what I just said. However what she said was a flat out smear and was really bad for our real effort to get rid of Trump. And one reason is that it riles up those feelings amongst her supporters from 2016 rather than help them unify. Is that not exactly her criticism of Bernie in 2016?

[StevieM]

23. Bernie doesn't need to attack her.

He leveled his attacks, they were treated as if they were true, and then it was dropped with his version of history being treated as undeniably accurate.

I don't think HRC is riling up anyone. In the first place, she was swift boated into oblivion. She went down hard in the Second McCarthy Era, and isn't going to influence too many people. In the second place, this story was never something Bernie had to deal with. It started out as a negative Hillary story on day one. It almost reminds me of all her so-called "attacks that backfired" from the 2008 race, that were never anything Obama had to deal with, but were from the beginning something Hillary was forced to deal with.

I am not sure how bad a "smear" this is. I can't imagine anyone cares about how popular a Washington politician is with his colleagues. The only reason we are talking about this was so that the media could provide another opportunity for people to attack HRC.

Hillary's criticism of Bernie from 2016 is very different. First, it is about the fact that he stayed in the race for a month after he lost, and kept telling his supporters that she was not a fairly victorious nominee. Second, he portrayed her as a politician who was in it for herself, even to enrich herself. It was a vicious line of attack, and one that benefited the GOP greatly when they took that line over in the Fall campaign.

If Bernie is the nominee then I am sure Hillary will immediately endorse him and encourage everyone to support him completely.

[Rilgin]

27. Did you see the posts yesterday. Of course it riled her supporters up.

She said it to prevent Bernie from winning. She said that. She certainly can have that opinion but her method is not kosher. She made an exaggerated divisive smear that her supporters echoed in post after post. Just go to the main page. You will find few threads attacking other candidates (other than Trump) and many attacking Bernie.

What did she expect if she says about a popular leading candidate that no one will work with him despite the fact that she worked with him pretty closely on health care. You know I don't criticize her own dislike or antagonism to Bernie. He was her opponent in an election she lost. I am sure she has an opinion. However, it is just an opinion and not the truth. It is colored by her emotions. Pushing it out to her supporters at this point in an exaggerated way is a smear and divisive. Again, it would be great if she could take her own advice and lower the hatred of those who totally identified with her in 2016 and blamed Bernie. If he is the candidate he will need those voters to beat Trump. If he is not, it will be harder to push sometime voters (not the political junkies who inhabit sites like this) who feel dissed by gangs who say their support for Bernie is (name your own insult).

Unite don't divide. Don't post smears against the candidates like yesterday. Unify.

[StevieM]

29. I'm a hardcore Clinton supporter, as hardcore as it gets, and I wasn't riled up.

I can't speak for everyone, but it seems like most people were bored by the story. To whatever extent anybody listened, as I said, it started out as a negative Hillary story on day one. This isn't something that Bernie is being seriously forced to contend with, it is one more thing that Hillary is being forced to contend with.

In the end it won't matter or be relevant if Bernie is the candidate. Everyone will support him fully, including Hillary.

[ehrnst]

36. Unify? Like what you were saying about that other poster on DU in the OP?

[ehrnst]

40. Which posts? You keep referencing "posts yesterday," in your rants and don't provide any links to

them to back up your claims that they were "lies."

[democrattotheend]

30. He didn't attack her when given the opportunity

At least not tonight - he just said it was the past and was eager to move on. Has he said anything negative about her in 2020 in response to her recent comments?

[Bumperstickers]

9. Klobucher may be positioning herselself for a Sanders presidency

I do not think there would be any chance in the world she makes that statement 4 yrs ago after Clinton said whay she did.

[Rilgin]

14. You think she was lying about working closely with him on an issue?

She said it in a genuine way with a smile. She didn't say she was best friends with him but said she likes and works with him closely.

According to the attack team yesterday it was impossible for her to have worked with him closely. It is the exaggeration only in the purposes of a smear and echo chamber on something that they all know better that should not be part of our discourse as Democrats.

