Bernie Sanders endorses Democrat Greg Edwards in PA-7 race

[Donkees]

Excerpt:

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, who galvanized the progressive movement during his presidential primary contest with Democrat Hillary Clinton, has endorsed Democrat Greg Edwards in his bid to represent the Lehigh Valley in Congress.

Sanders described Edwards, a community organizer, as working “tirelessly” to promote “justice in health care, education and economic dignity throughout the Lehigh Valley,” according to a statement forwarded by Edwards’ campaign.

“From his work in the nonprofit sector to his practice of nonviolent direct action, Greg is a proven progressive leader who has had the courage to speak out and fight for those left behind,” said Sanders of Vermont. “...He brings with him the courage to fight for what’s right, the vision to build an America that works for all of us, and the experience to represent his district."

Edwards, who is competing against five other Democrats in the 7th District, has often echoed Sanders mantra of debt-free education, universal pre-Kindergarten, Meidcare for All and a higher minimum. Edwards was endorsed last week by the Congressional Progressive Caucus which counts Sanders, now an independent, as a member.

Sanders is the highest-ranking elected official to endorse in the race for an open seat that Democrats are trying to flip the Lehigh Valley-based district. Rep. Charlie Dent, a Republican who won the seat in 2004, is not seeking reelection and leaving office in May.

http://www.mcall.com/news/elections/mc-nws-pa-7-bernie-sanders-greg-edwards-20180429-story.html

[Trumpocalypse]

1. Donkees, I really have to ask

Why is every single one of your OPs about Sen. Sanders? You do realize this is Democratic Underground, not Bernie Sanders Underground.

[PADemD]

2. Greg Edwards is a DEMOCRAT running in my district.

An endorsement by Bernie is great news!

[Trumpocalypse]

3. That is not the issue

or has anything to do with the question that I asked Donkees.

[lunamagica]

4. You will not get a reply from Donkees

[Trumpocalypse]

5. Why not? Nt

[lunamagica]

6. Because I've never seen Donkees reply to anyone, ever

[SharonClark]

12. He apparently posts and runs.

[KPN]

30. While you may have never seen Donkees respond to anyone ever, the implicit notion

in your statement that Donkees never replies to anyone is a total fabrication. FAKE NEWS! I can say from experience that Donkees has replied to people here at DU. You just haven't been paying attention.

Based on the Donkees' replies I've seen, I'd say Donkees just doesn't engage in debates or arguments about Bernie Sanders, or perhaps in arguments generally.

[BoneyardDem]

37. you actually used the term "FAKE NEWS"?

Last edited Mon Apr 30, 2018, 12:38 PM - Edit history (1)

WTF

[KPN]

41. Yeah -- it's about the same.

[BoneyardDem]

45. so you bring TRUMP talking points to DU....I wondered how long that would take

[KPN]

49. Hardly the first to use that statement here.

[BoneyardDem]

50. that's your excuse? Someone else did it? But you wasted no time doing it yourself.

don't bring Trump talking points to DU.

[KPN]

52. Really? Seems rather small.

The term fits. Get over it.

[BoneyardDem]

54. You bring Trump talking points to DU and dislike it being pointed out?

I don't think I'm the one that needs to "get over it"

You ready to delete your post? If so I will delete my responses.

[KPN]

55. No.

Still rather silly. I don't care whether Trump has used that phrase or not. Is that clear? I don't care whether you think a phrase Trump has used should be banned from use here. Is that clear?
And frankly, if this is the stuff you are going to take issue with, I don't care what you think of me.

Oh, and go ahead and have the last word if you absolutely must.

[BoneyardDem]

65. Of course you don't care that you use Trump talking points. It's all the confirmation I need.

So don't be surprised when your future "facts" are taken with the same amount of shrugging as any good Dem would give to Trump's talking points.

[ehrnst]

87. Oh NOES... you are going to take your ball and go home

and then tell the others to "stop playing this instant," so you can think they are doing what you tell them.

[KPN]

111. Lol. Where do you get that conclusion?

Way off base. But feel free to have yourself a jolly.

BTW ... it seems you have a vendetta with me. Can almost count on hearing from you whenever I post on one of these Bernie threads.

Oh, and go ahead and poke fun at my misplaced "self importance" if you must. I've come to expect that.

[ehrnst]

112. I got it from your posts.

You and I post on some similar threads.

You flatter yourself, again, to think that you are the center of someone else's day.

Feel free to have yourself a jolly, if a persecution complex is your thing.

[KPN]

114. Projection. Bye.

[ehrnst]

119. Buh bye.

Tag, you're it!

[Eliot Rosewater]

76. Remarkable, isn't it. But we need to learn from what we are seeing here. Otherwise we perish

[NCTraveler]

44. "Fake News"

Trump has really taken hold. Everyone is promoting his verbiage. It works on its target audience.

