Hillary booed at Sanders rally tonight.

[RandySF]

Link to tweet

?s=20

Nick Corasaniti
@NYTnickc
·
6h
Cynthia Nixon, introducing
@BernieSanders
tonight in Durham, talks 2016 and her support of Hillary Clinton.

Loud boos start to rain down.

Nixon stops them: “oh no, oh no, we’re not going to do that here.”

[DURHAM D]

1. Guess Cynthia didn't notice Michael, Nina and Susan

over on the side joining in.

[Still In Wisconsin]

2. "we're not going to do that here." Oh, but they are, Cynthia...

they're Berners. It's Bernie, or else they hold their breath and stomp their feet and vote for Jill Stein again... or write in Bernie!

[Gravitycollapse]

3. 90% of Sanders supporters voted for Clinton in 2016. Get another talking point.

[Still In Wisconsin]

4. actually you're being extremely disingenuous...

10% of Berners actually voted for Donald J. Trump:

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds

Many many more voted for JILL FUCKING STEIN, wrote in Burnie, or didn't vote at all.

Get a new trope.

[Cha]

6. Precisely.. Thank You!

[Gravitycollapse]

7. How you interpret that speaks to your biases.

Sanders was popular among independents, even pulling in some conservative voters. Those voters would never have supported Clinton regardless of who challenged her in the primaries. It was not "Bernie Bros" but simple independents who shifted out or back during the general.

[Still In Wisconsin]

10. Oh good God gimme a break.

The old, "I voted for Burnie because I'm a conservative, so then I voted for Trump" trope. As if that proves your point. It proves MY point! Bernie Bros want to "burn it all down and start over," much like the MAGAts. Birds of a feather.

[Gravitycollapse]

22. I'm talking about conservative independents (or just independents generally)

For those people, what mattered most was having an outsider. When an establishment candidate won, they swung either back to Trump or Stein.

I'm not justifying it. But I'm pointing out that truly left-aligned (and Democratic) Sanders supporters did vote for Clinton.

Your argument is that somehow Sanders (as an idea or ideology) drove voters away from Clinton. The facts prove you wrong. The vast majority of Sanders supporters went on to vote for Clinton. Those who did not were never going to vote for her anyway. It had nothing to do with Bernie.

[Still In Wisconsin]

26. TEN. PERCENT. OF. SANDERS. VOTERS. ACTUALLY. VOTED. FOR. TRUMP.

Ten percent of all Berners got into that booth and voted for the orange anus. Let that sink in.

[Gravitycollapse]

27. Go back and read what I wrote earlier. Those voters were never voting for Clinton.

They do not represent Sanders as a candidate or leader. He went on to endorse Clinton when it counted most and so did the vast majority of his supporters. Stop smearing him. It's getting ridiculous and, honestly, is hurting the party.

[lapucelle]

73. Do you have any data to support that speculation? N/T

[cherryinpa]

84. Are we really going there?

Just to ensure I get the context right; I support Biden unequivocally, and if he doesn't make it then I'm with Amy. But I do wonder if it is sensible for us to condemn Bernie and his supporters just because of the small minority who didn't vote for Hillary.

Are we really saying its right to condemn the 90% just because of the 10%?

Personally, I feel that is wrong.

The young get over-excited and open their mouths at the wrong time, it is natural just like hot gasses escaping boiling water.

Lets not make it a bigger deal than it is.

[lapucelle]

94. Rather than worry about getting the "context" correct,

worry about getting the facts correct More than 25% of BS voters did not vote for the Democratic nominee in 2016. The number who switched over and voted directly for Trump exceeded the Republican margin of victory in MI, WI, and PA.

[cherryinpa]

95. Cool

OK, so using your facts:

The proposition changes to let's condemn 75% of Bernie supporters based on the acts of the 25%.

Does that make it better? Mathematically, yes and sure anger feels good in the short-term but in the long term it can tear you apart.

Rather than anger at what happened in the past moving on, inclusiveness in the present will help us defeat the idiot in the Whitehouse.

As a Biden supporter I'm more focussed on those 75% than the 25%.

[lapucelle]

96. You need a new talking point. I'm not condeming anyone. I'm stating facts. N/T

[mcar]

99. THIS!

[sheshe2]

154. cherryinpa

cherryinpa
84. Are we really going there?

snip


The young get over-excited and open their mouths at the wrong time, it is natural just like hot gasses escaping boiling water.

Lets not make it a bigger deal than it is.

Well Nina Turner, Bri Bri, Siorta, Michael Moore and Sarandon to name a few are not young. Three of which have high positions on the Bernie campaign. They all voted for Stein.

[not_the_one]

177. Nina Turner, Bri Bri, Siorta, Michael Moore and Sarandon

are more like methane escaping my anal orifice....

[radical noodle]

138. No he didn't endorse when it counted the most

That would have happened before the convention and he wouldn't have condoned the atrocious behavior his supporters displayed there.

[Spider Jerusalem]

64. And 25% of Hillary 2008 voters voted for John McCain. Do you have a point?

[lapucelle]

75. ...

Link to tweet

[Spider Jerusalem]

77. Which doesn't change the essential facts

Obama won in part because of higher African-American turnout. Due to a combination of factors including less enthusiasm for Hillary and voter suppresssion in key states including Wisconsin African-American turnout was down in 2016 compared to 2008 (which isn't even getting into the tactical and strategic errors committed by the Clinton campaign in not investing resources in places like Wisconsin and Michigan because of complacency and a belief that the "blue wall" would hold). You can't blame those things on Sanders supporters.

[lapucelle]

80. The essential fact is that the number of BS to Trump voters exceeded

the Trump margin of victory in PA, WI, and MI. It's documented in the data.

https://dataverse.harvard.edu/file.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/GDF6Z0/RK0ONG&version=4.0

Your speculation as to

[lapucelle]

163. Those are not facts. Those are opinions. N/T

[Spider Jerusalem]

165. It's a fact that African American turnout was down in 2016.

It's also a fact that more people were turned away at the polls on election day in Wisconsin than Trump's margin of victory (to name just one state that's seen extensive voter-suppression efforts by the GOP).

