2016 Postmortem

Surya Gayatri

(15,445 posts)

124. +100!

Wed May 18, 2016, 06:35 PM

May 2016

"...he shirks responsibility and dodges reporters.

He puts on an act, looking aggrieved and stunned and then launches into the inevitable whiney complaints that he was robbed, blah-blah-blah..."

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

241 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Weaver was just asked how did Obama win against Clinton with the same obstacles as Sanders? [View all] uponit7771 May 2016 OP

Obama had other corporate dems on his side like Durbin. Obama is a centrist JRLeft May 2016 #1

Sanders has dems on his side to right? tia uponit7771 May 2016 #3

Hillary learned from last time and made sure her opponents wouldn't generate enough name JRLeft May 2016 #16

Obama was the Hillary of 2008, he was the one with the huge health ****** industry lobby money Baobab May 2016 #168

I donated & voted for Obama, previously voted for WJC. Obama represented hope and change. TheBlackAdder May 2016 #39

I had a similar experience CajunBlazer May 2016 #157

Agreed- it was Reid who asked Obama to run. CanadaexPat May 2016 #9

Obama had concrete plans for every item on his agenda. He was able to intelligently articulate anotherproletariat May 2016 #2

Yeah, I figured that... a podium bird and a greeting with the pope doesn't really count. Weaver... uponit7771 May 2016 #4

It had more to do with his charisma. JRLeft May 2016 #6

So he smiled better? Really? uponit7771 May 2016 #13

No, he's a great orator who related to young people. JRLeft May 2016 #19

What establishment figures backed him when he started, they backed him EVENTUALLY but the ... uponit7771 May 2016 #34

John Kerry and Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama in January 2008. NT Eric J in MN May 2016 #205

at the beginning of his campaign Obama had more endorsements than Clinton!? REALLY?! What is uponit7771 May 2016 #223

Obama was prepared and groomed by the powerful Illinois Democratic Party machine. imagine2015 May 2016 #222

right wing tripe uponit7771 May 2016 #224

I've been told Bernie has more charisma than Hillary in speeches. Even she admits it Sheepshank May 2016 #15

+1, they're flailing right now... Fuck Rodd asked a decent question to Weaver and he couldn't addres uponit7771 May 2016 #37

Yeah. Kall May 2016 #35

I can't keep up, are you all against Obama too? Who did you people vote for in the last election? anotherproletariat May 2016 #42

+1 uponit7771 May 2016 #97

His "concrete plan" obviously wasn't concrete on a core issue like health care. Kall May 2016 #125

I was drawing attention to the fact that Sanders has no plans, concrete or not. nt anotherproletariat May 2016 #126

Of course he does. Kall May 2016 #133

Yep, he said he would implemente single-payer health care plan CajunBlazer May 2016 #162

Including, and especially, foreign policy, where Sanders is a big zero BeyondGeography May 2016 #44

He couldn't answer that one other than he said Obama ran a great campaign doc03 May 2016 #5

There were far more roadblocks this time. Far less debates and candidates. JRLeft May 2016 #7

Outside of the number of debates what were the road blocks that were different now than then? tia uponit7771 May 2016 #14

Scroll up. JRLeft May 2016 #22

Other than an anecdotal "charisma" there's nothing empirical when I scroll up uponit7771 May 2016 #32

Really? The backing of Wall Street, Big Pharma, Monsanto, etc. JRLeft May 2016 #43

Obama had all of that when he started? No... he didn't and I'm talking about RULES not ... uponit7771 May 2016 #64

Actually he did, industry backed him from the beginning, and gave him more money as he gained JRLeft May 2016 #77

Link and quote on that one, Obama had grass roots money from the beginning seeing he was only uponit7771 May 2016 #96

He didn't just waltz in but the Third Way talked about him before he ran for Senate. JRLeft May 2016 #112

