There Is No "Bernie Bashing". There's Reasonable Annoyance At His Insults & Unhelpful Comments

[karynnj]

67. Sorry, this is bashing and uses a very typical method that could be used against any public figure

The formula is easy -- take an action or a statement that out of context is troublesome, then contrast to positive actions by others. You could do the same for Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, or Nancy Pelosi. All you have to do is choose a set of either positions they took or things they said that when isolated were not helpful.

In Sanders' case, I suspect part of what you are responding to is coming from the primaries when his supporters, far more than he , attacked Clinton. Like all previous candidates of either party, she was not perfect. Bill Clinton has made comments that are not that far from Sanders' comments on economic concerns of the people in the rust belt/coal company. Yet, you do not react the same way against him.

I understand your frustration because Clinton DID have a whole page on the website ... but that serious, intelligent effort from her team got less coverage than one sentence - that she would put coal miners and coal companies out of business - which IN CONTEXT was speaking of bringing in new clean technology and other jobs. (Here is a youtube that does include more than the sentence that went viral -

)

The Republicans used that one sentence and other similar sentences that needed the surrounding context to create a West Virginia image of a very unfriendly to them HRC. I suspect that any politician who is willing to talk with nuance, seriousness and depth on issues will have to work very hard NOT to have sentences that could be used like this. (Kerry's explanation of voting for a war funding bill that paid for it by rolling back planned tax cuts for the top 1% then voting for the version that added it to the debt was used against him.) In 2008, when the political differences were relatively slight between the top three candidates, all ginned up outrage by intentionally highlighting sentences like this.

On Ossoff, Sanders was asked if he was a progressive. Now, here on DU, progressive is a good thing and saying someone is not progressive is damning. This is not necessarily so everywhere. I suspect that Sanders, like every politician, has learned to carefully parse his words to avoid the "gotcha" experiences I am speaking of. I remember thousands of comments during the primaries saying that Sanders was a negative in the South. I also know where the Clinton campaign sent Sanders. My guess is that his response could be summarized as "not doing any harm and getting out of the way". In the runoff, I expect that Ossoff will be demonized by connecting him to Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton ... and Bernie Sanders. In a far less red state in 2006, Tim Kaine, while running for Governor, took money from John Kerry's PAC, but did not have him come to Virginia to campaign for him - even though they had a great deal in common.

In the big picture, Schumer and others in the Senate leadership thought well enough of Sanders to give him a platform. I suspect that the reason is that both parties see the coalitions that define the parties in considerable flux. There are people, who have been Democrats for decades, who Sanders can speak to who see Schumer as a slick, big city, Wall Street, smartest kid in the class. Oddly, Sanders and Schumer started in almost the same place -- they attended the same prestigious Brooklyn High School. We can not just say that the economic interests of these people is with us, we need them to actually SEE that we are working for them.

At the moment, there are two broad topics that almost certainly result in long passionate arguments - any discussion of flaws in Hillary's campaign - or anything done by Bernie Sanders. Five months later, the election loss is still far too raw for many. As one who mainly hid out in a safe spot (DU JK) in 2005, I understand that it takes time, especially as there was evidence of lies and unfair practices in both elections. It may be that any mention of Bernie brings back the primaries - and worse, the primaries with the knowledge that HRC did not become President. It might also be hard seeing that Sanders, through that primary effort, is far more influential than he was in 2015.

I think one of the hardest tasks we now have as a party is to BOTH allow new leaders to gain recognition and status (while we are out of power) and to use all the strong voices that we have - possibly after breaks of various lengths of time - to define the party or particular issues. Schumer has gained the position he has worked towards his entire career - the top Democrat in the Senate - needing only the party to return to the majority. Unlike Ryan, Pelosi was a leader who could count votes rarely losing a vote when she had the majority. We have two accomplished former Presidents, both healthy enough and popular enough to speak out. In Al Gore and John Kerry, we have two statesmen, who should have been President, who both have made enormous contributions on dealing with climate change - through educating the country (Gore) and the Paris Climate Accord and the pact with China (Kerry) who have signalled they will continue to speak out. Hillary Clinton has already shown that she will continue to be a strong voice, particularly on women's and children's issues.

If we find and develop the new leaders at all the levels needed, I would definitely NOT trade that list of powerful surrogates for what the Republicans have. Trump is already less popular than most Presidents ever become; their ex-Presidents are not all that useful as surrogates, Trump burned through most of would have been the next generation of Republican leaders, incinerating them in his path to the nomination. Both McCain and Romney were diminished over the last several years.

looking at the list of powers that we have, you can see that Sanders is just one of many -- and it is likely that he speaks to some that may be less reachable by the others. Just as we need to make sure that Hillary Clinton sees that we value her, we are best off if we do the same for Sanders.