[lapucelle]

166. The conclusions you draw based on the data are opinions, not facts. N/T

[Spider Jerusalem]

167. So are you seriously going to argue that Trump would've won Wisconsin without voter suppression?

Or that Trump would've won if African-American voter turnout had been at 2008 and 2012 levels? I don't really think so. You can call it an opinion if that makes you feel better, though.

[lapucelle]

169. We know for a fact that Sanders to Trump voters exceeded Trump's margin of victory in WI.

We also knew in 2016 that the the gutting of The Voting Rights Act was going to impact Democratic numbers.

That's why it was so important for the voters who were able to exercise the franchise on election day 2016 to do so wisely.

Trump would not have won WI without the Sanders to Trump voters.

That is a fact, but you can call it an opinion if it makes you feel better.

[Spider Jerusalem]

171. Which were fewer than the number of voters turned away at the polls...

or the number of 2012 Obama voters who just didn't vote at all.

[lapucelle]

173. That does not change the fact that the number of Sanders to Trump voters

in WI exceeded Trump's margin of victory.

[Spider Jerusalem]

174. Clinton lost Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania due to a number of factors.

Also the total vote in the Democratic primary in Wisconsin was 1,003,371; Clinton got 1,382,536 votes in the general election. Without the other factors Clinton would have won, so single-mindedly blaming Sanders supporters who decided to vote for Trump in the general is frankly stupid considering the other factors.

[lapucelle]

175. None of that changes the fact that the number of Sanders to Trump voters in WI, MI, and PA

exceeded Trump's margins of victory in all three states.

[Spider Jerusalem]

176. Or the fact that all those other factors had the same or greater margin.

Broken record much?

[lapucelle]

178. "What about" doesn't change the fact that the number of Sanders to Trump voters

in MI, WI, and PA exceeded Trump's margin of victory in 2016.

[StevieM]

168. She invested her resources heavily in Wisconsin and Michigan.

She had larger ground operations there than Obama did in 2012. She spent more money in advertising in those states than Obama did in 2012. The claim that she didn't is pure fiction.

And she made a few campaign stops in Michigan. She didn't hold rallies in Wisconsin because she was up by double digits. When the Comey intervention finally made Trump think he could win, the first thing he did was cancel an appearance in Wisconsin. Not that this matters, since a study by Nate Silver showed that where you made campaign stops wasn't what led to victories in certain states, as opposed to other states.

There was absolutely no complacency on Hillary's part. There was no conviction about a blue wall holding. She fought hard for every vote until the very end. People painting her this way are simply appealing to the age old sexist stereotypes of the arrogant and entitled woman.

[thesquanderer]

161. Those figures imply Sanders likely would have won in 2016 and would likely win in 2020.

Instead of looking at those defections as evidence that Bernie is a bad candidate, I see evidence that he is a good one, BECAUSE he brings in people who might not otherwise be inclined to vote for a Dem candidate, especially a mainstream moderate one.

[lapucelle]

162. Those inferences don't follow from the evidence.N/T

[thesquanderer]

164. It's not conclusive, but it's not entirely unjustified either.

If you assume the Dems who voted for Clinton against Trump in 2016 would likewise have chosen Sanders over Trump, but Sanders would have held onto the "defectors" as well, then he would have won. And his strength in the states you mentioned in particular would bode well for 2020 as well, since those are the states most in play that will make the difference.

[radical noodle]

139. Not true

Only about 10% of Hillary supporters ultimately voted for McCain, although in the weeks and months following her defeat in the primaries, the number that said they wouldn't vote for Obama was significantly higher. She worked hard to convince them otherwise and most finally saw Obama as the right vote. If 25% of Hillary supporters had not voted for Obama, he likely would not have won so overwhelmingly.

[StevieM]

170. Well said. It is time that we correct this latest talking point from TYT/Cenk Uygur.

They are determined to sell this absurd version of history, along with the claim that HRC only did 12 events for Obama and the absurd assertion that she darkened a photo of Obama while he was in African garb and then sent it to the media, starting with Matt Drudge.

[samnsara]

98. well of course!! i bet most of them have MAGA hats and they just jump from..

..one disruptive rally to another. Doesn't matter which side.. they are political mercenaries..for hire!

[JudyM]

145. Let this sink in. They may have been independents.

Because Sanders is leading among independent voters again, as in this brand new Reuters poll:

Link to tweet

[W_HAMILTON]

12. So, he pulls in people that would never vote for the Democratic nominee...

...all the while he and those supporters shit on the Democratic nominee and depress what would otherwise be Democratic voters turning out?

Even more reason Democrats should not support him for our nomination.

[Gravitycollapse]

19. Ah I see. It's okay to pull in outsiders if it's Biden but not Bernie.

I get it. The rules are different for them.

[W_HAMILTON]

24. What are you even talking about?

Biden doesn't trash the Democratic Party, nor does he encourage such a thing, nor does he "pull in outsiders" into the party that do such a thing. He is an ACTUAL Democrat, through and through -- why the hell would he want to do something to hurt the party?

Now, Sanders on the other hand...

[Gravitycollapse]

25. Sanders holds the party accountable. He wants it to do better.

And part of this accountability is building a bigger tent. Every candidates claims to do this and they succeed in their own ways. But I've seen who Sanders attracts and its drawing from a pool of true leftists who would otherwise feel disenfranchised from the Democratic party. This is good, for the party, for the country.

Again, if another candidate was doing this, they'd get universal praise. Not so for Sanders.

[Cha]

28. no he doesn't

[W_HAMILTON]

30. Oh bullshit.

A part-time Democrat that temporarily joins the party when it benefits him to do so is NOT the person to "hold the party accountable."