JR, Obama did the thing that Sanders couldn't; he EARNED his way into the presidency and now uponit7771 May 2016 #167

debates yes, candidates not really dsc May 2016 #17

Bernie has been around Washington for decades if he would have been in the Democratic party doc03 May 2016 #57

+1, or if he had some proof that his ideals of revolution worked even in his own state he would've.. uponit7771 May 2016 #107

Clinton is only barely winning with whatever coalition she has. If they keep dumping on the Sanders highprincipleswork May 2016 #8

Clinton has 3 million more votes now than Obama had then and FDR had an 80% dem congress in both uponit7771 May 2016 #21

Listen friend, we'd have more Democrats in Congress if the Democrats we have didn't act like such highprincipleswork May 2016 #63

or we'd have a congress if Sanders would bring his "revolution" to bear in the past but he didn't uponit7771 May 2016 #65

If you read any of my posts around here, you'd know that my opinion is that the time is ripe now, highprincipleswork May 2016 #72

Her coalition will be stronger in the GE against Trump. Bet on it!!! nt Jitter65 May 2016 #86

I'm not betting on any such thing. How do I know? I've been a Democrat for over 4o years, and sure highprincipleswork May 2016 #93

I'd bet on it, young people aren't going to let jerks like Trump in cause they mad. They're more.. uponit7771 May 2016 #103

wow on which teevee channel was he just asked that rather leading question? Link it please azurnoir May 2016 #10

MSNBC, and how was it a leading question? It basically calls Sanders "rigged" calls bullshit uponit7771 May 2016 #23

Why won't MSNBC talk about Net Neutrality, TPP, Monsanto, and JRLeft May 2016 #31

JR, what doesn't that have to do with the question at hand? How was it leading? and maybe they don't uponit7771 May 2016 #74

My take? WTF are you talking about? They aren't even close JCanete May 2016 #11

Could you outline what obstacles are different now than then other than the number of debates? tia uponit7771 May 2016 #24

I think I did address it but money and media support isn't enough for you? And JCanete May 2016 #40

Again, I'm talking about the rules not anecdotal ascribes to what happened in 08 uponit7771 May 2016 #73

Establishment rules help establishment candidates. Both Obama and Hillary JCanete May 2016 #85

That's bullshit, Obama was in office what? 2 years?... that's not even reality, Obama was an uponit7771 May 2016 #89

If you can get big money support, you are not an insurgent. JCanete May 2016 #108

Again, Obama did NOT have that support IN THE BEGINNING of his campaign. He won that support uponit7771 May 2016 #114

Where are you drawing the cutoff? Are you claiming that Obama didn't get campaign contributions JCanete May 2016 #139

It doesn't matter, Obama did NOT begin with the support he had in the middle of the primary he uponit7771 May 2016 #151

He wasn't on the power brokers hit-list, and he was a comfortable enough fit. JCanete May 2016 #172

It isn't the same. Clinton and Obama are in the same branch of the Democratic Party-the Corporatist Skwmom May 2016 #12

That's exactly it. the party machine had no problem switching from Hillary to Obama. m-lekktor May 2016 #20

It was an inner family Corporatist squabble. Skwmom May 2016 #30

^ This JRLeft May 2016 #26

Clinton is winning the same demos Obama won with in 08 and What is different now than then? tia uponit7771 May 2016 #27

Didn't Obama win young voters and Clinton has only received a fraction of Obama's remaining Skwmom May 2016 #33

This is false, Clinton has the support of millennials of color the last I checked but you bring up a uponit7771 May 2016 #45

You're not making any sense Armstead May 2016 #18

Makes perfect sense, Sanders calls for "rigged" is bullshit seeing Obama won with the similar set uponit7771 May 2016 #29

except that you're just saying they were the same obstacles. People are JCanete May 2016 #48

I'm talking about RULES and not anechdotal ascribes to the candidates, there are FEW RULE uponit7771 May 2016 #66

