I feel like I'm losing my mind with still more Hillary vs. Bernie

[Saviolo]

How is it possible that we're still focused on Bernie vs. Hillary? It's so far behind us now that the orange fog has completely obscured it. Being able to argue points about the primary and all of this infighting is a luxury and a privilege, meanwhile people are actually dying out there because they're standing up to people waving nazi flags, giving nazi salutes, and spouting nazi slogans.

There is a VERY CLEARLY DEFINED enemy that we should ALL be organizing TOGETHER to fight, but we keep picking at old scabs on each other. "He didn't concede early enough!" "She took all that money from Wall St.!" Jesus, enough. There are ACTUAL NAZIS happening in the USA right now, maybe that should be the focus? And they're enabled and emboldened by the people who are currently in power, and guess what: Lots of those white nationalists in Congress and the Senate didn't magically get elected this past election, they've been there for YEARS!

Dammit, focus, everyone!

[klook]

1. The floggings will continue until morale improves. (nt)

[Martin Eden]

97. You BEAT me to it.

Circular firing squad also applies.

[Amimnoch]

150. You should be flogged just for that awful pun.

[Martin Eden]

186. Ouch!

You're hurting my cyber head.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. I certainly agree.

Enough, already.

These folks are focused---on the wrong stuff.

[TexasProgresive]

3. I read through DU daily and haven't a clue as to what you are talking about.

Are you trying to restart the conversation about the primary. That's off limits for quite some time. Be careful.

[Saviolo]

8. With the release of Hillary's book

I've seen three or four threads the last couple of days talking about Bernie vs. Hillary, and I'm trying to urge people to move PAST that. I'm trying to do exactly the opposite of what you're picking up from my statement. There is a very clearly defined enemy in front of us, and that should be our focus, not a primary that's been over for over a year now.

Standing up together against -actual nazis- needs to be the focus.

[TexasProgresive]

15. Here's the proceedure

Click the alert button an click "Don't keep fighting the last Democratic presidential primary" Then it will be up to a jury.

[mia]

30. I've served on a couple of juries recently that addressed this issue.

Both were about Sanders being blamed for Clinton losing the election. One was a post that was part of a back and forth argument and the other was an OP that seemed to be started to rehash the primary.

[Ms. Toad]

31. Unfortunately, juries have been leaving them

If you're not seeing these threads, you must have all of the right people on ignore. I logged in yesterday to alert on a thread, an was hit with a jury request for that very thread. It stayed, I alerted on it in a different category - and discovered that the jury I was on was (at least) the second on that thread, since the alert cleared immediately. So people following the process you suggest, and the place is still trashed with Bernie made Hillary lose threads.

[thesquanderer]

38. But Hillary is releasing that book, discussing all this stuff.

Is it reasonable to expect that nobody here is going to want to discuss what she says in her book?

The site is big enough to hold those conversations and still not skimp on all the important stuff you're talking about. Heck, look at the left column and see all the *other* stuff that gets discussed here.

I understand that "refighting the primary" is off limits (for understandable reasons), but if Hillary comes out and "refights the primary," it may be a rules over-reach to say that we can't discuss her points here, when so many of us are going to read that book, and it is of obvious and natural interest to the members of this site. Skinner may want to weigh in here. Maybe a temporary rules change, specific to the book, or something like that, in its own section, is worth considering...? There are pros and cons.

[True Dough]

47. It really is a dilemma

I agree with you, the timing of Hillary's book launch and the contents of "What Happened?" make it inevitable to revisit that troubled period. I loathe the thought, but it's impossible to avoid now.

[woodsprite]

87. Maybe convos about her book need to be moved to a separate group.

That would seem appropriate and would keep this back/forth stuff from littering the General Discussion forum.

Under "Reading and Writing" there is a "Non-Fiction" forum. If that won't work, maybe we need a "Book Discussion" forum.

[The Mouth]

117. I agree

There is no way to discuss the book without some souls accusing one of 'refighting the primary'. I'd like to discuss the book -AND - I, personally, feel that some of the issues that animated the differences between supporters of Bernie and Hillary are still pertinent, but hard to discuss without appearing to be contentious or hostile.

[klook]

171. I think there should be a special forum for DUers who want to keep re-fighting the 2016 Dem primary

-- call it, say, The Circular Firing Squad Forum -- and anybody posting there automatically gets -20 points per post.

A slightly facetious suggestion, but I wouldn't object.

And I will probably get a Hide just for suggesting this.

[Paka]

223. Great Idea!

[ehrnst]

239. Was that done with discussions of "Our Revolution?" (nt)

[karynnj]

103. I agree that there should be a temporay dispensation to discuss this with no posts being eliminated

for "refighting the primary". I agree that Hillary Clinton's book is something that can not reasonably be ignored and - quite frankly - it is silly to alert on threads that raise this. Yet, once the threads are allowed, it is not right to silence anyone disagreeing with something that is genuinely debatable. Here, I get the problem ... any analysis of a losing campaign - even if it were to have greatly exceeded expectations (which 2016 did not) is painful focusing on all the negatives and erasing all the high moments. I get that many hate seeing HRC criticized because they put their hearts and souls into her winning. However, it is Clinton who actually started the refighting the primaries ... and we can't alert on her.

If the people starting those provacative posts want to discuss it ONLY among people willing to take Hillary's opinions as fact, they should put the thread in DU Hillary Clinton, where less criticism is allowed than on the main forums. A separate forum (or reintstatement of the 2016 forum) without the rule might be better.

[Demsrule86]

4. Have you read about Our Revolution and there plans to primary sitting Democrats?

They also have said they will back Republicans in some cases...Nina Turner a Sen. Sanders supporter said this.

[NurseJackie]

6. I do not believe that group is an ally of Democrats.

[Sunlei]

182. reporter asked-should people start a 3rd party?Bernie said, "NO. Stay in & support Democratic Party"

This was last week.

"NO. Stay in & support Democratic Party"[/b]

[NurseJackie]

184. Oh, I missed that. Can you post the link, please? (Thanks.)

I'm surprised that this is the first I'm hearing about it.

[Sunlei]

187. I watched it on a news show Sanders was on last week. He's been on several shows.

I think it was Sunday 9/27? one of those news shows Bernie was on,

the major days of the Houston flood 48 hours where I didn't have time to even sleep. thank god for strong coffee

[NurseJackie]

188. I'll have to see it or read a transcript before I comment further.

It's probably lost to history now.

[Sunlei]

192. here, I've spend a while looking for the "proof" for you. This is the closest I can find.

Sanders is on a lot of 'news' and interview type shows these past weeks.

I found this Bernie Sanders - After the tragic events in... | Facebook



https://www.facebook.com/berniesanders/posts/1516023551785977



Aug 24, 2017 - The Vermont senator opened a new line of attack against the president's Charlottesville reaction and urged activists to stay inside the Democratic Party.

heres the link to Bernies facebook and WP article is behind a damn paywall on this computer. Have a good day and how come I have to wait until 9/13 for my pre-ordered Hillary book when everyone seems to have their copy today?
https://www.facebook.com/berniesanders/posts/1516023551785977

[NurseJackie]

193. Ah. Two weeks ago and the context was Charlottesville.

Paywall blockade here as well. No matter. This throw-away off-the-cuff remark doesn't undo the damage caused by calling the Democratic party and its leaders "senile" and "ideologically bankrupt".

All I'm saying is that it's talk like that that Stein-voters glom onto to justify their stupidity and vanity-votes. If little ol' me is smart enough to figure that out, then seasoned politicians should be able to figure it out (and the consequences) also, right? And that just gets me to wondering and questioning...

Could it represent a turning point? Who knows? Not enough information exists. We'll have to wait and see if he's sincere or if it was just a one-off thing.

In the meantime... I remain skeptical.

how come I have to wait

Advance copies are frequently distributed to media outlets, reviewers, bookstores. Helps to generate interest and sales (as you can see.)

[Sunlei]

206. yes, but I also heard 'some reporter' ask Sanders that direct 3rd party question-

Sanders answer was the curt, short and direct answer- "NO. Stay in & support Democratic Party"


He is on our side. god I wish Hillary had picked Bernie for VP.. IMO they were close to a VP 'deal' but not close enough.(probably because of crabbie old Bernie, lol ) Hillary went with someone she knew, liked and trusted much more.

Hillarys book will be a number one best seller. Already it's by far one of Amazons number one pre-ordered book. She is a very strong person.

[NurseJackie]

208. That would have been a disaster. She made the best choice.

Hillary went with someone she knew, liked and trusted much more.

Trust is the operative word here. Agreed.

[melanctha]

197. Stay in and wreck the democratic party.

Bernie and his supporters would like to reimagine the democratic party in Bernie's image. This is the Democratic party. It is a party of we the people, not we Bernie. There is no way we can win 2018 with a clear threat from within. To primary sitting Dems and try and force white working class male ascendance on democrats is vile. We won the working class last election, just not not white working class. They were not animated by class or economics but by race. Our platform nailed working and middle class concerns. Now we are supposed to give WWMs ascendance within the party and force our loyal base,POCs, not under the bus but to the back of the bus. The irony is heinous. We lose our base and we lose.