And all Sanders has done is turn off what would otherwise be Democratic voters and allow conservative pieces of shit like Trump to get elected through idiotic purity tests where apparently everyone is a """neoliberal corporate establishment shill""" except him.

[blue-wave]

42. Spot On!!

+1000!!!

[happybird]

45. +1 million

[krissey]

47. Right on. Exactly. Damage to Democrats now in too elections. It is not forgotten.

[madaboutharry]

58. + 10 million

Bernie has no loyalty to the Democratic Party. If we lived in a parliamentary system, he would never be running as a Democrat. He would be a permanent member of another party, as would AOC and some of her friends.

[eilen]

131. I love this post. So. Much. Truth. nt

[NurseJackie]

141. Thank you. Brilliant post! It's nothing but negativity from him...

Thank you. Brilliant post! It's nothing but negativity from him when it comes to our party and our leadership. Negativity generates apathy. Apathy discourages voter turnout. Low voter turnout gives Republicans a chance to steal the elections.

[betsuni]

150. +1

[emmaverybo]

34. Bigger tent? But one of his surrogates has said the tent should be smaller. Why do "true

leftists” have to act so deplorably? Is it too bourgeois to show some manners? If he is going to
pull in disenchanted lefties, can’t he at least control them?

[Gravitycollapse]

35. And this is where the attack narrative comes into play.

The vast majority of his supporters are not small-tent or purists. They are inspired by his call to change and would, perhaps with less enthusiasm, still support a Democrat.

There's no one really to control. Those few who create problems (and they exist in every camp) will not listen to reason.

[ehrnst]

130. Were these the same "few" that were his staffers and canvassers chanting

"Fuck Warren..Fuck Pete..." in public

Are his staffers not even going to be admonished publicly?

How about the high level staffers on stage at this event who were booing?

What message does that send to all those others?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/politics/bernie-sanders-social-media-attacks-invs/index.html

[sheshe2]

158. This says it all.

Gravitycollapse (7,677 posts)
35. And this is where the attack narrative comes into play.

The vast majority of his supporters are not small-tent or purists. They are inspired by his call to change and would, perhaps with less enthusiasm, still support a Democrat.


Still support a Democrat? Hmmm. Not another Democrat, a Democrat. Seems to me you are saying that Bernie is not a Democrat. I agree with you there.

[Skidmore]

51. Sanders has expressed

contempt for the Democratic party. He is not interested in a bigger tent nor are a portion of the people he attracts. There is no amount of sugar coating that can cover his goal of a hostile takeover of the party. This was something known in the last election and is the flip side of the Trump-Tea Party coalition. Why should Democrats stand by and let this happen?

He wasn't even a member and he still isn't. He was duplicitous about saying he would join just like he was is about releasing his tax records and medical records. Sound familiar?

I am a Democrat. I consider him a demagogue. His policies are not achievable nor does he appear to care that scorching the earth to achieve them will burn real people in the process. I don't like him or trust his judgment or words. It is my right to not like him and say so. Otherwise, we are adopting Trump's rules.

[emmaverybo]

52. Bravo. Thank you for the big and bold honesty.

[oasis]

69. Post #51 delivers the truth in a nutshell. The raw truth. nt

Let it shine, shine , shine.

[NurseJackie]

89. Yes he has... so many LIES and insults about Democrats. Denigrating and divisive....

Yes he has... so many LIES and insults about Democrats. Denigrating and divisive. I've posted many times about this in the past.

I don't like him or trust his judgment or words.

Neither do I. Neither do I. He doesn't have the temperament to be the Leader of the Free World if he can't find (or is unwilling to find) common ground with others.

[brer cat]

118. Thank you.

Excellent post, Skidmore.

[ehrnst]

119. +1000. (nt)

[musette_sf]

149. + 1

Years ago, I used to admire Sen Sanders. 2016 opened my eyes.

[betsuni]

151. +1

[lapucelle]

78. Is the big tent of Democrats too big, as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says?

Only to small minds.

Can a political party be too inclusive? Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez apparently thinks so.

In a lengthy New York magazine profile this week, the New York congresswoman responded with a groan when asked what role she might play as a member of Congress if former Vice President Joe Biden is elected president.

“Oh God,” she said of the man who has been leading the pack of her party’s hopefuls in national polls. “In any other country, Joe Biden and I would not be in the same party, but in America, we are.”

snip===================================================================

She mocked the “big tent” strategy by which candidates in both parties have tried to grow and diversify their voter appeal. “Democrats can be too big of a tent,” she said.

She even went so far as to suggest that the Congressional Progressive Caucus expel members who stray from the progressives’ party line. Other Democratic caucuses in Congress require applications, she said. But her wing will “let anybody who the cat dragged in call themselves a progressive,” she complained. “There’s no standard.”

https://www.chicagotribune.com/columns/clarence-page/ct-column-ocasio-cortez-democrats-page-20200107-bbvieuuvzfaljnihwpr2weh52a-story.html

[krissey]

39. I actually I had someone argue exactly on my FB today. We HAD to elect the non Democrat in our

Democratic party primary because none of Sanders people or Independents will ever vote for the Democrat in our Democratic party because of the DNC shenanigans. So, he was telling me, that the people that are not Democrats insist we nominate someone who is not a Democrat in our Democratic primary in order to get the vote of non Democrats.

Does that not boggle the mind.

[Amimnoch]

86. Intepretation? Data is "intepretation" now?

What he stated was actual collected, released, and public data on voting statistics from that election cycle.

Let's not devolve into Trumpish "alternate facts" kind of bullshit please. It's irrelevant if they never would have or not.. it's fact that supporters of his.. hell even current campaign leadership of his voted that way, were proud of it, have doubled down on their support and votes since then and even during the current campaign season where it's "supposed" to be as representatives/candidates of the Democratic Party.. even as they repeatedly disparage and insult those of us who are long time Democratic Party supporters.