He passed the Animal House exit about a month ago. ucrdem May 2016 #25

lofl uponit7771 May 2016 #28

Isn't it funny how quickly the elephant in the room can get stuffed into the closet? lumberjack_jeff May 2016 #36

Your sequencing is way off...Clinton led big among black voters until after the Iowa caucus BeyondGeography May 2016 #53

Very true, forgot about Obama's win in IA ... and Obama didn't lead among blacks until SC uponit7771 May 2016 #75

Iowa was everything BeyondGeography May 2016 #84

Yeap, I remember still supporting Clinton till after SC... My wife was still supporting Clinton afte uponit7771 May 2016 #92

As simple as that. ladjf May 2016 #56

THANK YOU!!! I mentioned that.. the dem base has changed, Sanders chose someone who called Obama uponit7771 May 2016 #71

Bullshit. Obama did not have the same obstacles as Sanders. He had different ones, but the PTB of merrily May 2016 #38

Like what? I suspect you'll not answer this like the rest of em haven't outside of "charisma" uponit7771 May 2016 #47

Huh? Did you read my post? merrily May 2016 #50

Yeah, I did... you named NO RULES that were different now than then other than what yoou uponit7771 May 2016 #58

Rules? When I read your OP, it said "obstacles." merrily May 2016 #59

Not anecdotal ones, I don't see what you outlined as obstacales and that's why I'm sticking to rules uponit7771 May 2016 #76

Do you mean state party rules? merrily May 2016 #79

ALL the rules, state & party...what rules changed that the process is rigged now vs when Obama ran? uponit7771 May 2016 #88

Is that what weaver was asked? The rules do change, but the question is a red herring. merrily May 2016 #90

OK, what RULES changed to make this a rigged system against Sanders vs Obama? Seems like uponit7771 May 2016 #98

Why would you imagine I would bother replying to a question that I just described as a red herring merrily May 2016 #99

How is the question a red herring? Sanders is saying the system is stacked against him and it doesnt uponit7771 May 2016 #101

And in your mind, the "system" refers only to Dem Party rules? merrily May 2016 #104

No, of course not but it's an emperical place to start... I don't see how being black and running... uponit7771 May 2016 #110

Oh, give it a rest. I never said being black was an advantage. To the contrary, I said Obama had merrily May 2016 #116

I never said you did, my point is Obama had more obstacles one being black uponit7771 May 2016 #121

No, you just posted to me over and over how you couldn't figure out how being black merrily May 2016 #132

True, it wasn't a net positive being black in the primary seeing how many white dems were voting uponit7771 May 2016 #152

Obama ran a hopeful positive campaign. Bernie started out that way timlot May 2016 #41

+1 uponit7771 May 2016 #69

+100! Surya Gayatri May 2016 #119

It's obvious. Obama was a great candidate with good policies. YouDig May 2016 #46

Thx, it sounds like podium bird is tellin em things are really rigged uponit7771 May 2016 #55

I'm surprised he didn't say Obama had the advantage of being non-white. Sounds his style. CrowCityDem May 2016 #49

BINGO!!! That's EXACTLY what I was thinking!! That eventually they'll call Obama's blackness a ... uponit7771 May 2016 #60

Weaver also admitted the Obama campaign ran a world class ground game. procon May 2016 #51

+1 uponit7771 May 2016 #61

+100! Surya Gayatri May 2016 #124

Reasons Obama was stronger than Sanders (against Clinton) thesquanderer May 2016 #52

In the beginning the SDs were for Hillary, they moved after Obama won PDs throught the campaign uponit7771 May 2016 #67

He started picking them up very early on. thesquanderer May 2016 #82

That was NOT early on, the SDs were HEAVY in favor of Clinton until the PD count went south for her uponit7771 May 2016 #87

Obama had the most Wall Street Money bahrbearian May 2016 #54

Sanders has outspent Clinton this primary nearly 2 to 1 in some areas so money isn't an issue uponit7771 May 2016 #62