[KPN]

51. Lol. Really? That's just silly.

[NCTraveler]

53. Not silly at all.

He has so many doing his dirty work by promoting his verbiage that is clearly designed to cause mistrust in some of our most valuable institutions.

Fake News!

[KPN]

56. Whatever.

[ehrnst]

88. The reposte of last resort of the poster with nothing really to

say, but has a need to think they have the last word.

[KPN]

115. Wow. I was right.

[ehrnst]

118. Of course you were! You always are, right?

[LiberalLovinLug]

99. You are giving away the term "fake news" to Trump????

The Republicans before him and now Trump himself, have been using the GOP MO of accusing the Democrats or the 'liberal' media of doing what they are doing as a way to deflect and obfuscate. And they usually do it by heaping on embellishments and down right iies. If Trump has sexual assault accusers, then their answer is "Bill was a serial rapist!" .

Now they have figured out to not only react to their own bad behaviour with their 'but but but what about..such and such Democrat", but, in anticipation of some lie or bad behaviour they are engaging in that is not yet proven or discovered, they accuse Democrats of those same crimes, so that when they eventually are exposed, at the very worst, it can be spun as 'all sides are guilty'.

Case in point, Donnie's accusations of a rigged election, during the campaign. Causing Democrats and the 'liberal' media to scramble to double down on how fair it will be and he's just complaining because he thinks he will lose. When in fact it was a great strategy. Because if Hillary won, he'd say "See?", and if he won, Democrats would look foolish in flip flopping in saying that NOW they thought it was rigged.

Same with calling any news network that told the truth about him "fake news". Democrats have been so shy about calling out Fox News in that kind of strong language, in any kind of sustained way so that it stuck, so the Trumpublicans did it first. Now, we are playing catch up. And look like idiots for now saying "I'm not a poo face you are!"

But why just relinquish terms that actually describe them just because they used it first? Yes we look like idiots and cowards for not speaking our minds earlier and being honest about the fact that Fox News IS fake news. But why in hell would we voluntarily step into their carefully set traps and self censor the best descriptive term for them? We should throw it back in their faces. Better late than never. Take advantage that Trump cultists now believe there is such a thing as 'fake news', because he said there was. Now its just showing them that it is Fox News and hate radio that is the actual fake news.

We look like even bigger fools by refusing to use that term, giving off the impression that we believe there is no such thing. That is exactly following their projection of our reaction in order to take away a weapon from us.

[NCTraveler]

102. Yes. It's pretty clear.

He touts fake news regularly. His goal is clear. Share his goal if you want.

[LiberalLovinLug]

103. Whoooooosh

[G_j]

117. Trump didn't coin the term, just claimed to

...surprise!!
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/the-fix/wp/2017/10/26/trump-falsely-claims-again-that-he-coined-the-term-fake-news/


Trump falsely claims (again) that he coined the term 'fake news'

By Callum Borchers
October 26, 2017 at 2:39 PM

[LiberalLovinLug]

127. Exactly

Why even give him the credit for it!

By announcing a boycott on the term not only are you admitting you think he is smart enough to have invented that term himself, but that the only interpretation of "fake news" is liberal slanted news. And are just relinquishing the usage of a term to other side to use against you exclusively.

[G_j]

132. a Pure Rovian tactic

who pushes actual fake news?

[George II]

71. Nice right wing talking point - "fake news".

[KPN]

73. Glad you liked it!

[Eliot Rosewater]

77. I understand now anyone who has an anti Sanders position is actually guilty of fake news?

Wait, no , sorry, that is not what happened.

Anyone who does not OPENLY support him is guilty of fake news, now I got it.

I am losing my patience

[KPN]

128. Faulty extrapolation Eliot.

[ehrnst]

149. How so? (nt)

[sheshe2]

138. Lol.

"Fake News." The Donald says that all the time.

FYI. I won't go so far to say never, however Donkees says nothing, seldom if ever. JMHO.

[George II]

70. More than 90% of his/her replies are to his/her own OPs with.....

....additional videos and/or tweets in response to his/her own OPs. And he/she also double posts quite often, too.

[Blue_true]

140. There are other democrats in the primary.

Joe Biden, nor President Obama will endorse in such a situation. Bernie need to stay out of primaries.

[LWolf]

14. Since Donkees has been here

longer than you, I'm sure he knows as much about this place as you do, if not more.

You haven't been here long enough to remember that DU USED to, until '08, bill itself as the "premier left-wing discussion group" on the web. DU really stopped being "underground" when a Democrat was elected to the WH, regardless of the name of the site, and stopped being "left-leaning" at that time as well, although it took many of us to the left of the party establishment a long while to figure that out. Still, there are plenty of Democrats who ARE to the left of the party establishment, and who DO look favorably on Senator Sanders.
Still, I believe that ALL left-leaning people are still tolerated, if not welcomed as we used to be, as long as Democrats are supported in general elections.