[ehrnst]

107. So, you're saying he really doesn't bring independents into the party.

I keep hearing that's one of the reasons people need to support his nomination.

[NCProgressive]

8. +1,000,000

[Indepatriot]

11. Twice as many Sanders voters supported HRC compared to HRC voters who supported Obama.

Perhaps it was a mistake to not campaign in all 8 battleground states....

[peoli]

16. Hillary lost because of Hillary

It's that simple

[Cha]

18. Russia.

[Still In Wisconsin]

21. No, it's really not.

She ran, in my opinion, a poor campaign. But Burnie and the Burners, especially the 10% of them who fucking VOTED FOR TRUMP helped the Republicans win in many ways, not the least of which was attacking Hillary Clinton and encouraging people to vote for Jill Stein right up to the election. Get a new talking point.

[peoli]

125. Hillary had a 30 point lead on Barack Obama and lost

Because of herself

[Cha]

147. Hillary got 66 Million Votes in the General Election.

[emmaverybo]

40. Guess you forgot Russia attacked our election. No less an expert than James Clapper, former top

spy will tell you how. Republicans must love that we blame our 2016 candidate and would plot 2020 strategy around the assumption that a more left candidate would have won. So Bernie who Trump would love to run against.

How he must be laughing at us now.

Snip————————————-

Former top spy James Clapper explains how Russia swung the election to Trump
“It stretches credulity to conclude that Russian activity
didn’t swing voter decisions.”.

James Clapper served as the director of national intelligence from 2010 to 2017, and before that worked as a career intelligence officer under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

So when Clapper writes a memoir alleging that the current president of the United States is “distorting and twisting” the truth and using his power to financially benefit himself and his family, that ought to sound alarm bells.

And when he suggests that Russia very likely changed the outcome of the 2016 presidential election, we should probably listen.

https://www.vox.com/2018/5/31/17384444/james-clapper-trump-russia-mueller-2016-election

[StevieM]

53. Comey did more damage than Putin. (eom)

[emmaverybo]

61. He contributed. We do not know to what extent Russians "meddled." They certainly would have

the tech expertise to go quite deep into the numbers.

I don’t believe Comey was trying to throw the election. He tilted it. Russians tilted it. Some Bernie supporters played a role. A confluence of factors.

[StevieM]

143. I just don't agree with your assessment of Comey's actions and their results.

Regardless of his intentions, James Comey's actions were illegitimate. They were inconsistent with liberal democracy.

And I totally disagree that he only "tilted" the election. He turned the election upside down. Twice. Without Comey's illegitimate actions I think the evidence shows that Hillary would have soundly defeated Trump, all other factors notwithstanding.

[emmaverybo]

146. Ok. I need more information. I realize his action, which I believe was out of his choosing to

protect the image of the FBI over country, did influence a drop in her polls. Was he the decisive factor? Look at how much she fell behind and where. As I understand it, Cromey’s terrible choice managed to change the outcome in three states, by the same percentage in each state of her numbers vs. Trump’s.

[StevieM]

55. It is insane to say it is that simple.

Although I admit that this is the only narrative the media allows.

But her campaign was not plagues by disaster and mistakes like McGovern 72 or Dukakis 88. The media made that nonsense of after the fact.

If you eliminate James Comey's antics she would have destroyed Trump.

[mcar]

100. Just stop, please

You know your statement is not true.

[Indepatriot]

17. So, if the Packers were in a Superbowl, and decided to sit out the last 7 minutes of the game,

who would you blame their loss on? To say her campaign was fatally inept would be the understatement of the decade.

[Still In Wisconsin]

23. I would blame Mike Holmgren, because that actually happened in 1997.

Bernie hurt Hillary and helped Trump. Hell, I'll bet the old bastard probably voted for Stein in the general election. That's just the kind of person Bernie is. It's all about him.

[Indepatriot]

31. By that logic, it would surely be HRC's advisory staff, who answer to her, who are to blame....

Did Sanders , at any point, lie about Clinton's record, or anything else about her? Cause if the truth "hurts" that sure as hell ain't Bernie's fault. And, by the way, last time I checked, it's the candidate's job to win over voters to gain support, and she did a terrible job at that. I'm kind of shocked that a Wisconsin resident could be so cavalier regarding her failure to come to your state to make her case. She did come to California, a state she would win by double digits, close to a dozen times for Hollywood and Silicon Valley fundraisers...

[fleabiscuit]

50. She gave that job to Sanders. It was a poor hire.

But one has to work at what they have.

[Indepatriot]

142. It was her job, no one else. She had plenty of time for Hollywood and Silicon Valley

Just not enough for the plebes in Wisconsin.

[emmaverybo]

56. Trump doesn't believe the Russians attacked us either.

[octoberlib]

93. Speaking of Jill Stein, Rick Wilson wrote in his book Running Against the Devil that

Republican consultants in close races will hire some hipster to run as a Green party candidate to pull votes away from the Democrat. Republicans pay the candidate to run and finance the campaign.

[True Blue American]

54. Hillary won by

Last edited Tue Feb 11, 2020, 09:20 AM - Edit history (1)

2.7 million votes. Trump managed to eck out electoral votes by 70,000 and lots of Russian propaganda in the 3 rust belt states where people still blame Unions for job losses instead of the true culprits, greedy CEO’s and share holders.

[mcar]

102. And more BS supporters in those 3 states voted for IMPOTUS

than the margin of "victory." More idiots voted for Stein than the margin of "victory."

[True Blue American]

103. I agree!

They sure did!

[Cha]

179. What about doesn't work.

[blue-wave]

32. Thanks for this!!

I alluded to this fact in a comment a while back and it was deleted. Thanks for the back-up link.

10%? Hmmm, if they would have voted, just some of them, for Hillary just maybe.........? Ya think? As the article in the link states: "potentially enough to have handed Hillary Clinton those states (and the presidency)."