Hillary's Supper Pac's aren't spending any money behind the scenes ? bahrbearian May 2016 #68

Not the amount that Sanders has spent, Sanders did prove emperically that the SPs aren't even needed uponit7771 May 2016 #78

2008 was a fair contest. Obama was not anointed in September 2007 jg10003 May 2016 #70

The SDs weren't heavy in favor of Clinton starting out?! Not only that but she had most of the ... uponit7771 May 2016 #81

EASY! Obama was a corporate democrat with half the establiment backing him! spinboas May 2016 #80

Not in the beginning they establishment switched AFTER the PD count went south for Clinton... uponit7771 May 2016 #83

He was funded by wall street which is part of the establishment. spinboas May 2016 #91

Not at first, that's bullshit on a stick... Obama did not start out with WS money or any of the uponit7771 May 2016 #94

Sanders fundraising story is just an extension of Obama 08 phleshdef May 2016 #130

Let's see... deathrind May 2016 #95

Your answer doesn't outline any empirical rule changes that make the system "stacked" against him vs uponit7771 May 2016 #100

Because he didn't have the same obstacles. Fawke Em May 2016 #102

Oh BULL FUCKIN SHIT!! They ran over 2700 hrs of Wright, it was counted as some of the most uponit7771 May 2016 #105

Obama put together a viable coalition to win mythology May 2016 #106

+1, and Obama didn't have this coalition until after SC.. blacks were strongly in favor of Clinton.. uponit7771 May 2016 #111

The Sanders crowd doesn't realize just how coddled their unvetted man has been BeyondGeography May 2016 #113

+1 uponit7771 May 2016 #115

^^^This!^^^ Surya Gayatri May 2016 #131

+1 Retrograde May 2016 #136

Exactly...Clinton has laid off because she never saw him as a threat BeyondGeography May 2016 #137

+1 uponit7771 May 2016 #142

to be fair, Clinton (well more Bill than Hill) kinda blew it with a few nasty comments forjusticethunders May 2016 #135

It's a different animal altogether... vi5 May 2016 #109

Oh jeff weaver!..Help bernie make it through.. the campaign!.. dubyadiprecession May 2016 #117

In Obama's case Southern black voters voted their ethnicity instead of the Establishment candidate. bklyncowgirl May 2016 #118

AT FIRST? No they did NOT!! Blacks were HEAVY in favor of Clinton, Obama WON people over... uponit7771 May 2016 #123

Really, you don't think that his bein black had nothing to do with it? bklyncowgirl May 2016 #138

OK, again... AT FIRST... blacks were for Clinton until after SC... polls were clear uponit7771 May 2016 #149

So you are saying that Obama's race had nothing at all with the shift in African-American support? bklyncowgirl May 2016 #158

SHIFT !! He had to earn it along with the establishment ..........Sanders never did and now he's uponit7771 May 2016 #160

And I believe that there were a large number of people eager to vote for a viable black candidate. bklyncowgirl May 2016 #165

Sanders had someone who called Obama niggerized last year stump for him in front of mostly uponit7771 May 2016 #166

Economic issues matter to everyone. bklyncowgirl May 2016 #171

Not as much with one group than the other, Wall Street is NOT everyones top boogyman and Sanders is uponit7771 May 2016 #177

Easy, he was a slightly undercover establishment candidate, the establishment was split, and Obama TheKentuckian May 2016 #120

He was in the senate for 2 years, that isn't even reality... there's no way someone can call Obama uponit7771 May 2016 #122

Shit, the fact he was in the Senate so briefly and could have the cache supports my position rather TheKentuckian May 2016 #140

No it doesn't, that's a CT not actual facts based on history. Clinton had the establsihment behind h uponit7771 May 2016 #150

They both had substantial establishment support, even those folks are not a collective hive mind. TheKentuckian May 2016 #173