I showed that people have worked with him for years. And I am sure that some don't like him but its pretty obvious that more like him and its probably the same proportion as every candidate in terms of people likeing or disliking them. I also respect but don't agree with some arguments on electability or policies. But such concerns are not unique or a fact to Bernie. All of the candidates have arguments against their electability and have problems if you want to focus on it. The real point is support your candidate don't bash other candidates.

[sheshe2]

22. Hmm

Everyone tells me my Senator Warren and Bern are the best of best of buddies is gone. They are not. They work together, that is all. After calling her a liar the other night, what ever was there is gone. They are civil to each other and that is all.

Warren does it with a smile as well as Amy, does not mean it is genuine. Women learned long ago how to grin and bear it in front of company. Doesn't make it true that they are best buds!

[ehrnst]

39. Yes, what some people deride as distracting "pleasantries" are the skills of

a diplomat, which our POTUS must be.

Griping about people wanting them to remember birthdays, not so much.

[sheshe2]

42. We need those skills now more than ever.

Yes, what some people deride as distracting "pleasantries" are the skills of

a diplomat, which our POTUS must be.

That is the question that I had wished was asked of every candidate. How are you going to correct our standing at home and with allies abroad? How are you going to clean up this mess? Will you face it head on? Or just launch a speech?

This is one of the things that must be addressed on day one. I do not want any candidate to return immediately to the bully pulpit/ campaign trail to sell their ideas. There are many wrongs that need to be corrected for us to be a safe nation. Let's start with the concentration camps for immigrants, start funding CDC, we have a health issue here with the new virus....and wait for it, we are talking about more camps being built by those deemed contagious. Forget looking for a cure. LOCK THEM UP. You see a pattern here? I do.

[ehrnst]

38. Working with someone is not the same as thinking they are good to work with.

Or even liking working with them.

Also, Hillary is a pleasant, considerate person who writes thank you notes to people she works with. She smiles.

Some dismiss that as "pleasantries," and that those are a distraction from working on progressive issues.

I imagine that's one reason why so many of her colleagues in the Senate, and other progressives who have worked closely with her endorsed her run for POTUS. Their firsthand experience with her emotional intelligence, pleasant personality, her ability to listen closely - and not just wait for someone to pause so she can lecture them, her ability to change her mind when she gets new data, grace under pressure, and deep intellect were among the other reasons she is so liked and respected by her colleagues.

I don't think that a liar would get that kind of universal endorsement from her colleagues.

[myohmy2]

12. "Support your own candidate, don't tear down others."

...

[ehrnst]

32. ... the people who need to hear this....

Link to tweet

[58Sunliner]

15. Personally, I have been critical of what I see as his over-reach and his surrogates.

I don't dislike Bernie, but I do see what I characterize as potential issues as president. And that is what this race is all about. I agree that framing someone as unlikable is ultimately not very useful if the purpose is to draw attention to his deficits as a candidate. It would be nice if it didn't matter. But the effectiveness of a president is based on being able to be comfortable in a variety of relationships, the ability to empathize and compromise. Those are not, from all appearances, his strengths. Especially since his stated goals are Bernie or bust. Want to seem likable? Don't hire surrogates who attack falsely and unnecessarily. Stop trying to destroy the Dem party and then use it for your own gain. Because if we think somehow that isn't Bernie at some level, we're in denial. It's already evident to many that it is part of his persona and it is unlikable. In many ways his actions are petulant and self serving.

[Rilgin]

19. His stated goals are Not Bernie or Bust. Where is that from?

Some of his supporters may think or post that and certainly his detractors but not from him.

I posted proof if you are open. You say it is not his strength. He is the most popular senator in the country in his state. He has been the most popular politician or close for a few years and I just showed, that his caucus was full of highly respected Democrats who obviously like him or they wouldn't have joined or would not have had him chairman.

And it is easy to find footage and proof that Hillary herself worked with him and liked him before they ran against each other.