And, of course, this OP does just that; promotes a Democrat running against a Republican.

That leaves your post to beg this question: why are you triggered by Senator Sanders?

[LostOne4Ever]

17. +infinity nt

[MrsCoffee]

18. A lot of people are triggered by Sanders.

Me included. He represents nothing but divisiveness to me. I’m still wicked pissed at his continual attacks on the party and his below the belt comments about Obama. Many of us want to see his tax returns and have tons of questions about Tad Devine. If there had been one shred of unity come out of his “unity tour”, perhaps things would be different.

I have zero respect for him as he has no respect for people I look up to in the Democratic Party. I don’t trust him because he is hypocritical and never showed his tax returns. I don’t like him because he dismisses concerns of women and minorities as identity politics.

I still lay a lot of blame on him for our loss in 2016.

That’s why I get triggered anyway. Can’t speak specifically for anyone else.

[Fresh_Start]

20. Exactly

I agree,

Bernie's damage won't be limited to 2016
There are still a bunch of Bernie Bros running around blaming the democratic party for everything

[BoneyardDem]

39. And some trot right on over to DU and post

promoting what they full well know is divisive shit, gets very old, and I haven't even been here that long.

[honest.abe]

59. +1 Very well said.

My sentiments exactly.

[Eliot Rosewater]

78. Thanks for saying what some of us assume we cant say.

[LWolf]

155. From the heart

I recognize that many here, many establishment Democrats, get triggered. I disagree completely with the reasons, but I empathize.

As to losses, I fear that the party will continue to lose as long as the establishment continues to demonize those who want change.

2016 was simply more of the same.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/10/the-decimation-of-the-democratic-party-visualized/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1af8f4f828b5

[Trumpocalypse]

21. Actually I'm here over 15 years

and had to change my log in due to the election night hack. Plus how long someone is here shouldn’t matter when they ask a simple question.

The real question is why are so threatened by my simple question?

[Major Nikon]

22. Why haven't you stopped beating your wife?

[Trumpocalypse]

25. LOL!!! Nt

[George II]

75. Bazinga!

[KPN]

46. Hear, hear!

[George II]

72. I don't recall DU billing itself as:

the "premier left-wing discussion group" on the web. However, I've seen it billed itself as "liberal".

Now, here is the DU Mission Statement as of today:

Mission Statement

Democratic Underground is an online community where politically liberal people can do their part to effect political and social change by:

Interacting with friendly, like-minded people;
Sharing news and information, free from the corporate media filter;
Participating in lively, thought-provoking discussions;
Helping elect more Democrats to political office at all levels of American government; and
Having fun!

[comradebillyboy]

80. DU was a much nicer place before the 2008 election.

It's never recovered from the animosity of the 2008 primaries.

[G_j]

121. yes

what a long strange trip it’s been.

[lapucelle]

131. This an endorsement for a primary candidate, not the general election. N/T

[Arazi]

135. Agreed +1 million

[leftstreet]

141. +1

and how nice to see you!

[Jim Lane]

69. Neither Donkees nor anyone else is under an obligation to post comprehensively

First, if you think there shouldn't even be a Bernie Sanders Group, and/or that favorable posts about him shouldn't be allowed in GD, take it up in ATA.

If you don't want to read these posts, put Donkees on Ignore.

There are many DU members who are interested in reading about Bernie Sanders. In GD we can read plenty of attacks on him. Many of the members who supported him in 2016 have been PPR'd or FFR'd, or have just left in disgust, so there aren't as many positive threads about him as there once were.

Under these circumstances, Donkees does a lot of work to bring relevant information to this board. I'm very appreciative of her contributions.

[Trumpocalypse]

92. Never said he was

I was just asking a simple question out of curiosity.

Why are you so threatened by a simple question?

[ehrnst]

108. Who said anything about there not being a Sanders group or

"favorable posts about him shouldn't be allowed in GD?"

Straw man much?

[Trumpocalypse]

146. +1 nt

[treestar]

157. Maybe these posts belong in the Bernie Sanders Group

It seems that everything he does is thought to be of general interest - not so sure any more.

[ehrnst]

158. I agree. But General Discussion can include anyone, even

a post about a new discovery about George Wallace, or Hitler.

[grantcart]

101. Because he is devoted

[Trumpocalypse]

147. Obviously

But why?

[grantcart]

154. Because he was a damn fine Senator, especially on health care.

And some people (including Sanders) thinks that translates into being a good President. It very rarely does.

Sanders is like the star wide receiver who thinks every pass should be to him

Eventually he thinks he should call all of the plays.

In time he thinks that his team would go to the Super Bowl and score in every possession if he were the quarterback, even though his passing arm isn't that great.