[Sunlei]

209. thanks for your concern. I love Bernie & Hillary. I'm keeping them both on _my_ team.

[mucifer]

9. So everything his supporters say reflects on him?

Does that only work for Bernie? Does every Hillary supporter reflect on her?

Should we say that Bernie is the one who tried murdering republican congressmen when they played baseball?

BTW I do believe people should have choices in primaries. I didn't vote for rahm emmanuel as my mayor and he is a democrat. He was backed by the Clintons and President Obama. But, I didn't vote for him and I never will. I didn't vote for a republican. I voted for someone more liberal.

[boston bean]

16. That is Sanders group.

[disillusioned73]

105. Nina Turner is not bad..

the smear merchants have been trying to destroy her since the primary cause she dared to have her own opinuion.. go figure, a strong black female liberal/progressive voice is not welcomed..

[Susan Calvin]

137. No, we've already been a center right party for some time. Unfortunately. nt

[SunSeeker]

138. Nina Turner is President of Our Revolution, which is working to primary sitting Democrats.

https://www.thenation.com/article/nina-turner-it-is-not-our-job-to-fit-into-the-democratic-establishment/

There is nothing "strong" or "liberal/progressive" about that.

[Plucketeer]

158. So if YOUR truths are the ones

I MUST believe (none of that thinking for myself BS!), how does that make me any different from a staunch Trump supporter?

[SunSeeker]

165. These aren't "my truths," these are the facts.

You don't have to believe facts. You're free to join the Trumpanzees in creating your own "alternative facts," but they won't be facts.

[Plucketeer]

167. Wow!

What an irony. I actually went to your church a time or two a few decades ago!

[Tanuki]

154. She did not support the Democratic candidate in the general election.

[disillusioned73]

163. Ohhhh..

She did not "support".. and by support do you mean like Senator Sanders advocating & campaiging for Clinton?? Because I am quite certain she was not asked by the Clinton camp to do any such things since she was shunned at the convention.. not that if asked she was obligated to do anything other than vote her own concious.. and I am un-aware of her publicsing who that might have been.. I would think Clinton but I wasn't in the voting booth with her..

[Tanuki]

170. In late October, she was quite offended by an MSNBC anchor's suggestion

that she had supported Hillary over Trump.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbc-anchor-calls-out-nina-turner-as-a-hillary-supporter-she-denies-and-asks-to-roll-the-tape/amp/
..."Discussing the recent FBI letter from James Comey and the emails from Huma Abedin, Roberts wanted to know if this story made her rethink her choice of backing Clinton.

“I know that you were a super Bernie Sanders supporter,” Roberts stated. “And in light of this, and the fact you got on board and backed Hillary Clinton, does any of this make you regret that decision?”

Immediately, Turner noted that she is “not backing anybody in this general election,” adding that she wanted to “clear that up right away.” She proceeded to decry that the American people have taken a backseat in this election and that nobody is talking about income inequality, but instead just focusing on “drama and more drama.”

Xxxxxxxxxxxxx

So, to answer your question, Turner's own on-camera statement a week before the election that she was "not backing anybody in this general election," when given an opportunity to voice even the most tepid endorsement, is an example of what I mean. Bully for her "conscience." It's sure as hell not helping the 800,000 DACA dreamers, or the environment, or healthcare, or public education, or women's reproductive rights, or Wall Street regulation. I hope she enjoys the current "drama and more drama," because she and her apologists certainly won't take any responsibility for ushering it in.

[disillusioned73]

175. Wow..

that's all you got.. a whole week before, jees - I guess that was the nail in the coffin of the Clinton campaign?? Please, that's a stretch - she is a strong independent black female that wouldn't tow the line.. and that is why there has been an attempt to silence her, period and of story.. I am glad that she is still advocating for liberal/progressive causes.. and the Dems need more voices like hers - NOT LESS.

[Tanuki]

178. As I said, she did not support the Democratic candidate against Trump in the election.

Choices have consequences.

[Justice]

243. No one is trying to silence Nina Turner. But she is not a Democrat if she doesn't support Democrats.

Nina is making that choice, not anyone else.

[ehrnst]

246. Imagine - a strong woman having the nerve to express her opinion.

She had better not dare to write a book....

[SunSeeker]

130. The whole group wants to primary sitting Democrats.

Our Revolution is Bernie's group. It is not just one person. It is not just Nina Turner. It is the whole group's agenda.

[disillusioned73]

164. I think you may..

have Our Revolution confused with Justice Democrats..

[SunSeeker]

180. No.

https://www.thenation.com/article/nina-turner-it-is-not-our-job-to-fit-into-the-democratic-establishment/

And then there's this:

Tim Canova is challenging former DNC Chair Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz in Florida. Single-payer health care is a divisive issue between the two candidates, as Wasserman Schultz has yet to support the policy.

Activist Paula Jean Swearengin is primarying Sen. Joe Manchin in 2018 with the help of Brand New Congress, an organization founded by former Bernie Sanders staffers. The primary puts pressure on Manchin, one of the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, to support the policy.

http://observer.com/2017/08/democrats-primary-challenges-single-payer-health-care/

[disillusioned73]

190. Ummm..

2 of the worst around..

Single payer - yes please
Payday loan sharks - no thanks (& a myriad of other issues)
DINO - again, no thanks

"One-hundred-and-sixteen Democrats in the House have signed onto Congressman John Conyers Medicare for all bill, the highest number since Conyers began introducing the bill in 2003. He has introduced it every congressional session ever since."

Policy over personality..

Right in the article;

"If they want Our Revolution’s endorsement they will seek it like everybody else and so they gotta start with the local affiliates, and if the local affiliates say that this is the person that we want to back, then there it is. There it is."

Endoresemnts are different from "running" candidates, I guess the local affiliates made thier choice.. FDR democrats

[SunSeeker]

199. NO Democrat is worse than a Republican. And that is what you'd get by attacking a sitting Dem.

It just plays into GOP hands to attack sitting Dems, particularly in red-leaning districts. Our perfect candidate would never get elected in such a district. Why not find a vulnerable sitting Dem you do like, or a Dem challenger of a sitting Republican, and help them, instead of attacking sitting Dems that are not pure enough?

[disillusioned73]

200. Pure enough?? Let's go with current events then..

The Dream Act Would Be Law But for 5 Democratic Senators who Filibustered.

[link:https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/9/5/1696211/-The-Dream-At-Would-Be-Law-But-for-5-Democratic-Seantors-who-Filibustered|

"It might have been so different if those 5 had the common decency President Obama spoke about today."


Do you think the 800,000 people now under the threat of possible deportation care if it was an R or a D that helped cause this problem??

[SunSeeker]

207. The GOP was filibustering, not the Democrats.

Yes, those 5 Dems opposed DACA so they voted No on overriding the Republican filibuster, but they were red-district Dems. Without those 5 Dems we wouldn't have the ACA. 4 of those 5 were replaced by Republicans. Is that better now? The only one of those 5 still in office is Jon Tester. You want him replaced with a Republican? Without red state Dems we can't control the Senate. Winning in red states with liberal candidates is difficult if not impossible.


As comments to the counterproductive blog post you cite noted:

The primary fault does not lie with the scant few Democrats who did not support the law. The fault lies with the overwhelming majority of Republicans who did not support the law. We need to be crystal clear on the distinction between the two parties. One scores an A- while the other scores an F.

And as another noted:

538 has a running tally of how every member of the House and the Senate votes, weighted by 2016 Presidential vote, to rank how plus or minus Trump-y they are compared to their district:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/

Jon Tester has the #1 most “anti-Trump-compared-to-district” vote score in the Senate. Much-maligned Heidi Heitkamp is 2nd; Claire McCaskill is 3rd; good old Sherrod Brown is 4th; “evil” Joe Manchin is 5th.

People really need to think realistically about who would likely replace these senators.

[disillusioned73]

234. So....

" 4 of those 5 were replaced by Republicans."

This was under Obamas watch, but let's keep doing what we've been doing.. got it

[SunSeeker]

241. No. I don't want us to "keep doing what we're doing."

I want us to stop attacking red state Dems and Dems in general. I want us to direct our ire on the GOP instead. Pick a Dem candidate you do like and focus your energy on supporting him or her.

[disillusioned73]

242. I agree..

to an extent, yes pick Dems or left leaning Indies and support them. I just don't think anyone is above reproach.. if Dems (voters) for example in a "red state" or distract want a challenger to a Dem incumbant, I really don't have an issue with it.. you do, so we will have to disagree there..

Ultimately our goals coincide.. more liberal/progressive representation throughout all levels of government..

[ehrnst]

248. Because who needs experience when you can have "NEW BLOOD"?

Except, of course when it comes to one politician in particular.