[Rilgin]

65. There were other groups of democrats who did not turn out in 2016. But you will not blame them.

Understand, I think no voter owes their vote to any candidate. I think if a candidate loses, its that candidates own fault and sometimes its not even their faut..

Seemingly you and this thread want to say that it is a group of peoples fault because the candidate did not give them a reason to vote. Then you seem to blame Bernie for someone else (not Bernie himself) not voting for her despite the fact that Bernie's convention speech said we must vote for her and he campaigned afterwards for her.. You seem think he has mind control over people or should have taken a shotgun to them. As has been pointed out over and over, it is usual in a contested primary for sets of voters to have hard feelings and sit out when their candidates win. Bernie's supporters who sat out or voted Stein are less than the average in such contested primaries historically and less than Hillary supporters sitting out voting for Obama.

Now the real sensitive part. If Bernie's supporters are at fault, lets see you blame other groups who did not turn out. See article on turnout in Black America in 2016 below. The second article is about the drop in Black Voter turnout in the Midwest which Hillary lost. I don't think you will blame black America for not voting for Hillary either in numbers that would mandated a win for her.

I don't think you will blame them even though "if they would have voted, just some of them, for Hillary just maybe l.....? Ya think"" quoting you directly.

Now lets see if you apply your logic to an important but other part of the Democratic Base. I dont think you will. And to be clear, I do not think you should. You should just stop blaming Bernie supporters. We all need to support each other and to maximize the voter turn out by not attacking each others candidates and supporters.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/12/black-voter-turnout-fell-in-2016-even-as-a-record-number-of-americans-cast-ballots/

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/study-black-voters-2016-election-trump-hillary-wisconsin

[blue-wave]

159. Wow! You miss the entire point

10% of Bernie primary voters actually voted for Trump in the general election. They voted for Trump!!!!!! Not turning out to vote and turning out to vote but voting AGAINST the Democratic nominee (for Trump) are two different animals. They most probably lost the election for Hillary.

[Rilgin]

160. No. You missed the point.

The point is do not attack supporters of a democratic candidate to add disunity. We need to unify not to disunify. And accusing a candidate's supporters of being responsible for every other supporter then pointing to something you don't like is a disunifying tactic.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the "10 Percent" would ever have voted for a democrat other than Bernie or ever voted for Hillary. They were not Hillary Voters in the end and probably not Hillary voters in the beginning, middle and sub middle. Every contested primary has disaffected voters. Lots of Hillary Voters voted Mccain rather than Obama. The 10% voting for Trump or not voting did not cost Hillary the election because they were not her voters to begin with or if they were possibly Hillary voters she did not win them.. Trump voters are wrong and hopefully most see the error now and we can beat Trump handily with any of our fine candidates.

However, you blame one group of voters only. Not non voters and not a large mass of voters who we know voted democratic and then didn't. You then further blame Bernie and all Bernie voters for those people who didn't vote for Hillary but voted Bernie in the Primary. Voting blocs are very complicated. It was a bad election year for a well known democratic establishment candidate who had historic net unfavorable whether deserved or undeserved. It is clear the Midwest did not trust the democratic establishment candidate, they did not vote for her and turn out was down. The disaffection for Hillary shown in the low democratic turnout was in both Black and white groups and shown by Bernie's ability to go from unknown to winning states in a single year.


Now for some historic facts applied to your argument (one I do not ascribe to). Black Voters voted in mass in 2008 for Obama against Hillary. They didn't vote in large numbers for Clinton in 2016 including in the Midwest. Some of them probably even heavens alive voted for Trump although probably a small number. But you don't want to look at that cause it wrecks your narrative that only one set of voters, non-voters, or independants which you then ascribe to Bernie and all his suporters cost Hillary the election.

Yours is a totally hypocritical argument looking only to spin out an attack against a candidate you don't favor..
To sum up. I do not blame any voters. You do. To show you your error, I pointed out that under your standard and argument, you also make Black non-voters the reason Clinton lost cause if they had come out, she would have won. I quoted you earlier on that I don't have to here.

We can add to your argument's problem. Since these black non-Clinton-voters did vote for Obama in 2008 and 2012, your logic would hold that it was Obama's fault or the fault of Obama's other supporters (who did vote for Clinton) that Hillary Lost since Obama and they should have made sure through mind control that the non-voters came out and voted.

I wish Obama voters had come out as they did in 2008 but they are not the fault that Trump won just as its not the fault of Bernie and Bernie Supporters that some other Voters THAT ARE NOT THEM ended up voting for Trump. I wish I had the power to wave a magic wand and make people vote the way I want them too including those Bernie Voters who didn't vote for Hillary, those Obama voters who didn't vote for Hillary and all the voters in America that voted for Trump.. Unfortunately I don't have that magic power. Please let me know if you do and how we can do it.


Stop the blame game on one candidate and one set of voters. We need unity not disunity and inatuthentic attacks on a group makes for disunity.

[blue-wave]

180. "The 10% voting for Trump...... did not cost Hillary the election"

Wrong. Simply wrong. And the numbers back me up. Read the article and info in the link. And to say they were not Hillary's voters to begin with? So you just told me that a large number of Bernie supporters are really Trump supporters. Wow!! How hypocritical.

[Rilgin]

181. No longer debating inauthentic arguments.

You know better. Voters are people and people are complicated. Every single time there is a contested primary, people get offended when their candidates lose. This always happens including Hillary Voters voting for McCain in larger numbers than Bernie Primary Voters voting for Trump. A winning election candidate always has to win. And part of it is realizing that some people and groups may vote against you or not vote unless you have a winning campaign strategy.

Your post, like many here on this site, just adds disunity by blaming by association anyone who voted for Bernie in the Primary with being Trump Voters even though none of them including Bernie has any control over that group of people.