You say it is evident to many that is part of his persona. It is only because you don't like him and I will agree. People who don't like a person will say that person is not likeable. Is that kind of like looking in a mirror?

[58Sunliner]

31. Bernie is entrenched ideologically.

And it isn't a bad set of ideals, but when you have blinders on, to the point where you have no plan to accomplish said goals you are less tethered to reality and fight to maintain a fantasy. Don Quixote. Guess who the savior is in the center of his ideals? Bernie. Can you truly be pragmatic and open to compromise if you are committed to the ideal of yourself, and what it gives you. Psychology is definitely a factor in how people behave, what motivates them. If Bernie had surrogates who did not post memes/say things that are just pure propaganda, based on lies and meant to deceive, he would look like he is aligned with his ideals, which are health care for everyone, etc... That type of ideal evokes a sense of caring, compassion and equanimity. Using a lying tool does not, it is inconsistent. Bernie chose those people knowing who they have been. Using people like that is classic passive-aggressive. Trying to dismiss the actions to the media is also classic denial, which is part of being passive-aggressive. The lies are totally unnecessary to his stated goals.
As for Bernie's stated goals-if he was truly committed to them, he would have a realistic plan to implement them. He apparently doesn't. They may not be that important after all.
I am sure Bernie has been a good senator for his state and more effective than Don Quixote. I am sure that many people like him and that he has qualities that are likable. I don't dislike Bernie-I distrust him.

[ehrnst]

41. Good interpersonal skills are a very important part of being an effective POTUS.

We've seen all too well what the lack of them leads to.

[Rilgin]

45. Your View is better since you note that it is your personal opinion.

I will give you a counter view. The concept of intransigence and the inability to work with people is exactly the attacks on Bernie I am responding to.

I will give you some counter facts. This ideological unpragmatic person voted for Obamacare. So obviously his full on support for Single Payer Medicare for all did not prevent him from compromising his vision for an immediate good for some people. That is actually his history of working with people.

The posting of memes by surrogates and supporters is exactly what I object to. All campaigns not just Bernies. The difference is that I do not see only one campaign participating. In addition, the concept that a candidate can control his or her supporters opinions, posts and arguments is pretty scary to me. The attacks on Bernie have been pretty inauthentic and based on in your words lies. This thread started from my reaction to someone supporting another candidate supporting a claim of Hillary's that "Noone" likes or likes to work for him. I posted proof that this is just a lie with ulterior motives. The goal posts have changed to some or most. However, he was the chairman of the progressive caucus for years and people joined and worked with him. The goal post changed to people work with people they don't like which implies they have to work with him. He was an independant from Vermont. He could do nothing for people who work with him at the time. He was not in charge of the money spigot or assignments. People worked with him obviously because the wanted to work with him. And people do not want to work with people who they think don't work well with others unless they are forced too --- their boss or someone who has something they need. For Bernie, the progressive caucus made him Chairman 8 years in a row even though he had no institutional power. This is certainly proof that his caucus wanted to work with him because they actually liked and wanted to work with him.

I will not even answer those who just want to move goalposts. However, your post is slightly different, it gives your personal reasons which are fine. We should distrust all politicians. I just hope you can add some distrust into the image the Bernie attackers try to paint of Bernie and his supporters. To every supporter, their own candidate is the victim of scurrilous attacks by the other candidate and the other candidates supporters. They view their own attacks as justified because they are "true" about that candidate or supporter group and the attacks against their favored candidate or his or her supporters as utotally unfair or untrue. I actually support Warren in this primary for a few reasons. However, I love Bernie and supported him in the last election. However, despite having a wife, 2 daughters, voting for 2 women senators, 1 woman congressman and working for 1 female local supervisor, I was attacked by a poster as being sexist or misogynist. Should I ascribe that attack to every person who argued against Bernie as a candidate. No! But my emotions made me want to and I am sure in some posts I made equally unfair attacks. People are emotional and supporters attack other campaigns for both good and bad reasons and with good and bad attacks. I am trying this primary to not attack any candidate or specific group but only to defend candidates I like when I think an attack is unfair. Bernie seems to get his share of unfair attacks. Warren luckily doesn't.