Because, you know, he's DIFFERENT.

[Demsrule86]

25. He is involved with Our Revolution.

[hfojvt]

67. That used to be okay on DU

I remember the glory days when Lieberman was primaried. Lamont seemed to be supported by at least 80% of DU. If Lieberman had supporters, they weren't saying anything. Granted, in the general election we are yellow dogs for blue dogs, but its better to NOT have to walk (with) the DINOsaur.

[leftofcool]

133. You can't expect more from Nina Turner.

First she was a Hillary supporter, then she went to Bernie, then she went to Stein and now she is backing Republicans. She really doesn't have a political ideology.

[AllyCat]

152. Stop it. Just stop. Read the OP

Please note that we need to band together. More candidates are NOT a bad thing, but we need to focus on the correct people for the job. Not one Republican is the right person for the job right now.

Quit carrying on about things that are not the enemy and focus on what we need to do. Fighting Bernie supporters, Clinton supporters, OWS, OFA, and Our Revolution are NOT IT.

[ellnthomp]

204. Thank you. Finally a voice of SANITY

Do Dems want to WIN or do Dems want to BICKER?
HRC beat Bernie. He campaigned for her. SHE LOST. Time to deal with that FACT.

2018 is fast approaching. GOP is salivating over every Dem seat up for grabs, while they watch Dems SQUABBLE.

Do We Want to WIN ? Then it's time to stop contention and be a DEM and put the PAST where it belongs.

Look FORWARD, not BACK. There will be wins and losses. we MUST recover from the losses to work for more wins.

Unless you're willing to do that, YOU are part of the problem, and YOU are forcing loss in elections.

I know this post will be unpopular. I've watched long enough. It's time to speak up. Think 2018.

Please.

[AllyCat]

210. Right on. Thank you.

[Progressive dog]

212. I have and it makes me sick

[mucifer]

5. I know lots of us come he for support in difficult times and if we voted for Bernie I feel this

constant bashing.

I feel at least there should be a bash Bernie group so it's not all in the general discussion forum.


I'm so sick of it.

[NurseJackie]

7. Nobody is doing that.

[melman]

35. .

[RandomAccess]

146. No, least of all you

[white_wolf]

219. Sure they are. If you haven't seen it then you aren't paying attention nt

[NurseJackie]

220. Can you link to an example? Or maybe it's been hidden already...

... and if that's the case, then what's the problem? There's always going to be an occasional miscreant and lapse of good judgement... but you're acting as if it's something that's running rampant and this website is complete anarchy.

I think it's a bit disingenuous to try and squelch an honest and open discussion about Hillary's version of "What Happened" by bringing in all these distractions. Doesn't she deserve to be heard? Don't we deserve the opportunity to have a frank discussion on her perspective? Why are so many in such a big hurry to silence her?

[ehrnst]

230. Can you provide examples? Not everyone has the same definition of bashing. (nt)

[Me.]

32. Understandable

But for my part, I am tired of the Senator and his group constantly bashing Dems. Post #4 has it exactly right and that is happening now, not the past and likely in the future.

[LakeArenal]

52. Yes. A Bernie Bashing group..

So I can ignore it.

[ehrnst]

231. Politicians in office will be criticized. That's part of the package. (nt)

[LakeArenal]

236. Yes, but I don't need to listen to "bashing"

Heated political discourse is fine. Bashing by folks supposedly with the same goals is nothing I'm interested in.

[ehrnst]

238. One person's criticism is another's bashing. Particularly when it comes to favorite politicians.

Whether it is or isn't "bashing" on DU is up to the jury you get.

You can report a post, and see if the jury agrees.

[LakeArenal]

240. If you can't distinguish bashing

From political discourse, then be my guest and continue on a site created just for you. The many here are sick of Bernie bashing, especially in regards to the Clinton campaign and the past. Which incidentally, is something we are supposed to be finished with, as per DU.

[ehrnst]

245. If you can't distinguish bashing

From political discourse, then be my guest and continue on a site created just for you. The many here are sick of Hillary bashing, especially in regards to the primary campaign and the past.

Which incidentally, is something we are supposed to be finished with, as per DU.

[LakeArenal]

247. I never bash Hillary, so I don't know to whom you refer.

If you'd like to create a site just for Hillary bashing, be my guest. I can ignore that as well.

[ehrnst]

249. I think a site for those that don't know the difference between bashing

and critiquing their favorite politician might be a good idea. Be my guest.

Until then, there is the alert button if you feel that a "democratic" leader is being bashed.

That's what the juries are there for, as I understand, to determine if it is indeed bashing or something different.

[LakeArenal]

250. Just give it up, ehrnst...

You and I don't agree.. Just leave it... Cripes...

[ehrnst]

253. Like you're doing? (nt)

[padfun]

71. In that poll published a few weeks ago,

It showed that 9% of Bernie primary voters did not vote for Hillary. And the flame wars were off and running. I got called on a lot of juries in just a few days.

But what nobody mentioned, is that same poll showed that in 2008 24% of Hillary primary voters did NOT vote for Obama. Yet nothing gets said about that. It's a double standard.

[brush]

81. Obama won though. Nine percent would've helped Clinton win against the orange idiot. Big difference

[Whiskeytide]

127. Really not a big difference at all ...

... The outcome in the general was different - but the behavior of the voters was quite typical. The outcome was simply a reflection of that in a close race.

Typically, about 10% of voters are so pissed off that their candidate lost the primary, they refuse to support the "other candidate". It's been that way for as long as we've had primaries. Bernie's supporters fit that model perfectly - 9%. But they are being excoriated because the outcome was different.

2008 Clinton supporters went higher. A lot of theories for that - women felt disenfranchised when she lost the primary, Obama was young and unproven, Obama was black (yes, their ARE racists in the Dem party too)... but the fact of the matter is that this was expected, and always has been. Obama won so overwhelmingly that it didn't affect the outcome in the general. 2016 was closer, and arguably the 9% made a difference.

There was barely a whisper of a difference between Sanders and Clinton policy-wise. I dare you to find a distinction that was genuinely material. There just wasn't one. But this divide is being amped and exploited to create a perception of conflict and divide the Dem party. The question we really need to explore is WHO is stoking it.

[brush]

131. The EC was flipped by 77,000 votes. I beg to differ that nine percent made no difference.

[Whiskeytide]

143. I agreed that the 9% made a difference, but...

... my point was that it was a normal and expected 9%. It only made a difference because the general was close enough to be within that margin.

If Sanders' supporters had turned to the tune of 30 or 40% - I'd agree that Sanders' primary campaign damaged Clinton in the general. But only 9%? - that evidences that Sanders' supporters did exactly what they were expected to do, and were as typically loyal to the party as any other group of opposition supporters.

Hating on them makes little sense.

[Tom Rinaldo]

214. Some Independents and even some rural Democrats who voted for Sanders

were simply not going to vote for Clinton. She never had some of those votes to begin with and she didn't have them in the end either. Those voters weren't all progressive activists types who wanted the Democratic Party to move further left. Some were just people fed up with the status quo who thought Clinton was part of it. Bernie "seemed different" but to them, unfortunately, so did Trump.

[brush]

221. Some of what you're saying might be true but you're saying it as if there was no skullduggery...

done by the repugs in those three states, and other states for that matter.

We know repugs cheat and will always try to cheat because that is the only way they can win.

IMO that element was there on election day in those states. It wasn't just some voters who would never vote for Clinton.

[Tom Rinaldo]

222. I didn't mean to imply that. I agree that Republicans often cheat when they can in elections.

They at a minimum apply rules and run the machinery of elections intentionally unfairly and I suspect they do far worse than that.

[brush]

134. Two different elections 8 years apart with trump being the orange elephant in the room.

McCain was nowhere near the orange idiot that trump was/is who everyone with any brains could see looming.

Not hypocritical, not the same scenario at all.

[RandomAccess]

141. What too many people don't understand is that

a good number of Bernie primary voters weren't Democrats, or even on the Left.

[LovingA2andMI]

121. 24% Huh....

That's interesting. Interesting indeed.

[ehrnst]

237. There were different polls, and different studies. You are not quoting the same poll at all.

So that may be why you haven't seen the 9% vs the 24% figures.

Perhaps you were mistaking the figure of 9% of Sanders voters that went to Trump in WI:

Link to tweet

More on the various figures:

Two surveys estimate that 12 percent of Sanders voters voted for Trump. A third survey suggests it was 6 percent.

First, the political scientist Brian Schaffner analyzed the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, which was conducted by YouGov and interviewed 64,600 Americans in October-November 2016. In that survey, Schaffner found that 12 percent of people who voted in the primary and reported voting for Sanders also voted in November and reported voting for Trump.
..........................................................