At the end of his career he is resentful of his team and in addition to calling the plays and being the quarter back thinks that they should give him the team and make him owner.

Some of the fans tired of not winning every game buy his argument that winning is easy want to take the team and give it to him.

They are very devoted

[Trumpocalypse]

159. I like Sanders

I just find it curious that someone only posts about Sanders.

[George II]

105. And there are 48 Democratic Senators (well, 46 + 2 Independents), not just one.

[Jim Lane]

123. Actually 49 in the caucus (47 + 2)

If you think that others are being underreported, you should remedy that by actively posting whatever important information you consider to be worth adding to the knowledge available on DU.

IMO, that's what Donkees is doing.

BTW, of those 49 members of the Democratic caucus, which one comes in for the most criticism on DU? Even Joe Manchin wouldn't rate any higher than second, and a pretty distant second at that.

[George II]

126. Joe Manchin and the other Independent haven't relentlessly criticized the Democrat Party...

....over much of their political careers.

[Jim Lane]

129. In 2012, Bernie endorsed Obama. Manchin didn't.

And, yes, I know, Bernie opined in 2011 that there would be benefits to a primary challenge to Obama. I'm talking about the general election. Obama was the DEMOCRATIC nominee against Romney. Bernie endorsed the DEMOCRATIC nominee. Manchin, expressing his disagreements with many of the DEMOCRATIC nominee's policies, did not endorse him.

Manchin fluffers might also take note of how Sanders and Manchin each voted on what may prove the single worst action of 2017, namely the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch.

You're upset that Bernie has frequently pointed out how progressives, including those in the Democratic Party, could do a better job? Fine, you can prioritize having your feelings hurt. I put more weight on the lifetime appointment of a comparatively young right-wing extremist to the Supreme Court.

At any rate, this is of only tangential relevance to the point I was making. DU is awash with Bernie-bashing. Under these circumstances, the board is improved by the posting of information about Bernie from any perspective other than seeing him as Designated Evil.

[Trumpocalypse]

148. It's name is the Democratic party

[RandiFan1290]

150. Democratic Party

We see you!

[progressoid]

153. Manchin? Who criticized Democrats for not standing during Trump's SOTU.

And complained that Pelosi shouldn't call out Trump's racism. And voted for Pruit's confirmation. And has a 61% pro-Trump voting record.

Yeah, fuck that shit.

[Adrahil]

7. LOL....

Another Bernie fluffer thread.

Man, you are not helping his cause with these non-stop fluffer threads.

And a reminder: Sanders is NOT a Democrat.

[RhodeIslandOne]

23. But is Greg Edwards?

I think that should be the big question.

[RandySF]

28. Sanders changed his registration from Independent to Democrat back to Independent

Why is he messing in our primaries?

[David__77]

32. That is untrue.

...

[RandySF]

33. I stand corrected

But he makes it clear that he is not a Democrat

[Demsrule86]

61. That is true...he changed it back after the 16 primary.

[Jim Lane]

66. No, it is UNTRUE. Vermont does not have partisan registration.

Before, during, and after his primary campaign, he was registered to vote with no party affiliation.

Before, during, and after his primary campaign, he was listed on the Senate rolls as an Independent.

Before, during, and after his primary campaign, he was a member of the Democratic caucus in the Senate (as, in fact, he has been throughout his Senate career).

Also, he was not a registered Democrat on those occasions in the fall of 2016 when he traveled to battleground states to hold rallies in support of Hillary Clinton. I think you should send Hillary a stiffly worded letter of protest, demanding that she apologize for allowing her campaign to be sullied by the presence of this non-Democrat.

[Demsrule86]

74. I know that but he did change it back as he had become a Democrat in order to run in the primary.

and then changed it back. live in Ohio where you don't have to be affiliated but I am a member of the Democratic Party.


"Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders will remain with the party if he does not get the nomination, his campaign manager said Wednesday.

In an interview on Bloomberg’s “With All Due Respect,” host Mark Halperin asked campaign manager Jeff Weaver if the Independent senator will stay in the Democratic Party if he doesn't become the nominee.
“Well, he is a Democrat, he said he’s a Democrat and he’s gonna be supporting the Democratic nominee, whoever that is,” Weaver responded.

“But he’s a member of the Democratic Party now for life?” Halperin pressed.

“Yes, he is,” Weaver said."


http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/dem-primaries/277086-sanders-will-be-democrat-for-life-campaign-says

[David__77]

79. He did not change his partisan voter registration.

That just didn't happen.

[George II]

95. That doesn't matter, one doesn't register to vote in order to run for office. Two completely...

....different things.

In order to run for office one files paperwork with the FEC and a state's office of Secretary of State, and that documentation calls for party affiliation.