You ignore the fact that there were other voting blocs in larger numbers who had historic voting history in the right states who also did not vote in a way that would have created a Hillary win because that would require you to not just bash Bernie. In my world, it is the fault of a campaign or electoral mood that creates a loss not voters who do not support you.

I hope you turn it around. We will need attackers to turn into unifiers. I hope that rather than attack that you start argue without attacking one group of voters and one candidate someday and just support your candidate. It looks like you support Joe Biden. Try just boosting him rather than tearing into others and grouping people who support someone different. Hint, its a better strategy for beating Trump.

Good luck to you.

[Control-Z]

76. Sadly I have to agree.

If only it were not the case. Imagine where we might be today.

[Locrian]

87. sorta - but not exactly...

>> Sanders-Trump voters were much less likely than Sanders-Clinton or Sanders-third party voters to have been Democrats.
Those were independents - meaning he brought MORE to the party than Clinton

Also - (I think it was like 25%) with Clinton
Moreover, defections from a primary to general election are common. More voters went from Hillary Clinton to John McCain in 2008 than went from Sanders to Trump in 2016; about 13 percent of Trump’s 2016 voters also voted for Barack Obama in 2012.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/24/16194086/bernie-trump-voters-study

[eilen]

129. Actually, it was 12%

heard that on the radio about an hour ago.

[Celerity]

153. around 30% total of Hillary 2008 primary voters did not vote for Obama in the general

Around 24 or 25% voted for McCain, around 5% did not vote

https://isps.yale.edu/research/data/d130

https://sites.duke.edu/hillygus/files/2014/06/hendersonhillygustompsonPOQ.pdf



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/

Another useful comparison is to 2008, when the question was whether Clinton supporters would vote for Barack Obama or John McCain (R-Ariz.) Based on data from the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project, a YouGov survey that also interviewed respondents multiple times during the campaign, 24 percent of people who supported Clinton in the primary as of March 2008 then reported voting for McCain in the general election.

An analysis of a different 2008 survey by the political scientists Michael Henderson, Sunshine Hillygus and Trevor Thompson produced a similar estimate: 25 percent. (Unsurprisingly, Clinton voters who supported McCain were more likely to have negative views of African Americans, relative to those who supported Obama.)

Thus, the 6 percent or 12 percent of Sanders supporters who may have supported Trump does not look especially large in comparison with these other examples.

snip


I think the 2020 version of the Sanders group could top Clinton's record. I see extreme danger ahead, especially if Bernie loses at a multiple ballot and/or brokered convention.

The non DU Sanders crowd looks way way more radical and anti-Democratic Party to me than in 2016. the good thing is that they are far smaller in overall numbers in 2020.


Finally I will adress operation Chaos in 200, as that has been held up as a large reason for the 30% defection rate for Hillary primary voters in 2008. It had very little effect overall, in reality.

Lets do a drill down......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rush_Limbaugh_Show#Operation_Chaos

Limbaugh started this around March 20, 2008, he urged Republicans to switch parties and vote for Hillary to tie up Obama

it only works in open primary states

It blew up in his face in one of the biggest (PA)

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/article24481603.html



so lets give Hillary 33% of 10% of the total vote

76,156 Republican switchers

She did win late deciders, but those were mostly Democrats





Next open primaries were also big states Ohio and Texas

let's give Hillary 75% of 10% of the total votes in the combined (I doubt it was that high but lets play this really in her favour of the Chaos concept)



385,544 Republican switcher votes

and the final 2 states that were part of Operation Chaos

Indiana and North Carolina (Obama won NC, but I will be just as generous as Texas in both)



211,749 Republican switcher votes for Hillary

that's it for Operation Chaos

so the total she gained was 673,449 Republican Operation Chaos-eligible Rethug voters for Clinton

now, she overall had



18,046,007 total votes (taking the largest possible number)

so at most 3.73% percent of Republican votes from Operation Chaos went to Hillary

subtract out the 5% who didn't vote in the general

3.54%

lets say 90% of those late switch Repug voters went back to MacCain (which is higher than the rate MCain Rethug primary voters switched to Obama, which was 87%)

thsi yields a grand total of 3.19% (and this is being REALLY generous to Operation chaos, and assumes ALL of those, every one that was a Rethug late switcher, were game ALL playing Operation Chaos voters, which is simply not true, but again, I wil say, for argument's sake they were)

so around 22% were actual defections from Hillary to McCain (I would guess the real number was probably 23.5 to 24%) and NOT part of Operation Chaos

depending on what stats you use for Sanders defections to Trump (I have see anywhere from 5% to 12%) that is a 183% to 480% (an average of 331.5%, but my gut says it was around 220% to 230%) HIGHER rate from Hillary voters to McCain in 2008 versus Berners in 2016 who flipped to the orange bloat known as Trump.

Again, all that said, we really have to worry about 2020. Given the stats I am seeing, if (more like when) Bernie loses our primary (especially if it is highly contentious and goes to multiple ballots) I can see 26%, 30%, or even higher bailing directly to Trump, let alone the Greens or just staying home, as his new base is FAR less Democratic now than it was in 2016. Many are super hostile to our party and the other candidates.the big positive mitigating factor is that they are far less in overall numbers versus 2016.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

5. Seriously!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[pnwmom]

29. Link?

[Gravitycollapse]

33. Yep.

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds

[pnwmom]

37. That doesn't support the claim that 90% of Bernie voters went on to vote for Hillary.

It supports the claim that only 10% voted for Trump.

You can't just assume that the remaining 90% voted for Hillary. Some of them may have voted for Jill Stein or another candidate. Some of them may have written in a favorite candidate (even Bernie). Some may not have voted at all. The article doesn't discuss that.

[lapucelle]

72. The fact that over 25% of BS voters did not vote for the Democratic nominee

in the 2016 general election is a data point, not a talking point.