There is no way to know whether 12 percent or 6 percent or some other estimate is The Truth, and there are enough differences among these surveys that we cannot easily pinpoint why the numbers differ. So we should take these estimates with some caution.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/?utm_term=.c4bd5c859911

[LostOne4Ever]

10. It is a flagrant violation of the rules and I wish the admins would crack down on it. Nt

[lunasun]

11. Listening to my local liberal radio station and they are talking about it, among many other things

this morning
Just like DU , it is just one discussion they had.....Most General Discussion forums have a plethora of links to choose from not just here on DU

[HopeAgain]

12. I don't care about Hillary or Bernie.

Rightly or wrongly, neither was a viable candidate, in my opinion. Let's find one that is and let's work hard locally and shake up the wackos in the House. The Tea Partiers and Libertarians may destroy this country yet.

[Control-Z]

27. Neither was a viable candidate.

Um, wrong.

[Fla Dem]

55. +1000

[HopeAgain]

90. Umm, they lost.

[Tanuki]

46. How can you say that someone who won the popular vote by multiple millions

was "not a viable candidate"?

[HopeAgain]

93. She lost key states to DJT?

[Control-Z]

100. I think someone likes to cause trouble.

Saying Hillary was not a viable candidate is remarkably divisive.

[Dopers_Greed]

115. Anyone would not be a "viable candidate"

If they had decades of propaganda and an international criminal conspiracy trying to take them down

[Bad Thoughts]

132. Clinton and Sanders are done!

I hope both walk away from the elections. Unless they have added something significant to their resumes by 2019--which is unlikely with the Republicans in power--I don't want to see them anywhere near the next primaries. I want to see the Warrens, Klobuchars, Gillibrands and Inslees stand up and lead the party.

[Martin Eden]

189. I agree that neither was optimal

But when the R's nominated Trump I thought Democratic victory was a certainty.

I mean, how stupid can the voting public be??

It should have been obvious to any thinking person that Donnie boy is a malignant narcissist and a pathological liar entirely unfit both mentally and morally to be POTUS.

Boy, was I wrong!

Obviously, the Democratic Party has much work to do.

Castigating Bernie Sanders and the voters we need by re-fighting the last primary is stupidly counterproductive.

I voted for Bernie in the primary and didn't hesitate to vote for Hillary in the general, though I wasn't particularly thrilled with either choice. I agree with Sanders on most policy issues but saw he was far from the optimal candidate to move the Democratic Party and our country forward.

[treestar]

13. We don't want that to happen again

Those supporting the Democrat, whoever that will be and those supporting the primary challenger. Looking back, the big problem was allowing one from outside the party.

[padfun]

75. No, the same problem was here in 2008

That poll out a few weeks ago showed that 24% of Hillary voters didn't vote for Obama.

Although Hillary was fully qualified, she also had 20 years of Republican attacks working against her. And the Russians. And voter suppression. And machine hacking.

[brush]

91. Agreed. Never again should we allow a non-Dem with no party loyalty to split our party.

[mreilly]

14. So much this

... I don't even read that junk any more. The admins should block it and ban the posters involved. I was a Bernie man then switched to HRC when she won the nomination. End of story. Now we're facing far bigger threats than "The DNC did this" or "Bernie was against Hillary then for her when she won the nomination" or whatever.

Just.

Don't.

Care.

Move on, people!

[slumcamper]

33. THIS.

I and thousands more are totally with you.

This bullshit is SO petty.

Bury the hatchet, folks!

[Arkansas Granny]

66. I couldn't agree more. It's over, it's done. I have bigger things to worry about now than

trying to blame one candidate over another for our loss in 2016.

If I wanted to place blame on anyone it would be those people who voted for Trump, regardless what party they claim to be or who they supported in the primaries.

[Coventina]

17. And, it's blatantly against the TOS.

Alerting seems to do no good.

[QC]

172. Not much good in rules that people won't enforce.

Or, worse yet, enforce unevenly and arbitrarily.

[boston bean]

18. It is a discussion about the general. Not the primary.

[Saviolo]

20. Can we focus on mid-terms instead?

Or the next general?

Because he-said-she-said-he-did-she-did is getting us nowhere, and people are actually dying in the streets standing up against nazis in the USA. That is actually happening.

[boston bean]

21. Why can't people discuss what they feel was wrong??!

[Saviolo]

28. They absolutely can, but...

The discussions have largely been scab picking on ridiculous issues. Hillary's Wall St. speeches, Bernie's actually a racist, Hillary wants to kill brown people, Bernie was a rapist in college.

We can talk about how the DNC's strategy wasn't super tight, and how to tighten in. Let's talk about how many democratic politicians seem to run to the centre and avoid strong progressive stances when pushed (with a few notable exceptions). Let's talk about getting a better ground game for the upcoming mid-terms.

The current administration is a dumpster fire, so it should take very little active campaigning on the part of some dedicated and enthusiastic people to tip the balance back to the Democratic party. But if we're going to talk about it, it has to be with an eye to what is actually going to happen.

[longship]

23. Rubbish! Bernie vs Hillary is NOT about the General.

And I am like many here, getting sick and damned tired of the children here who refuse to abide by the TOS.

I have alerted on three threads today alone. Not that it will do any good.

[boston bean]

24. Umm you are wrong.

[longship]

34. The question is, who is going to be part of the solution?

And who is going to be part of the problem.

To quote Major Kong, "Let's get things on the hump; we've got some flying to do!"

This interminable infighting does absolutely no good in electing Democrats, and only helps the GOP. Why? Oh why would any rational person want to waste energy on such a singularly useless purpose as to fight within the party at this point????? What in the Sam Fuck would that accomplish???

Meanwhile, the GOP is melting down before our very eyes. But by all means, let's keep the infighting going. Promote it at every opportunity!!! Hillary or Bernie forever!!!!!

No wonder we lost.

Let last year's primaries and November go. Let's get with the program. We need to elect fucking Democrats! And I don't give a damn what kind.

Either one is part of the solution, or part of the problem.

Hint: the problem is in the White House and the congressional majorities, not within the Democratic caucuses.

The extent that one disagrees is the extent to which that they ought to look within as being a real problem for Democrats.

[LostOne4Ever]

45. No he is not. Nt

[cwydro]

39. Lately, I've started trashing those threads.

There are a LOT of them. I don't think I've ever trashed this many threads in my entire time on DU.

[PatrickforO]

42. Just out of curiosity, how do you 'trash' a thread?

Does this mean just not replying, ignoring it?

Or does it mean replying and arguing against the point the poster is making?

[blaze]

53. Directly under the Original Post

Is a button that says Trash this Thread.

If you click on it, you won't see the thread anymore.

Doesn't put any particular member on ignore.

[PatrickforO]

56. Oh, how cool! Out of sight, out of mind.

It's still out there, though.

[longship]

48. Don't trash them. Alert on them. nt

[cwydro]

68. I've never been big on alerting, but maybe you're right.

But I just get the feeling they'll be allowed to stand.

[longship]

73. Well, there's no hope at all unless people alert.

We've got to stamp this intraparty fighting out. And we have to be aggressive about it.

It does no good for us. It's part of the reason why we lose. We all know there are normally very good DUers who are participating in this. They need to be corrected. The best way is to alert.

[cwydro]

78. You have a point.

I thought there was a rule about refighting the primaries, but I see dozens of these threads daily.

[longship]

85. Alert them all. nt

[Ms. Toad]

179. It's Bernie bashing, which is a blatant violatinon of the TOS. n/t

[LanternWaste]

19. Retrospective analyses of the primaries and the general are now perceived

Retrospective analyses of the primaries and the general are now perceived by far too many biased and/or lazy minds to be re-fighting the primaries should particular sacred cows become impugned in any way.

[IronLionZion]

22. We all choose which threads to click on and reply to

We could post more threads supporting liberal Dems who have been inspired to run in the 2018 congressional primaries

Many of the white power folks in congress did get elected in recent years in long term methodical plan to shift our country hard right by running RW candidates at every level of local office on up to oppose our president and what they saw as a dangerous amount of diversity and progress threatening their privilege and power.

That's why these assholes need to throw out 800,000 law abiding tax paying smart young English-speaking immigrants (DACA). They don't like competition on a level playing field and preferred having the system benefit a privileged few.

[Xipe Totec]

26. Qui Bono? - Who benefits from this internal conflict?

Anyone who's drawing focus on this internal conflict is working for the other side.

[CanSocDem]

62. That's exactly right.

It is clear from these threads that there is a concentrated effort to divide Democrats.
Even long-time(high post count) members seem to prefer 'going down in flames' to picking themselves up and giving it another shot. That's not good citizenry...


.

[SharonAnn]

69. "Cui Bono" is the phrase

cui bo·no?
kwē ˈbōnō/
exclamation
exclamation: cui bono?

who stands, or stood, to gain (from a crime, and so might have been responsible for it)?

[Xipe Totec]

96. Yes. Thank you. "Caesar non supra grammaticos" nt

[Bluepinky]

29. I'm very sorry that Hillary isn't President, but she is wrong to blame Bernie.

She's being divisive in placing the blame on Bernie, and I'm tired of her. She wasn't anointed as the Democratic candidate, she had to run for it. Bernie ran a good campaign; he got people excited about him and his ideas, something Hillary could never do. And she changed some of her positions based on Bernie's influence.