Not from the start, that is false on its face and not even close to reality. Obama had grass roots.. uponit7771 May 2016 #174

Tell Tattoo and Mr. Roark I said "hey" TheKentuckian May 2016 #202

Sanders is not Obama by a long shot..Obama build bridges Sanders is doing the opposite. asuhornets May 2016 #127

yes he did, including to the banks. Including to insurance companies. That's why we got what JCanete May 2016 #183

Well, being President has always been a thankless job... asuhornets May 2016 #184

Just so you know, in many ways I'm a fan of Obama. JCanete May 2016 #187

I'm not 100% satisfied with Obama either. He was better than any Republican. asuhornets May 2016 #188

Easy, Obama was the establishment candidate kcjohn1 May 2016 #128

Someone in congress for 2yrs is establishment?! In that case Sanders is structure !! uponit7771 May 2016 #144

Because Obama is a once in a generation political talent. phleshdef May 2016 #129

Obama stayed postive even when he was still a long shot Retrograde May 2016 #134

Yes, his purity leads to him being cynical uponit7771 May 2016 #156

Great post. Imo, sums up both Bernie and President Obama nicely. PragmaticLiberal May 2016 #185

There were more automatic delegates in 2008 (852 delegates) LiberalFighter May 2016 #141

++++++++++++++DING DING DING !! Thread winnah+++++++++++++++++++++ uponit7771 May 2016 #145

Obama didn't have the same obstacles as Sanders. The question's premise is wrong. (nt) w4rma May 2016 #143

You're right, emperically Obama had it harder cause the number of PDs... thx uponit7771 May 2016 #146

Both Obama and Clinton were backed by Wall Street. (nt) w4rma May 2016 #148

Obama had no WS backing at the beginning of his campaign, he earned that after beating Clinton uponit7771 May 2016 #155

no Wall Street backing is different from establishment opposition. JCanete May 2016 #182

He did NOT ... NOT have the support Clinton had from the beginning, you guys are going further uponit7771 May 2016 #198

No, you are making an entirely different argument, one which I didn't disagree with. JCanete May 2016 #199

Yes, I agree... they started in a similar place... cept Obama earned votes Sanders ignored the uponit7771 May 2016 #210

As has been said many many times Sanders is no Obama. DCBob May 2016 #147

Obama is black. Bread and Circus May 2016 #153

He earned the black vote though, just like he earned the establishment support. Sanders earned neith uponit7771 May 2016 #154

Obama is likable, Sanders is not. hrmjustin May 2016 #159

+1, Sanders is looking more and more like someone who's out for himself. uponit7771 May 2016 #161

Sanders ego is huge. hrmjustin May 2016 #163

Please... there are plenty of examples, particularly in congress JCanete May 2016 #189

The Democratic Party nominates only "historic" candidates now. MadDAsHell May 2016 #164

AND he was black ... EffieBlack May 2016 #169

+1 uponit7771 May 2016 #170

President Obama was a household name by the time the first debates aired. he also Exilednight May 2016 #175

This is also false on its face, no he wasn't .. he was known among politicos he was not Donald Trump uponit7771 May 2016 #176

Obama did not have a harder path, "empirically." He had a differently hard path. JCanete May 2016 #178

This is false on its face, there were LESS PD's in 08 than 16... uponit7771 May 2016 #193

you're false on your face! jk, but that's the third time you've posted that. JCanete May 2016 #200

it must be nice to forget facts like Exilednight May 2016 #190

1. Irrelevant, most of the voting public doesn't look at conventions, 2. see 1, 3. see 1 4. He did uponit7771 May 2016 #192

you must not realize that nearly 40 million people saw that speech. Exilednight May 2016 #201

40 million != 130 million voting population. Either way, no one serious is claiming Obama had the... uponit7771 May 2016 #216

I guess you don't let being proven wrong get in the way of you beliefs. Exilednight May 2016 #218