Link to tweet

******************************************************************************************

Link to tweet

https://dataverse.harvard.edu/file.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/GDF6Z0/RK0ONG&version=4.0

[Zolorp]

101. I do not believe that

Nothing you can do or say will convince me otherwise.

[ehrnst]

105. I think these may be the half that didn't go over support other candidates in 2020.

So there's that.

[beachbumbob]

116. you need to actually KNOW the data and its far from what you posted

[George II]

123. Now it's up to 90%? Well, it should have been 100% don't you think?

[George II]

126. As we move along in time the real number keeps going up and up. Now 90%. Is 100% far away?

[PatSeg]

117. And it is Bernie who should be saying that

and saying it often. He needs to act like a leader if he wants to be president.

[George II]

124. "Here"....not "everywhere"? If they need instructions, just follow Gray/Sirota/Turner on twitter.

[Cha]

13. But What About?!!

[NanceGreggs]

15. Someone booing HRC ...

... at a political gathering.

Now, where have I seen that before?

[Indepatriot]

20. Hmmm...I wonder why that might be...maybe the junior high style sniping and refusal to commit

to backing Sanders if he's the nominee.....just spitballin here...https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/hillary-clinton-blasts-sanders-won-t-commit-backing-him-party-n1119011

[fleabiscuit]

41. I was unaware that Hillary is running again.

She could step in right now and beat everyone on the list.

[W_HAMILTON]

43. Ain't that the truth!

[fleabiscuit]

46. Perhaps Bloomberg will choose Hillary as a running mate LOL.

[True Blue American]

106. That would be nice!:)

Seriously, we have a great group.

Mayor Pete is really laying in on how he would creat jobs, help climate change at the same time. He is brilliant!

[krissey]

44. 54% of Sanders supporters refuse to vote for a Democrat if he loses in 2020. What are you talking

about?

[True Blue American]

68. Well, that is

Not nice!

[krissey]

36. Ya? Sanders #6 on my list. Especially because of the horrible supporters that cause so much

damage to our party.

[Aussie105]

48. What horrible supporters?

Oh, you mean the paid-for agitators?

I hear they get paid $1 per BOOO!!!

Maybe your reaction is EXACTLY what the goal is?
ie 'Cannot support Sanders because of his horrible supporters!'

Mission accomplished, in that case.

[krissey]

49. Right.

[True Blue American]

59. I can answer that.

The horrible supporters were those that are still booing Hillary. They are in the same camp that were yelling, “ Lock her up!” At the Trump rally last night.

[lapucelle]

157. DrDooleyMD, BS surrogate

[MrsCoffee]

83. The paid for agitators get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Nina Turner, David Sirota, Briahna Joy Gray are just some of the Stein loving paid agitators. The whole Bernie campaign seems to be an exercise in division.

[fleabiscuit]

38. It's an echo......................nt

[True Blue American]

60. No, but they

Were thinking that!

[True Blue American]

63. As my Engineer Son says,

FREE!

[True Blue American]

67. He is already doing all that

While sending his Son who has chosen Computer Engineering, last I heard. He has been designing Robots.

Welcome to the board. It is nice to have some who knows people need a hand up but it is not free!

[True Blue American]

74. I do not even have to ask.

He would agree!

That is a neat background. Makes me feel so good that so many brilliant people can see the main problem in this Country is inequality, but not Socialism.

I do not envy billionaires and if they can use their Leadership to turn the Country around, fine with me. After all our most successful Presidents have been wealthy..FDR was the best, but even Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, broke up the Oligarchy.

As you can tell I am a History nut

[True Blue American]

92. Trump told his followers last night to vote for the weakest

Democrat. If they do that shows they are no better than Trump, cheating to win.

As a long time Judge at the polls I can say I watched very few do that. In a small Precinct I know most of the voters and watched the Head Judge , who was a Republican challenge them, make them sign a pledge they had switched parties. In this state you designate the party you belong to. I was embarresed for them.

Republicans actually hired Poll Watchers one year, paid them more than Poll Workers. We were lucky,, ours was nice, but the minority precincts had an awful time.

[BlueMTexpat]

71. If Nixon really DID support

HRC in 2016, then WTF is she supporting Bernie now?

If there were no choice but Bernie, I could perhaps understand. But there ARE MUCH better options.

So no, I don't. And I never will.

[ibegurpard]

79. Good for Cynthia

Unfortunately there are a lot of assholes supporting him too.

[NYMinute]

82. I'm glad cynthia nixon lost to Cuomo

Those people have no shame and no self-respect so they denigrate a woman who has accomplished at least 100 times what they have and that includes their messiah

[still_one]

88. This is not the first time, and how can we believe Sanders is the person who can unite the party

when he can’t even control his own supporters

[brooklynite]

90. Cynthia Nixon, AOC, Cornel West....

Susan Sarandon wasn't available?

[octoberlib]

91. Did they chant lock her up ? They're the MAGA of the left.

[samnsara]

97. someones campaign seems to attract the immature....

..and we dont need children. This is an adults game and in this war we need every adult we can get. I guess we are just going to assume those particular fans dont have winning in mind...only loud immature disruption....in other words..tantrums when they dont get their way.

Maybe we can hand out juice boxes to that section..quiet them down a bit.

[Zolorp]

104. Turnabout is fair play

If Sanders is nominated it j will be okay to boo him and all his surrogates at the convention from the convention floor, just like they did Hillary and John Lewis in 2016. It's fine and dandy to do that, otherwise Sanders would have condemned it back then.e

For the humor impaired

[Squinch]

111. No. Really it won't be ok, and its not ok to suggest it will.

[Zolorp]

112. Sarcasm

[Squinch]

114. Doesn't work well on this subject.

[Zolorp]

115. too bad

[Squinch]

135. Bless your heart.

[Zolorp]

136. Back atcha

[riversedge]

108. Thank you cynthia.

[ehrnst]

109. Bernie and his staff might to well to learn from Cynthia Nixon.

[Tom Rinaldo]

110. Good for Cynthia

And yes that type of reaction in the crowd to Hillary's name does not help Sanders.