I wonder if Bernie could have won the Presidency--at least 2 people in my family would have voted for him but refused to vote for Hillary. And yes, I voted for Hillary in the general election but would have preferred Bernie.

Go away Hillary.

[delisen]

50. Hillary Clinton is unlikely to go away. I

am interested in her analysis because I believe she is the strongest and most knowledgeable leader we have in the US-and the one who has withstood the most attacks from anti-democratic forces-both foreign and domestic.

I value that history and am unlikely to ignore it for the latest flashy, and untested candidate.

If I were a German I would be voting for the unglamorous but experienced and wise Merkel.

If some people need to have candidates that "excite" them in order to participate in the political process that is their personal need. (Your family members who refused to vote for Clinton were free to do that and free to suffer the consequences).

I and others like me don't need that kind of emotional high. We need to involve ourselves perhaps more rationally. there are many millions of us, we vote steadily Democratic, and neither we nor Clinton are going away nor are we going to threaten to not vote, or vote third party.

Let Clinton speak, let Sanders speak, let you speak, let me speak. In that way we build democracy.

The crises we are facing are not going to be made worse if a few people want to examine the recent past while at the same time leaving you free to do whatever you want.

[Bluepinky]

144. Don't be patronizing, I sense some derision in your words.

I have voted for Democrats all my life, and I don't need a politician to excite me. But Bernie excited a lot of people who otherwise weren't that interested in the political process.

Hillary would have made an excellent President, and I'm devastated that she lost. But I don't think it does us any good for her to point fingers at Bernie. Instead of dividing us, she could discuss problems we need to address, like voter suppression, big money in political campaigns, foreign influence in politics, etc.

It's not helpful for her to target a populist progressive politician who consistently caucuses with Democrats, who refuses big money in his campaigns and who isn't afraid to vote his conscience, even though most of his peers are afraid to vote for what they know is right (I'm talking about Iraq War vote).

If Hillary can't be a positive influence for uniting and strengthening the Democratic Party, she should shut up and enjoy her retirement. I'm really sick of the anti-Bernie threads.

[delisen]

183. I think Clinton should tell the truth as she sees it.

I think Sanders has claimed to do just that, and good for him.

I think Clinton has worked for decades to strengthen the Democratic Party. As she states in this excerpt from her book she is proud to be a Democrat.

As for the Iraq War Resolution, I don't know whether really don't know whether Joseph Biden and John Kerry I don't know whether they thought they were doing the wrong thing but were afraid to vote against it. Each has stated that they thought they were doing the right thing, and I have taken them at their word.

[Bluepinky]

194. Hillary voted for the Iraq War, just saying.

She can write about whatever she wants to. However, I don't think it's helpful for her, or any Democrat, to attack a popular progressive politician who consistently caucuses with the Democrats.

[Fla Dem]

57. No, Hillary, don't go away. Speak up and speak loudly.

[hfojvt]

124. No, I would say that is factual

The same case against Nader applies to Bernie.

Trump is President now because he won three states

Wisconsin
Pennsylvania
Michigan

Wisconsin - margin of victory 23,000 votes Johnson 106,000 votes, Stein 31,000 votes
Pennsylvania - margin of victory 44,000 votes, Johnson 146,700 votes, Stein 49,900 votes
Michigan - margin of victory 10,700 votes, Johnson 172,136, Stein 51,463 votes

Those are facts, and so are these
Michigan - Trump 2.28 million, Hillary 2.27 million
Pennsylvania - Trump 2.97 million, Hillary 2.93 million
Wisconsin - Trump 1.41 million, Hillary 1.38 million

2012 election results
Wisconsin - Obama 1.62 million, Romney 1.41 million, Johnson 20,400, Stein 7,600
Pennsylvania - Obama 2.99 million, Romney 2.68 million, Johnson 50,000, Stein 21,300
Michigan - Obama 2.56 million, Romney 2.1 million, Johnson 7,800, Stein 21,900

combine those two elections (difference between 2016 and 2012)

Wisconsin - Trump +0, Hillary -240,000, Johnson +86,000, Stein +23,000
Pennsylvania - Trump +290,000, Hillary -60,000, Johnson +96,000, Stein +28,600
Michigan - Trump +180,000, Hillary -290,000, Johnson +164,000, Stein +29,500

Just one more set of facts

1. losing hurts - it makes people angry and sad
2. Bernie lost the primary thus likely to make at least SOME of his supporters angry or sad
3. the message was spread that the DNC, if not Hillary herself, cheated
4. the message was spread that Hillary was VERY likely to win the general election
5. because of #4 it is very likely that SOME angry or sad Bernie supporters felt they could Safety dance with a 3rd party candidate
6. the numbers, less votes for Hillary and more votes for Johnson and Stein, would indicate that they did

okay, #5 and #6 are speculative rather than factual, but it is speculation based on facts. I base that on my own experience too. In 1996 it was said that Clinton was going to win easily. As such, I my own damn self, felt safe to cast a protest vote for a 4th party candidate even though I really, really did NOT want Dole to win.

[Bluepinky]

153. I'm not disagreeing with you. I remember that Nader episode, I was furious that he didn't drop out.

But that wasn't the case with Bernie, he had a shot to win the primary. I live in NH, where he beat Hillary early on. I attended one of his first campaign events and could see the excitement he generated. He may have had a chance to beat Hitler (I mean Trump) in the general campaign, we will never know. I'm glad he fought hard in the primary, I would expect no less from any candidate. When he realized he lost the candidacy to Hillary, he dropped out of the race, encouraged all his supporters to vote for Hillary and campaigned hard for her. As a Democrat, it was no problem for me to change my allegiance to Hillary. But there were some people who were not going to vote for Hillary no matter what. I think that Bernie attracted some Independents and Republicans who, after he left, switched to what they perceived as another populist candidate, Trump.

[LostOne4Ever]

160. The same case against Nader does NOT apply against Bernie

1 Bernie did not run 3rd party against Clinton
2. Bernie endorsed Clinton
3. Bernie Campaigned for Clinton
4. Votes for Bernie in the general (which would have been write ins) would not have changed the results.
5. Nader ran 3rd party
6. Nader ran against Gore during the General
7. Nader attacked Gore during the General
8. A small fraction of Votes for Nader could have changed the election for Gore.

If you want to say Jill Stein, fine. You have a case there. But Bernie did things the correct way-through the Democratic Primary.

[hfojvt]

191. Why did those people vote for Stein or Johnson (or even Trump)?

When in the past they had voted for Obama?

Because they were Bernie supporters angered by his loss in the primary. Bernie could have dropped out after he lost on Super Tuesday and it was obvious he was not going to win. Instead he stayed in until the bitter end, creating that much more bitterness, with his ardent supporters just sure he was gonna win at the convention - somehow, and even after the convention some were insisting that the Democratic Party remove Hillary as the candidate and put in Bernie instead.

In fact, there is even another Nader parallel. Nader gained enough votes in New Hampshire to tip the election to Bush. Why did he get those votes in New Hampshire? Because pissed off Bradley supporters would not vote for Gore because they were still mad about their loss in the primary.

Of course the same applied in 2008. I was, after all, one of the people begging Hillary to drop out after it was clear Obama was the nominee because a bitter primary could damage our chances in the general. Fortunately in that case the M$M strongly supported Obama.

Stein? Stein was nothing in 2012 and would have been nothing in 2016 without angry Bernie supporters. Plus those people were told that Hillary was gonna win anyway so their protest votes wouldn't really matter.

Oops.

[Bluepinky]

196. Bernie attracted some Independents and even Republicans

who were not going to vote for Hillary under any condition. For a number of reasons, some people abhorred Hillary. My sister voted for Obama twice but then became hooked on Fox News and started blaming Obama and other Democrats for her economic problems, including very expensive health care. She liked Bernie's populist agenda and voted for him in the primary. When he lost, she turned to Trump. I tried to change her mind and make her see reason to no avail. I didn't speak to her for months after the election, I was so angry. Even now we aren't as close and don't talk politics.
I have a sister-in-law married to a rabid Republican; she's environmentally responsible and never liked Trump's immigration stance; she voted for Bernie in the primary and her way of compromise in the general election was to write in Bernie's name on the ballot. Her husband poisoned her mind about Hillary, she would never have voted for her.
I'm telling you this to show that Bernie attracted some people to the Democratic platform who otherwise wouldn't have voted for a Democrat.

[emulatorloo]

156. Books over 500 pages, I'd imagine very little of that concerns the primary

[Arazi]

37. So much this Fuck this bullshit feud. 2018 is upon us

[PatrickforO]

40. K & R X 1,000!!!

You are absolutely right. I'm with you.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

41. I agree. But I learned a while back

that the slightest hint of criticism of Hillary (that maybe she wasn't a pure as the driven snow victim of Bernie's perfidy) brings down the wrath of the administrators.