Here is the procedure to file for the Senate election:

https://www.sec.state.vt.us/elections/candidates.aspx

[George II]

91. Not true at all. Here is Sanders' statement of organization for his re-election committee:

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/344/201510160200258344/201510160200258344.pdf

It clearly states on the second page that his party affiliation is "IND".

On the other hand, here is Patrick Leahy's most recent statement of organization (note: Patrick Leahy is the other Vermont Senator):

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/227/201608250200363227/201608250200363227.pdf

It clearly states on the second page that his party affiliation is "DEM".

Patrick Leahy has been running as a Democrat for more than 40 years.

[Jim Lane]

116. You've shown that the statement I called false WAS false.

He didn't CHANGE anything.

This has been pointed out numerous times. The Bernie-bashers cling to their myth that he changed his party affiliation then changed it back because he cynically exploited the Democratic Party.

They therefore feel compelled to remind us, approximately ten times per week (informal subjective estimate not based on careful tabulation), that Bernie is not a Democrat.

It would serve them right if the Democrats were to swing two Senate seats this fall but Bernie and Angus King, tired of all the hullabaloo over nominal party identification, were to leave the Democratic caucus. Then the Republicans could organize the Senate again and Mitch McConnell would remain as Majority Leader but, on the bright side, the Democratic caucus would consist exclusively of D-after-their-names Democrats, and that's the really important thing, right?

Fortunately for the diehard Bernie-bashers, he prioritizes the welfare of the country over petty revenge. If the Democrats net a two-seat pickup, then, with Bernie's help, they will organize the Senate and take over all the committee and subcommittee chairships. The Democrats who will succeed to those positions are noticeably less obsessed with the party membership issue than are some DUers.

[George II]

125. You're mixing different things. To VOTE in Vermont one doesn't declare....

....party affiliation. To RUN FOR SENATE in Vermont one has to consciously make a declaration as to Party Affiliation, which includes Democratic, republican, any number of minor parties, and Independent.

In either context Sanders is not a Democrat. He's not registered to vote as a Democrat, and he hasn't filed to run for the Senate as a Democrat. His counterpart in the Senate, Patrick Leahy, HAS filed to run for the Senate as a Democrat for 40+ years.

Later this year, if a Democrat runs for Senate in Vermont, Sanders will be running against a Democrat.

Finally, it's rather presumptuous to say that party identification is "nominal". There's a lot more involved with actually being a member of the party than just a label.

[Jim Lane]

130. No, YOU'RE mixing different things. Try to pay attention to the context.

This subthread is about RandySF's statement in #28: "Sanders changed his registration from Independent to Democrat back to Independent". I said that that was untrue -- and RandySF has had the integrity to admit error (#33).

As I said in #116, in responding to you, Bernie "didn't CHANGE anything."

You point to Bernie's campaigning for the Senate as an independent. Here are the facts:
* In 2006, Bernie won the Democratic primary, declined the nomination, and appeared on the general-election ballot as an independent.
* In 2012, Bernie won the Democratic primary, declined the nomination, and appeared on the general-election ballot as an independent.
* In 2018, Bernie will be in the Democratic primary; he has expressed his intention that, if he again wins the primary, he will again decline the nomination, and will again appear on the general-election ballot as an independent.

In 2016, anyone who was horrified by this course of conduct was perfectly free to vote against Bernie on that basis. In 2018, you are perfectly free to believe that this course of conduct is somehow despicable, a threat to all that progressives hold dear, etc., etc., etc. What you are not free to believe is that it represents some kind of change.

This whole thing is silly. The anti-Bernie vitriol is so bad at this point that he could change his listing with the Senate, accept the Democratic nomination this fall, and adopt a pet donkey, and it wouldn't matter to the Bernie-bashers. I resolve to waste less of my time trying to reason with people who are so preoccupied with attacking Bernie Sanders at every turn.

[George II]

134. Whether he runs in the Democratic Primary this year or not, he has filed as an Independent...

...for the election, as he's done in previous elections.

I would not be surprised if the deal he made with Vermont Democrats in prior elections will be rendered null and void this year. No one can say for sure yet, but there's a good chance that he won't be unopposed in the Democratic Primary.

[Jim Lane]

137. Yes, "as he's done in previous elections." My point exactly.

As for this year's Democratic primary, one can see from DU that there's still an enormous reservoir of animosity toward Bernie among certain elements in the Democratic Party. Based on that, I agree with you that there's a good chance he'll have an opponent in the primary.

While we're making predictions, I'll go further: If someone does run against Bernie in the Democratic primary for Senate, Bernie will nevertheless win the primary in a landslide, and will go on to win the general election in a landslide.

[ehrnst]

110. Well, at least he was a Democratic Superdelegate in 2016.

Right?

Before it was, you know, not good to be one, in the eyes of many.

I guess.