But I am also forced to say this; There is no more experienced political figure inside the Democratic Party than Hillary Clinton. She damn well knew (or should have) what she was doing when, years after the 2016 election, she called out Sanders personally, including over the top cutting claims that "no one likes him". Hillary is a pro, and she knows how important it is for Democrats to unify to the extent possible heading into the 2020 election. She waved a red flag in front of the most bull headed Sanders supporters and, yeah, they predictably took the bait. None of this is helpful.

[Squinch]

113. To quote Amy, "Hi, Bernie people." Cue the claims of persecution

over the fact that they were asked to stop.

[Bluepinky]

120. STOP Fighting the last Democratic primary!!

Doesn’t it ever get old? Hope this entire thread is deleted.

[RandySF]

121. It happpened last night.

And I wasn't the one who booed.

[LexVegas]

122. ...

[Me.]

133. It Does Get Old

They need to get over themselves.

[Eyeball_Kid]

127. ENOUGH of that crap. Grow up, folks. n/t

[eilen]

128. Seems like Bernie Rallies are not that much different from Trump rallies

When are they going to start chanting "Lock her up!"?

[Me.]

132. I Am So Done With Those People

Fed up and the person who should've stopped it was BS

[Gothmog]

134. This is the same type of conduct that vetted sanders delegates engaged in at the National Convention

Normally going to a national convention is a once in a life time experience. I have worked really hard inside the party on campaigns and voter protection issues for a very long time to earn this trip. Too bad that sanders and his vetted delegates ruined that experience and did their best to help trump. A candidate has absolute approval rights over their pledged delegates because these delegates can change their votes and these delegates represent the candidate and campaign. I helped vet Clinton delegates and I know that I was vetted. The Clinton campaign told us that we represent her and that our actions would reflect on her and her campaign.

In contrast, sanders sent one very weak text the Sunday night before the convention and then did little or nothing to control his delegates. It was nasty I was there when the sanders delegates booed Congressman John Lewis. I was warned about this stunt 30 minutes before it happened by the Clinton campaign whip. According to my whip, sanders was asked to stop this event and declined. That incident will be used against sanders by Russia to suppress the African American vote just as was done in 2016

Link to tweet

Russia will just run material showing sanders delegates booing John Lewis, Elijah Cummings and others to suppress the vote of African American voters and I feel that this tactic would be very effective

I was at the Texas delegation breakfast when a group of sanders delegates marched in and demanded that we condemn Clinton and change our votes to sanders.

sanders spoke to the Texas delegation the next morning and his speech was again solely about himself. There was a mini-riot due to his delegates the prior morning and the only thing that sanders talked about was himself. sanders did nothing to deal with the fact that his delegates were out of control and did nothing to try to help Hillary Clinton win the general election.

Finally a group of sanders delegates yelled at my daughter and called her the c-Word because she would not try to get me to change my vote. Again sanders was asked to tell his delegates to behave during the convention and sanders refused

The conduct describe in the OP does not surprise me

[MineralMan]

144. I'm glad I read the whole thread. I was about to weigh in with this.

You were there. I was not. However, I heard the Sanders supporters or delegates booing John Lewis. It was then that I decided that I could never vote for Sanders in any primary election. He did not stop it. He did not condemn it. John Lewis, for pete's sake.

That and the other antics of that crowd poisoned me on Sanders, because it was his responsibility to rein in his supporters and pledged delegates. He could have done so, but refused and refused multiple times.

I will vote for the man if he is the Democratic nominee, but I hope that is not the case. I believe Trump would win in a landslide were Sanders to become the nominee. I have no doubt whatever of that, and it would be a disaster for the nation.

When Sanders supporters dissed an honored civil rights leader at the Democratic Convention by booing him, and Sanders did not condemn or prevent such behavior, I saw his true colors, and so did many others.

And now, I'm seeing Sanders supporters calling Mike Bloomberg a racist. Fuck that!

I'll vote for Sanders, if he is the nominee, but until that time, I'm against him as a candidate for showing no leadership with his own supporters. We need someone who will do better than that.

[Gothmog]

148. It was not a fun experience

These were planned stunts that the Clinton campaign found out about and warned her delegates. The last night of the convention there were over a dozen such warnings

[Blue_Tires]

140. Classy to the end...

[Horizens]

152. I planning to attend a Sanders rally

and boo as loud as I can.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

155. This sort of shit is why Sanders won't get my vote in the primary

It's no longer 2016 people.

[betsuni]

156. 5 years ago, the idea of supporters of someone running for the Democratic nominee

booing the last Democratic nominee would be inconceivable to me.

Thank you, Cynthia. They're being ridiculous, as usual.

[Gore1FL]

172. Sanders supporters booed someone openly (and inexplicably) attacking their candidate?

Wow. Go figure....


Expecting Sanders supporters to act better than Clinton has seems sort of disingenuous.

[Gothmog]

182. Arggh

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Gothmog]

183. Biden calls on Sanders to take accountability for supporters' threats

Link to tweet

Joe Biden called on Bernie Sanders to accept greater accountability for tactics and rhetoric of his staunchest supporters and do more to discourage it, after what he called the “outrageous” threats on a prominent union that criticized his healthcare plan.

Representatives of the powerful Culinary Workers Union, which represents 60,000 workers supporting Nevada’s gaming and hospitality industries, said this week that supporters of the Vermont senator had “viciously attacked” its members after its leadership warned about the risk to their negotiated health plans under a Medicare for All system.

In an exclusive interview airing Sunday on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” Biden said the Vermont senator “may not be responsible for it, but he has some accountability.”

“You know me well enough to know if any of my supporters did that, I’d disown them. Flat disown them,” Biden said. “The stuff that was said online. The way they threatened these two women who are leaders in that Culinary union. It is outrageous. Just — just go online.”