And this constant renewal of "It's all Bernie's Fault" said with a petulant stamp of the foot is at best useless, and at worst highly divisive.

[Madam Mossfern]

43. I agree with you

I usually don't alert, but I think I'll start doing that for infighting threads - and that's just what they are.
It's over, move on. Support your local Democratic candidates in every election - take back Congress.

I was a Bernie supporter, but when Hillary won the Primary, I supported her. These threads make me
feel alienated. I will not be shamed (and that's what these threads tend to do) for supporting the candidate
that best fulfilled my preferences.

[RiverStone]

139. Agree! Alert infighting threads!! Much bigger battles to fight....

Bernie supporter here who also voted for Hillary

[Initech]

44. I don't think we'll ever hear the end of it, sadly.

You're right - we should absolutely be focused on the right wing terrorists and Nazis that are showing their support for Trump. We should be focused on ending Trump and fighting this very real terror threat that is lurking in the shadows, not focusing on what should have happened. That's why they win and we lose.

[nini]

49. I'd like to thank the Admins for the Trash a Thread function

God knows I've ranted a bit myself over this crap but good LAWD - enough.

[JohnnyRingo]

51. I think it was resurected by a recent article

...that stated that only 17% of Bernie Bros voted for Hillary. Considering the vitriol here at the time, I believe it. Many fled to another site rather than accept the nominee. Many more remain.

I recall that much of the fake news doled out by the Russians was funneled through DU by those posters, leaving me to avoid the site for a month or so.

[MrsCoffee]

58. Some of us would like a true accounting as to why there are ACTUAL NAZIS happening right now.

Yet some folks seem intent on trying to shut Hillary up. Bernie was a factor in all of this. Like it or not, he bears responsibility for running a dangerously reckless campaign that put us in this position. There were many factors, but he was the factor that made the rest of them possible. The huge divide created by his negative bullshit was the perfect cover for the KGOP to steal the election. They couldn't have done it without him.

I want to hear about what happened. I want to hear it from Hillary. She was 100% spot on about Trump and I don't have any reason to believe she isn't 100% spot on about Bernie. Too bad if some folks don't want to hear it. We don't ever want to be in this position again, so we need to understand exactly how we got here.

There are some big elephants in the room that no one wants to talk about. Like Tad Devine. I guess we will just have to wait for the truth to trickle out. But good luck trying to silence it.

[Saviolo]

70. The nazis have been here all along - they're not new

It is only recently that they've been emboldened to come out in public without masks, without hoods, without hiding, and spew their hateful rhetoric. They've been building up to this for years, and POC and Jewish people can let you know that yes, they've been around all along, we're only seeing them out right now.

That has everything to do with who is in charge and who is enabling them. Like John Oliver said about nazis really liking Trump: Nazis are like cats. If they like you, you're probably feeding them.

As for what happened, it's complicated. Lots of things happened. Left-wing politics are under fire from tons of sources, and both Bernie and Hillary got battered and beaten. They got beaten up in the press, they got beaten up by each others' spokespeople, they got beaten up by right-wing assholes trying to pose as democrats in the papers.

But we should not be looking back on that fight except to plan what's next. We can't dwell on it, and re-fight it, we have to move forward with it. I personally think that Bernie staying in the primary race was helpful because as soon as there was a set Democratic candidate, the media could stop focusing on the horse race and go back to "OMG! Look what Trump did now!!!" which is what they did. The longer there was attention on the left, the more it was possible to get policy positions out.

Neither Bernie nor Hillary were perfect candidates. Why? There's no such thing as a perfect candidate. And there are already a few holes being poked in Hillary's recounting of the story (I'll link a tweet below). So, let's put the tribalism aside, gather up all of our imperfect candidates and allies, and get better. Because as much as we've got some infighting as to who's better within the Democratic party right now, the other side is LITERAL NAZIS that we need to deal with.

Link to tweet

[MrsCoffee]

82. The answer is not for Hillary to shut up.

And the same people calling for her to shut up (AGAIN) are the same ones who lose their minds when anyone says Bernie should shut up and stop bashing Democrats and the Democratic Party.

That is probably why there are so many threads and so many emotions running high. People still want to know what the fuck exactly happened.

[Saviolo]

101. I personally don't think either of them should shut up

Bernie and Hillary are amazingly powerful liberal voices and they both hold a great deal of sway. They may, in fact, hold too much, they tend to suck all the air out of the room. I'd love to hear them empowering and enabling some younger voices, but I'd hate to see either of them disappear.

But please, can we stop picking scabs and start picking fights with the OTHER side? Y'know, the one full of white nationalists, white supremacists, and nazis?

[ehrnst]

229. +1000. (nt)

[LostOne4Ever]

77. Blaming a Jew for Nazis? Figures... antisemitism is everywhere even here on DU it seems.

Posts like yours is exactly why we need this OP!

[MrsCoffee]

86. That's a ridiculous stretch and you know it.

[LostOne4Ever]

89. No your post is what is ridiculous and you know it. Nt

[MrsCoffee]

92. His being Jewish had absolutely fucking nothing to do with my post.

Not even a nice try bud.

[LostOne4Ever]

99. You are the one who blamed a Jew for the Nazis and you know it.

And everything else in your post is Bull too.

Bernie had a right to run, and he did it the right was by not running 3rd party and endorsing and stumping for the nominee in the general. He bears no blame.

The blame lies at the feet of Comey and the cheating repukes. I could tell you one other place the blame does lie...but I'm not going to do so because this feud needs to die and the party needs to come together.

[MrsCoffee]

102. For fuck's sake.

Your post is ridiculous and nothing but hyperbole.

I don't care if you think the same of my post, but your accusations are fucking ludicrous and insulting.

[LostOne4Ever]

104. Projecting much? Nt

[MrsCoffee]

106. No need to make it personal.

Your accusations are rude and inappropriate.

[LostOne4Ever]

109. Your post is hyperbolic, offensive, divisive, falatious and

Epitomize the need of this OP and for us to STOP FIGHTING THE PRIMARY!!!

[MrsCoffee]

111. That's your opinion.

Which isn't going to stop me from expressing mine.

I find your posts all of the above as well. But I'm not gonna make shit up and accuse you of bullshit because of it.

[LostOne4Ever]

114. I didn't make anything up. I posted a fact

And everything you posted is opinion and won't stop me from expressing mine.

[Act_of_Reparation]

112. Cry some more.

You post some insipid shit about Bernie Sanders -- and by extension Sanders supporters -- bearing personal responsibility for American nazism and then have the temerity to whine about people being "rude and inappropriate"? Give me a fucking break.

[MrsCoffee]

118. Yes, Bernie was the spoiler.

That is what happens when spoilers run. They bear some responsibility for spoiling the race and handing it to the other side.

[LostOne4Ever]

122. You don't even know what a spoiler is!

Bernie can't be a spoiler because he didn't run third party. He endorsed and stumped for Hillary.

That is not a spoiler.

[AtheistCrusader]

123. Can you not tell the difference between a primary and a general election?

You know they're different right, and occur at different times?

Trump didn't use Bernie's general position that Hillary was TOO FAR TO THE RIGHT on multiple issues, to attack her.
Bernie CAMPAIGNED FOR Hillary in the general. He did not do any damage to her that Trump could leverage.

Time to let it goooo let it gooooooo

[Act_of_Reparation]

198. Nonsense happens when people who don't know what they're talking about open their mouths.

People much smarter than you or I will write academic works dissecting the 2016 election, and I think it is safe to say none of them will conclude with the line "Bernie was the spoiler. That is what happens when spoilers run." I base this prediction largely on the fact we've had primaries before and this is the first time people are talking bullshit about a losing primary candidate costing a general candidate the election. No one blamed Dennis Kucinich or Howard Dean for Kerry's failure to unseat George W. Bush. No one blames Bill Bradley or Lyndon LaRouche for Al Gore's loss. Did Jesse Jackson cost Dukakis the election? Did he fuck it up for Mondale too, or was that Gary Hart's fault?

Please. The notion Bernie Sanders tipped the race against Clinton -- more so than, say, voter suppression, the Electoral College, Russian meddling, manufactured controversy, and the Clinton campaign's myriad missteps -- is next-level ludicrous. Bernie did not run a unique campaign; not in content, not in tone. And once it was over, he campaigned for Clinton. How in the galloping fuck could a seventy-year-old man with crazy hair and New York accent, who was almost completely unknown outside of Vermont, convince thousands of swing-staters to cast their vote for the candidate he was campaigning against? Is he a fucking wizard?

Jesus Christ, this is why I drink.

[MrsCoffee]

201. They blamed Ted Kennedy.

I have a feeling there will be plenty of writings that come to the same conclusions as I have.

[Act_of_Reparation]

202. No doubt you do.

The conundrum with people who don't know what they're doing is that they don't know that they don't know what they're doing.