[George II]

82. He was actually both back in 2015/2016. Even while he was running....

....as a Democrat for the the office of President he was running for re-election as an Independent for the office of Senator.

2015 Statement of Candidacy (President):

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/533/15031422533/15031422533.pdf

2015 Statement of Organization (Senator)

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/344/201510160200258344/201510160200258344.pdf

A curious political dichotomy.

[RhodeIslandOne]

36. Randy, that's not the question I asked

You steered it right back to Sanders....


Is Greg Edwards the right choice in this primary or not?

[George II]

81. As a matter of fact, even while he was running as a "Democrat" in 2016....

....he had already begun his 2018 Senate re-election campaign as an "Independent".

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/344/201510160200258344/201510160200258344.pdf

[BoneyardDem]

40. The OP was intended to fluff Bernie...it's the posters MO

most of us can see that

[Jim Lane]

120. I take it that "fluff" means "praise someone whom you personally dislike"

Or would you say that favorable posts about Hillary Clinton or Adam Schiff or anyone else are also intended to "fluff" that person?

For my part, I think it's perfectly possible to post about Clinton or Schiff or any other politician, e.g. by giving information about recent speeches or endorsements, without engaging in "fluff".

[RandiFan1290]

152. It's a term from the porn industry.

A fluffer is a person employed to keep a male porn performer's penis erect on the set.[1] These duties, which do not necessarily involve touching the actors, are considered part of the makeup department. After setting up the desired angle, the director asks the actors to hold position and calls for the fluffer to "fluff" the actors for the shot. Fluffing could also entail sexual acts such as fellatio or non-penetrative sex.

I find it disgusting that people are allowed to use that against fellow Democrats just because the right wing hates Bernie.

[David__77]

31. Sanders is a leader of Democrats.

...

[RandySF]

35. Really?

He made clear in 2017 that he is not a Democrat

[David__77]

47. Yes, he is a leader of Democrats.

In fact, 46% of the pledged delegates at the last Democratic National Convention were pledged to vote for him as Democratic presidential nominee. I was glad to vote for him in the Democratic primary in California.

[ehrnst]

113. HRC had 100 fewer pledged delegates than Obama in 2008.

While having within 1% of the number of actual votes that Obama did.

Can you IMAGINE the reaction if what happened to Hillary had happened to a future candidate? The idea of pledged delegates might well have been called "corrupt!!"

Hopefully election year caucuses, which give a small number of very loud citizens (who are able to leave their jobs for the time and travel it takes to it takes to caucus), far, far more power than the majority of citizens to choose, and can skew the pledged delegate count toward away from the will of the people, will be seen for what they are in 2020.
eral in

Fortunately, the candidate with the most votes, even within a 1% spread, has always gone on to be the Democratic nominee.

But usually with a way, way bigger spread, like 12%, and a clear mandate from the Democratic majority.

[George II]

139. Less than one's opponent generally doesn't translate to "leader".

[BoneyardDem]

42. I don't think so

[NCTraveler]

48. In his very long career as a politician.

What do you think his greatest two accomplishments of leadership have been?

[Adrahil]

57. Not to me, he isn't.

Anyone who doesn't COMMIT to a group is not fit to lead it, IMO.

It's downright insulting for him to think he can pull that shit.

[David__77]

58. I get that.

I'm not insulted, some are.

[Adrahil]

84. I used to think well of the man....

My wife still likes him.

But I cannot respect someone who likes to stand on the outside of our house and piss in. I'm perfectly willing to discuss things we need to address in our own house, but I resent someone who will not even COMMIT to it's improvement giving me a list of things I need to clean up before he would deign to to come in. I was okay (more or less) with him being his gadlfy self once he said he was a Democrat. My respect for him crumbled when he left the party again after the primary.

I am exhausted by having to struggle with people allegedly on my own side, when we face such dire times. And Bernie's insistence on dragging out the primary, and his leaving the party was a really a problem for me, IMO.

Thanks for hearing me out.

[David__77]

89. I understand what you're saying.

I am hopeful that there will be renewed affinity among Democrats and progressives generally. During the latter part of George W. Bush's presidency, for instance, I think that there was a lot of affinity among progressives/Democrats in general.

I think that there are actual differences in worldview and political programs among Democrats. I hope that there can be agreement on some minimum program of action.

[George II]

94. During the latter part of GWB's presidency I hadn't even heard of him, and I live....

....about 80 miles from Vermont.

[George II]

83. In what manner?

[David__77]

90. He is certainly the talk of the town.

All the rage, indeed.

[grantcart]

100. No he is not and says so quite clearly.

[David__77]

106. I don't think it matters what he says in that regard. He is.

I get that not everyone will agree with me.

[grantcart]

109. you will just close your eyes and pretend he said something

You are very devoted.