If you step back from the fray just a little, you might recognize that the Bernie detractors do some of the same thing they accuse Bernie and his supporters of doing. Primaries are emotional and it would be better for us to beat Trump if we tailed down the unfair rhetoric and understand that every campaign has a swarm that attacks every other candidate or candidate's supporters unfairly. Nor can campaigns exactly control their most unruly supporters.

[UniteFightBack]

16. Ok maybe it's not 'everyone'....it's most people then. nt

[Rilgin]

20. So yesterday when I saw post after post echoing the word NOONE why no reasonable post.

And it is not even most. You know that. People who don't like a person will always say that a person is unlikeable. Just stick with YOU don't like him. That is an opinion and absolutely unassailable since you own your own opinions.

[UniteFightBack]

21. I don't hate Bernie...I think he is a wonderful advocate. But c'mon we all know the people

that are difficult to work with...we may not 'hate them'...but we aren't crazy about working with them.

[Rilgin]

24. Did not know you know Bernie :)

Do you think everyone likes every one of the candidates on the stage now? He is just a person with people who like him and who don't. Most of the dislike is from 2016 before which he was very liked by most people on DU because he is generally likeable. In 2016 he ran for president and every contested election divides people. The problem is when you go from I don't like someone to thinking that is most people or even more people than not especially one you don't know.

Everyone including me has thoughts that If I don't like someone no one should or even no one does. I try to resist that and would urge you to consider that maybe you are the minority and that many people in the country love him and his peers like him in the same proportion that they like every other peer. They may not all be best friends but maybe his peers respect and like him the same way they like and respect other politicians that they agree with sometimes and sometimes don't.

[UniteFightBack]

25. The bottom line is I believe Hillary. nt

[ehrnst]

34. HRC was talking about people who work with him.

And others who worked with him have been making that same observation about him for years.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287465223

https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/anger-management-sanders-fights-for-employees-except-his-own/Content?oid=2834657

And why do you think that Bernie himself was trying to make not being interested in "pleasantries" a bonus, if it wasn't something that he himself sees in himself?

Link to tweet

[Uncle Joe]

18. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread Rilgin.

[marlakay]

26. I thought it was great Biden and Amy hugged him

I really felt a few times tonight they tried hard to stay unified.

Like when they tried to get Pete to say something about Biden and he refused and stuck up for him.

[Rilgin]

28. Agree totally. Was great.

[ehrnst]

33. Well, she's not the first one to make this observation about working with Sanders.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287465223

https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/anger-management-sanders-fights-for-employees-except-his-own/Content?oid=2834657

Mickey Hirten, the editor of the Burlington Free Press when Sanders was mayor has talked about what people in Burlington thought of working with him, and it does line up with HRC's observation of him in the Senate later on in his career.

HRC had the backing of most of her Senate colleagues for her 2016 run, which certainly wouldn't have been because she lied about people, or was a pain to work with.

And why would Bernie be trying to make "not being interested in pleasantries" a bonus, if he wasn't aware of how he's perceived by those who work closely with him? In his own words:

Link to tweet

And I'm not seeing his Senate colleagues rushing to contradict Hillary, other than Amy Klobuchar.

Maybe you have a link?

[George II]

37. The person who said it, who you didn't name, wasn't lying.

[lapucelle]

43. Arguing from an atypical example is a tactic that often backfires

by highlighting the validity of the original claim. There's something so sad about clinging to the exception to a claim in an attempt to argue that the claim itself is invalid.

And if I were trying to convince anyone that colleagues like working with the career career politician, I wouldn't use Barney Frank to make the case.

[Gothmog]

44. What are sanders' legislative accomplishments plishments?

If sanders is so easy to work with, what major legislation did sanders get adopted? Renaming post offices do not count as major legislation