[MrsCoffee]

203. No doubt that's a two way street.

[Act_of_Reparation]

244. Not really, no.

[AtheistCrusader]

120. Maybe post better then? I dunno.

Maybe go back and re-read your post and see if it says what you meant to say, because your defense of it isn't making sense.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9561031

[Lordquinton]

176. Very brave

Some things have gone on far too long

[Lordquinton]

181. So much wrong here

But I want to say how amazing it was that Bernie kept California in play. We're usually taken for granted, expected to perform on command with no reward. Bernie let us vote. He visited us, the real California, not just donors. I remember he came to the Vallejo marina which blew my mind! He really cared.

And you know the result? California supplied the 2million+ vote surplus for Hillary. That's what happens when a canadite visits the people, and shows they care. Sanders voters had the lowest crossover rate to boot. He did a ton of work for the party, and should be commended for what he did, not blamed.

[CanonRay]

59. Can't we just turn the fucking page already.

Haven't we got enough shit to deal with? Seriously, people.

[smirkymonkey]

60. I agree. Let's move on.

This is getting old and boring.

[kpete]

61. I simply do not pay attention to the past

That is a luxury we cannot afford


the present/future is what interests me

fighting over 2016 does not help

we had 2 good candidates, they lost

Why did WE lose,
because WE keep fighting with each other
instead of uniting
THAT btw is exactly what the other side expected & took advantage of
end of story

LET'S MOVE ON TOGETHER PEOPLE!!!!!



peace,
kp

[dogandturtlemom]

63. Hillary and Bernie

Thank you for those words. The angst over the primary is overblown. In actuality, the Democratic primary was minimally rancorous, with all focused on policies. The narrative, however, ignored this, as they focused in imaginary drama.

[TNNurse]

64. You cannot move forward if you only look back.

Yes, we need to learn from the past, but we need to live in the present and work toward the future.

And just to piss off some. Bernie Sanders is not now or ever was a Democrat.

[Lil Missy]

65. People are angry, moreso because it resulted in a immature criminal in the White House.

Not an excuse, but a reason.

[efhmc]

76. Yes.

But we need/must move forward and many seem not to be able/willing to do that. I want to see new faces and new ideas while using the clear progressive goals of our past candidates.

[jalan48]

72. How or why is it happening? I'd say lots of bitterness.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

148. Definitely

I'm trying to get over the last election but keep finding it hard every time Trump/GOP overturn or gut another Obama policy. So far, he's gone after Muslims, Trans people, Dreamers, and openly coddled Nazis and White Supremacists and pardoned a racist sheriff. Every time he does something embarrassing or horrific, it just reopens the scabs left over from last Election. I don't blame just Bernie and/or some of his extremist anti-Hillary supporters for Hillary losing but I can't stop being angry at everything and everybody whom contributed to Trump's victory.

[jalan48]

157. I agree. We need to focus as a united group and not individual factions. Easier said than done.

[Rural_Progressive]

74. And this is why we can't have nice things

like winning elections and having a shot at a sane society.

[disillusioned73]

79. Let us not forget..

the focus of the corporate media on the so called "left" violence as well.. it's no coincedence that Trump spouts off a false eqivalency and our so called allies run for cover.. to scared to stand strong against Naziz/KKK/ White supremests.. there is no grey area when it comes to this..

I wish we could move on as well and focus on single payer/ fight for 15/ climate change, but the silencing of progressive voices seems to be the focus of some..

[workinclasszero]

80. Repeating for emphasis....

"There is a VERY CLEARLY DEFINED enemy that we should ALL be organizing TOGETHER to fight, but we keep picking at old scabs on each other."

Dump and his racist party are loving the fact that after all these horrible months of orange hitler debacles we are STILL fighting each other and not them!

[elmac]

83. I am sooooo over this Hillary VS Sanders thingy nt

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

84. I agree. I don't even read those threads any more.

Someday I will probably read Hillary's book; I'm interested in her take on the election. But of course it's going to be through her eyes and it won't be objective (and I wouldn't expect it to be). Obviously there will have to be a lot of analyzing by a lot of people as to what went wrong and what the Democrats should do to win the next one, and there's no question that Hillary's opinion will be extremely valuable. But right now I'm more interested in the immediate and desperate problem of how to keep Trump and his goons from pulling the whole edifice of government down.

So rather than agonize over woulda-coulda-shoulda I'd rather buckle down and take on the Trumpistas. Political navel-gazing can wait, and I am in absolutely no mood to keep rehashing the primaries.

[moonseller66]

88. Here's Bern-ary!

Imagine here on Hollywood Insider or Entertainment Tonight (Wrong site?) or whatever mindless, what passes for entertainment on TV now, were to bash "Babs" for her clothing or hair color or whatever! Imagine those coming to her rescue! The millions irate that someone had the audacity to question ANYTHING about her? OMG It's a personal afront because my view is the only correct one due to my reasoning and/or experience and/or whatever. And when you get down to it, how childish.

I've read DU for years but only recently started commenting. Did most of my fighting in the 60s. Beginning to wonder if it was worth it. Looks like the self-destruct sequencing count-down has begun, just like after Kent State.

Is this what this great site is all about?

BY the way,you all know, of course it's Kerry's fault..no, it's Gore's fault...no it's Dukakis' fault...no, it's Mondale's fault...no, really, the blame lies with Humphreys and McGovern! Anyone else we'd like to mention?

Just maybe it's our fault.

Of course it's never MY fault (my guy's ok but yours?) but the fault of whomever YOU voted for...if you voted!) /s...in case!

MEanwhile...in the WH...rump and the Republicans cancelled the MAGA Billion Gallon Vaseline order.

Enjoy!

[MuseRider]

94. I am trying to ignore it all

and the more I do the better I feel.

Bernie likely does not give a flying f about what she has to say. He is still relevant and out working to try to get good things to happen in this country and no, most people (not here) but most people could care less what team someone is on if they do what is needed and desired in this country.

Hillary is out, she has no office. Is she important? Yes, kind of. More in the sense of history. She has done a lot for our country over a long period of time. How you feel about what she did is your business. For me she is a very mixed bag but she deserves respect for what she has done and for the fact that she did it facing very large odds. Still, she did the work and put in the time and now, after losing twice I do not see the need for her to do this. It sounds terrible to me. I cannot say why because no matter what you say it will get you pummeled by those who cannot see why she lost and will not look inward. There are many, most in fact who have done that and moved on.

Let them burn themselves out. Ignore them, trash threads or read it and remember who they are because they are always here and will be back with another super rock star candidate who they will take you out for saying anything not positive about. I do not think most of these people are Democrats, they sure as hell don't have a clue what is going on nor are they mature enough to let this go.

*******YES I KNOW ABOUT RUSSIA AND COMEY Gotta add those

[zentrum]

95. I'm with ya Saviolo, but

...there are some who will never tire of lamenting a normal Primary process.

So they're fine with listing as one of the reasons she lost---the normal debate that all contenders engage in during a primary. Just like Obama and HRC did in 2008.

We seem to have a new set of rules since 2016: You're only allowed to have a pretend Primary where everybody says the same thing.

[Chakaconcarne]

98. At this point, anyone who brings it up now makes me suspicious

They are just here to troll and divide this community.

[hay rick]

107. Agree. nt

[MrsCoffee]

108. So only trolls want to talk about Hillary's book?

Because that seems to be what all the angst is about right now.

[Saviolo]

125. You are sounding more and more like this:

No one is saying we can't talk about Hillary's book, what we're saying is stop picking at the scabs from the primary, and if you're going to examine it, do it with an eye to looking forward together and taking back congressional seats in the mid-terms. Look forward with an eye to set a united front against ACTUAL NAZIS.

The primary process worked as it should and we ended up with the candidate that got more support. The GE did not work as it should and we ended up with the candidate that got LESS support.

[haveahart]

110. Don't lose your mind. If you can't take it just delete the thread and move on.

[Javaman]

116. I'm not surprised. mention the 2000 election and watch people lose their shit

about nader.

[LovingA2andMI]

119. This!!!

[BainsBane]

126. I'd have more sympathy for that view

If you had articulated it during these past several months when Hillary and her supporters were being attacked by those who now insist they be subject to no criticism.

We've been told that as much as objecting to criticisms of the party dooms it to electoral failure. Now we are told criticizing Bernie is divisive and will lead to defeat. The unity demanded is around Bernie's political ambitions, not the party or principles.

I and many other Democrats believe in equal rights and equal opportunity, justice for all. A political ethos that elevates a few over the majority runs counter to everything I most value.

[Saviolo]

135. I've been begging for an end to tribalism for years, now

This from January 2016:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10027511056

This from March 2016:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/12511504426

This from May 2016:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/12512061347

This from January 2017:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/12512674643

All political figure deserve and require criticism. There are no perfect candidates and there are no perfect allies. But if we're not united, we will fall. It's an uphill battle right now, fighting against entrenched preconceptions, an apathetic for-profit media that cares more about money than facts, a powerful and well-funded right wing with the economic power of incredibly wealthy families and corporations behind it. Bernie fights against those things, and so does Hillary. Can we just focus on what's in front of us? Let's take some lessons from what happened and go against the actual nazis in the streets?