[sheshe2]

136. How do you lead a party that ..

How do you lead a party that you do not belong to, criticize always, and refuse to join...except for one brief shining moment where he said this:

Sanders: Yes, I'm a Democrat of Convenience

The longtime independent says he'd "need to be a billionaire" to run for president without a party.

Bernie Sanders raised eyebrows Monday when he admitted his decision to join the Democratic Party to run for president was not an ideological choice or driven by loyalty, but a way to hack the nominating process.

“Here’s the truth. You’re right, I am the longest serving independent in the history of the United States Congress,” the Vermont senator, who identifies as a Democratic Socialist, told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd during a town hall Monday night in Ohio.

“We did have to make that decision: Do you run as an independent? Do you run within the Democratic Party?” He said. “We concluded – and I think it was absolutely the right decision – that, A, in terms of media coverage, you have to run within the Democratic Party.”

snip


“The structure of American politics today is such that I thought the right ethic was to run within the Democratic Party,” he said.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-03-15/sanders-yes-im-a-democrat-of-convenience

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

"Sanders: Yes, I'm a Democrat of Convenience "

[PADemD]

8. Thanks for the great news!

I had not read the Morning Call.

Trump won Northampton County (in CD7) bigly.

The latest campaign mailings have been smears. It’s nice to hear such a great endorsement.

[Donkees]

9. Here's a Greg Edwards campaign video on twitter ...

Link to tweet

[PADemD]

11. Thanks!

I don't read Twitter or Facebook regularly.

Greg Edwards called me personally several months ago. He will be speaking to our local women's group on May 9. Looking forward to meeting him.

[Demsrule86]

62. This is a Republican district...don't think Gred Edwards can win a general.

[George II]

96. He won't get a chance, Susan Wild will most likely win the primary.

From past performances, this endorsement won't do much for Edwards.

[PADemD]

122. Morganelli has greater name recognition than Susan Wild.

[Donkees]

10. ''Humbled and honored to receive the endorsement of @SenSanders. ''

Link to tweet

[BoneyardDem]

43. so this WAS a Bernie fluffer OP...confirmation

[SharonClark]

13. Per Ballotpedia, here are the other candidates

Primary candidates - Democratic Party
David Clark
Rick Daugherty
Greg Edwards
John Morganelli
Roger Ruggles
Susan Wild

Any insight into the rest of them?

[PADemD]

15. See Open Secrets Link

https://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary?cycle=2018&id=PA07

Personal opinion:
David Clark - never heard of him before, he's pushing his latest book
Rick Daugherty - Third attempt at running, only $1,788 cash on hand
John Morganelli - crime fighting conservative Democrat who supposedly asked Trump for a job
Roger Ruggles - Former (by several months) Republican who stood up our last woman's group meeting
Susan Wild - promised Morganelli not to go negative, but last two mailings slam Morganelli. Vote for me because I'm a woman.

[RhodeIslandOne]

24. Sounds like Edwards is a good choice

The rest sound like opportunists.

[SidDithers]

16. Then he's sure to lose...

Go Susan Wild!

I'd take the candidate supported by Emily's List over Pastor Edwards, supported by the grifters at PCCC, any day.

Sid

[MrsCoffee]

19. +1

[Demsrule86]

64. I don't live there but would support an Emily's list candidate myself.

[JustAnotherGen]

67. Yep -

Can't disagree with this statement.

[RandySF]

26. I thought it was a DEMOCRATIC primary

[PADemD]

34. Democratic Candidate Ruggles is a former Republican

By luck of the draw, his name appears first on the ballot.

[MineralMan]

27. OK. Well, PA-7 Is a District that was greatly affected

by the redistricting court decision. There are three leading candidates in the primary, which takes place on May 15. Personally, I'm going to let voters in that district decide who they want on the November ballot. I don't know enough about that district to comment, really. I doubt very much that you do, either.

For those who would like more information, especially if you actually are a voter there, here's some:

https://ballotpedia.org/Pennsylvania%27s_7th_Congressional_District

I don't care who Bernie endorses in a district he isn't living in. Local Democrats know who they want, and will select that candidate to run in November.

[Demsrule86]

63. I agree with you...I actually don't think politicians should endorse in primaries.

[David__77]

29. He is also supported by the SEIU.

...

[George II]

97. He's endorsed by SEIU Pennsylvania State Council only.

[brooklynite]

38. PA-7 has a three-way Primary...

Greg Edwards (D) - Pastor
John Morganelli (D) - Northampton County District Attorney & Frequent Statewide Candidate
Susan Wild (D) - Ex-Allentown City Solicitor, Community Activist & '13 County Board Candidate

All three are fairly equal on campaign cash

[George II]

104. Is it down to three now? A little while ago there were six, but I know at least one dropped out....

....and is now supporting Susan Wild.

[brooklynite]

107. There are some minor candidates...

...but experience tells me that if you’re under $100K a month out and you can’t put together a professional website, you’re not a serious competitor.