No one relative to the support and backing Clinton has and you know I didn't mean "no one" literally uponit7771 May 2016 #219

no serious person would say that Sanders had half the infrastructure or Exilednight May 2016 #221

I disagree on factual basis; Sanders had 30 years in congress and is well known among politicos uponit7771 May 2016 #226

The DNC wasn't cheating in 2008 AgingAmerican May 2016 #179

ok, what did they do different now than what they did in 08? tia uponit7771 May 2016 #194

Obama had media coverage as soon as he announced, Sanders was ignored for months. Todays_Illusion May 2016 #180

Obama did NOT have the media coverage Sanders had when Sanders announced, you guys are now uponit7771 May 2016 #195

Thanks for your mature response: "just making shit up." Todays_Illusion May 2016 #203

Mature is facing reality, making shit up isn't facing reality; Sanders had less of an uphill battle uponit7771 May 2016 #209

Thanks for the speculation and opinion, You can provide no evidence to support what you call fact. Todays_Illusion May 2016 #225

That Obama didn't have the media coverage Sanders did when he annouced!? REALLY... uponit7771 May 2016 #227

That is what you are claiming to be a fact nt Todays_Illusion May 2016 #230

Bernie Sanders always says that Obama ran a historic campaign. Which he did. jillan May 2016 #181

Sanders has ALSO ran a historic campaign in the category of money raised without support of uponit7771 May 2016 #196

Personal Charisma. That's how. MineralMan May 2016 #186

You really think the Obama coalition is different than the Hillary coalition? cui bono May 2016 #191

Hopefully not, the Obama coalition is the dem base that Sanders overtly ignored and even uponit7771 May 2016 #197

Bernie Sanders spent a lot of time and money in South Carolina Eric J in MN May 2016 #206

That's not what Weaver said on a call link to voice call (link inside) uponit7771 May 2016 #207

After their TV ads in South Carolina did nothing Eric J in MN May 2016 #211

Then my statement rings true, he thought he could bypass the states Obama won and is now whining uponit7771 May 2016 #214

mmkay... cui bono May 2016 #239

Hopefully, been posting on DU since 03... and progressive is starting to sound like a four uponit7771 May 2016 #240

Obama had 25 debates with Clinton; Sanders had 9 debates with her. Eric J in MN May 2016 #204

This is false on its face, again.. yaw into making shit up... there were no 25 debates EXCLUSIVELY uponit7771 May 2016 #208

The debates between Clinton and Sanders Eric J in MN May 2016 #212

There were also less people running now than in 08, the debates didn't make Sanders ignore the uponit7771 May 2016 #213

If you had been Sanders' campaign manager Eric J in MN May 2016 #215

No doubt, I would've told him to get his ass out and pound ground because I know math... uponit7771 May 2016 #217

Obama was not and obviously is not anti-establishment. He represented one political faction. imagine2015 May 2016 #220

Bottom line Obama earned the support of the dem base and the establishment while Sanders ignored the uponit7771 May 2016 #229

June 14th .... LenaBaby61 May 2016 #228

That's such bullshit! glowing May 2016 #231

I agree, Weavers response was a bunch of bullshit and had not real good reason why Obama, being ... uponit7771 May 2016 #232

uponit7771—Obama had Wall Street’s support. CobaltBlue May 2016 #233

At first? really?! link and quote... he earned it cause he ran a kick ass campaign that didn't ignor uponit7771 May 2016 #234

uponit771—Here is one source.… CobaltBlue May 2016 #235

So Obama BEGAN his campaign that way or did he earn it after kicking ass? I see you along uponit7771 May 2016 #238

uponit7771—Here is another source… CobaltBlue May 2016 #237

Again, Obama started out a long shot and won and he's black... Sanders is whining and sounds uponit7771 May 2016 #241

This message was self-deleted by its author CobaltBlue May 2016 #236