[NCTraveler]

60. A lot of PAC money is being directed into his account.

https://secure.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/54091

[Donkees]

68. May 5 - Bernie Sanders to make a stop in Lehigh Valley for Greg Edwards for Congress

Bernie Sanders to make a stop in Lehigh Valley

Excerpt:

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, whose populist mojo has made him a sort of a charm for liberal-leaning Democrats, will be in the Lehigh Valley next week to campaign on behalf of Greg Edwards for Congress.

Sanders is scheduled to speak at a rally, dubbed “America for All of Us’” at 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. Saturday at Miller Symphony Hall in Allentown.

Doors will open at noon and seating will be granted on a first-come, first-served bases.Pre-registration is encouraged.

Edwards, who is competing against five other Democrats in the 7th District, has often echoed Sanders mantra of debt-free education, universal pre-Kindergarten, Medicare for All and a higher minimum. He was endorsed last week by the Congressional Progressive Caucus which counts Sanders, now an independent, as a member.

http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-nws-pa-7-bernie-sanders-edwards-20180428-story.html

[George II]

85. Confirmation of the point I made in Post #70.

[asiliveandbreathe]

86. Pie in the sky - as usual - ain't gonna happen - this has been the problem for Sanders...

debt-free education, universal pre-Kindergarten, Medicare for All and a higher minimum. - I will wait for those in PA to identify the other DEMOCRATIC candidates...and not hang my hat on something that is wishful thinking...all those issues are great...but have never materialized.....

My question for ALL the Sanders drummers...HOW?

[David__77]

93. Do you support those things?

...debt-free education, universal pre-Kindergarten, Medicare for All and a higher minimum?

They sound pretty good to me. Reduce military spending, raise taxes, fund these things and more. I tend to vote for candidates that I agree with. Now, I live in California, and the political climate may be different from that of other places.

[asiliveandbreathe]

98. I believe I said..all those things are great - so why hasn't sanders been able to see

those issues to fruition...here in AZ, politics stink..CA has always had the momentum for doing the most good for the most people...but not biting off more than they can deliver...

[Blue_true]

143. Realism isn't Sanders admirers' strong suit.

No decent democrat DON'T want those things. But like you pointed out about California, great progress comes from a set of determined small steps.

Bernie has been in Congress for something like 30 years. If the things he is calling for are so simple to achieve, why hasn't HE achieved them yet?

[Blue_true]

142. Yes, it is always that easy.

Wave a magic wand and presto, it happens. Seriously cutting military spending and raising taxes on the rich are long fights. President Obama raised taxes on the rich as the country was about to burn due to Bush, but thanks to purists behavior leading up to November 2016, we are heading back to the debacle President Obama saved us from.

[David__77]

145. It may not be easy.

I can certainly lend them the support of my vote.

I’m all for a clear and practical plan of action to achieve these things.

[Jim Lane]

124. I'm not sure I qualify as a "drummer" but I'll answer your question

Let's look at history. How did women get the vote? How did the Jim Crow era end? How did Medicare for even some get enacted? How did the nation achieve marriage equality?

The answer for each of these, and for many other forward steps, is the same. None happened overnight. In each instance, there was a time when it would have seemed pretty much inconceivable. I'll guess that "pie in the sky" was applied to each, because that has been a favorite conservative meme since before anyone even talked about memes.

What proved the scoffers wrong was that, in each instance, many people put their shoulders to the wheel and worked for what they knew was right. Many could know or suspect that they wouldn't even live to see the victory, it would take so long. But, nevertheless, they persisted (as one of our contemporary scoffers so famously put it). It turns out that, with enough people persisting over enough time, even pie in the sky can sometimes be served on everyone's plates.

Of the goals that you list, none will be enacted this year. What will happen this year is that progressives will keep working and will keep trying to make progress, one election at a time.

[StevieM]

133. Universal pre-K is a longtime HRC issue. Somehow I doubt he will acknowledge that

when presenting himself as the progressive alternative.

[Blue_true]

144. Yes, Hillary has championed that since 92, and actually got some results.

Before she raised the issue, PreK was not available for poor and middleclass kids in any state. Now, many states have mandatory PreK for four hours 3 to 4 days per week.

I bet you that if Bernie said the the sky is often blue, there will be some on DU doing cartwheels writing about what a visionary genius he is.

[samnsara]

151. dont we ALL want debt free higher ed, universal pre K, higher min wage....

...why is it always linked to one or two specific candidates? I think this is what ALL dems want. This article makes it sound like a novel and unique idea.

[treestar]

156. Do people in PA 7 want advice from a Vermont Senator?

If so, they have it.

[PADemD]

160. Yes, we do.

[Blue_Tires]

161. I thought he wasn't doing that anymore?