[BainsBane]

136. Okay, I give you props for that

Seriously.

[Saviolo]

151. A house divided against itself cannot stand

It's hard for progressives vs. regressives. Progressives have this habit of all being progressive in their own direction. There are so many ways to go forward. Rights for POC, rights for women, rights for LGBTQ+, rights for immigrants, rights for the poor. There are so many fights that all go in different directions, so it's super hard to get a bunch of liberals pointing in the same direction for any amount of time. Regressives, on the other hand, can be pretty single-minded. Just go backwards. It's easy to get regressives all moving back in the same direction.

Here's another post from me back in 2014:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10025519054

where I try to articulate something similar. It's hard. It's complicated. There are too many facets to count.

[MelissaB]

129. We are playing right into Putin's hands with the division.

Eyes on the prize, peeps. We need to put this behind us.

[samnsara]

140. we had no way to debrief after the election...

....the loss is still unresolved. I think ppl bring it up, not to cause a rift, but because to talk about it helps bring about some sort of perspective. maybe there needs to be a lounge specifically for this kind of discourse. With no repercussions. let folks hash it out...in a respectful manner of course.

[milestogo]

142. The circular firing squad is quite popular at DU.

[Bruce Fallsteen]

145. Naughty Naughty

Having read the rules when I signed up, I seem to recall that re-fighting the last Democratic primary season was a no-no. I am now seriously confused.

[Iggo]

147. WE FUCKING LOST!!!!!

[RandomAccess]

149. I couldn't agree more

Every day, it seems.

What astonishes me is the unbelievable immaturity (childishness) involved in hanging onto the perceived grudges this long -- on both sides, but I see far more anti-Bernie and Bernie supporters -- esp. in the face of the very real threats facing us.

GET OVER IT, I want to scream. GROW UP.

[Binkie The Clown]

155. Reminds me of the way The South clings to the Civil War. Some wars never end. nt

[seaglass]

159. Because some pages of her book were released? The book will be released on 9/12 and I assume

those interested will discuss it here.

If you are not interested in Hillary's perspective after we have had 9 months of everyone else's then you are welcome to ignore the discussion.

We are all capable of multi-tasking.

[Kaleva]

161. You choose to be focused on Bernie vs. Hillary

I have "Bernie" and "Sanders" on auto trash by keyword because I choose not to be distracted by the drama. I would not have seen your OP had I logged in right away but I didn't, saw your post, read it and thought it was worth reponding to. I had to untrash "Bernie" to find your thread after I logged in but I'll trash it again after making this post.

Basically, DU is a drama free forum for those who want it to be one because of the tools available to each member. Conversely, DU can be drama city for those who love that kind of stuff. The choice is up to each individual member.

[Mountain Mule]

162. Please, please no more divisiveness! The alt right loves it!

Hillary may have been right or she may have been wrong in her comments. I do feel that she chose the wrong time to make them. We need to be looking at the 2018 midterms which are fast approaching. Post mortems of the 2016 election can sometimes be helpful, but not statements which lead to schisms within the party.

I have been a voting democrat for 45 years now. Never missed an election in all this time and ALWAYS voted dem. In the PRIMARIES, I supported Bernie. In the ELECTION I voted for HILLARY and canvassed for her, as well. Yet even I feel attacked by all this anti-Bernie polemic that never seems to end. Hillary should have held off on her anti-Bernie comments until the midterms are safely behind us. The need for a united Democratic party was never more important - we should recognize this all along the spectrum from the individual dem voter to the top of the current party leadership.

[ehrnst]

166. She had the nerve to WRITE A BOOK!!! About the ELECTION - and that is WRONG!!!!

It's 2017, not 2016, and she SHOULD NOT BE saying things that will DIVIDE THE PARTY!!

OMG!!!! She said things!!!! THINGS THAT she THOUGHT, and the ARE NOT APOLOGIES!!!!

She's DESTROYING THE PARTY from BEYOND THE DEAD!!!!

[Saviolo]

168. Thanks for skipping to the end and not reading anything else

As I said in response to someone up-thread:

Bernie and Hillary are amazingly powerful liberal voices and they both hold a great deal of sway. They may, in fact, hold too much, they tend to suck all the air out of the room. I'd love to hear them empowering and enabling some younger voices, but I'd hate to see either of them disappear.

But please, can we stop picking scabs and start picking fights with the OTHER side? Y'know, the one full of white nationalists, white supremacists, and nazis?

So, let's take a look at how the DNC failed, but with an eye to making it better in the midterms and GE2020. Sniping amongst ourselves is only empowering the right and we need a united face. People are losing their lives out there standing up to actual flag-waving saluting nazis, and we can't afford to be snarky right now. People need to hit the street, knock on doors, tell their non-voting friends that getting Congress back will make a difference in 2018.

[ehrnst]

228. I was commenting on various posts I've seen on DU, not just the OP.

I also feel it's ironic that many who blame other losses on conspiracy theories point to HRC as "not taking responsibility" for her loss.

[Skittles]

225. THANK YOU

[Heartstrings]

169. Midterms, Midterms, Midterms!

Focus on 2018. Damn, I'm tired of this bashing of either one.....

It's done....turn the fucking page people!

[jimlup]

173. +100000000000000000

[Politicub]

174. Step away from the Internet for a while

Or check out some different places on the net. Not many people in the real world are talking about Hillary or Bernie.

[Sunlei]

177. turn it off because the Republican partys propaganda Juggernaut takes great pride in Ds upset.

[tazkcmo]

185. Trash thread.

Without that feature I feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day.

[ancianita]

195. Truly, we MUST focus. For years we haven't stopped them when they were small. We've been

navel gazing.

Now the racist fascists are medium-sized to large in influence. Yes, they're being called out and the media are learning that "both sides do it" is flat out wrong. But the 900+ white supremacist groups are plotting.

So. What. How many decades do we wait. Do we wait until the confederate flag or Nazi flag is dropped from some government building? of the South? again? before we defend the Constitution and justice in this country? The longer we wait, the harder the defense will have to be.

European countries have outlawed Nazis and Holocaust denial and have not become dystopian authoritarian states for it. After we stop the more-democratic-than-thou ego fights around here -- because people keep forgetting that unity isn't uniformity, we have to get to work promoting anti-fascist tactics.

[RiverStone]

205. Yes!! It's an echo chamber

More of us are posting this sentiment on FOCUS to beat the fascist and his minions in 2018.

Thanks Saviolo!

[Progressive dog]

211. We are not focused on Bernie vs Hillary

at least if by we you mean Democrats like me. We are focused on keeping our system of government alive until the psychopath and his followers no longer have control.

[stuffmatters]

213. It's completely intolerable. Let go of this divisive obsession and fight THEM not us.

As a lifelong Democrat,this Hillary vs Bernie fetishism is beyond sickening to me.

Republicans are rapidly achieving the anti democracy goals of their 60 Year Plan, first visible to me with the founding of the John Birch Society (by Daddy Koch & other assorted racist, Randian, Red baiting vermin) The Democratic Party and Our Democracy itself is currently in the greatest peril it's been in my Boomer lifetime. They are f...ng winning, right in our Capital, in our communities, and right in our faces.

We're not only "Stronger together"., We're "Necessary Together." Start focusing on down ballot, local (including judicial) candidates, fight to regain the essential powers that the Democratic Party has lost across the Country in the last decade to these Fascist

[johnp3907]

216. Comic gold!

[DesertRat]

217. How can you possibly cite that opinion as FACT?

[liquid diamond]

218. Most of the shit going on

now wouldn't be happening if Hillary was president. Things are only going to get worse too. All because some purists decided to sit out the general election out of spite, allowing trump to win key states by the most narrow margins. Congratulations. You really showed us (POC, LGBT, women, non-Christians, immigrants).

That's why I think many posters here can't move on. None of this shit had to happen.

[Skittles]

224. the subject was brought up in a major book by a politcal figure

THIS IS A POLITICAL BOARD so it is OPEN FOR DISCUSSION

STOP WHINING AND LEARN TO USE IGNORE

[chillfactor]

226. same here...

I am so sick of the whole Hillary/Bernie shit....the election is over.....damn give it a rest already.

[icymist]

227. Nothing to lose your mind over.

Just think of it as Democrats versus non-Democrats. Easy-Peasy. Non-Democrats helped elect the orange Nazi. It doesn't matter what their reason was.

[Voltaire2]

232. It appears that there are a small group of people who intend to keep this mess going as long

as possible. That is the bad news. The good news is that this thread has 167 recs and about 6-10 people posting "nope not gonna stop".

Perhaps we should just put all those people on ignore?

[LovingA2andMI]

252. Yep...

The Ignore Button has been getting a workout, since the first passage of her Mea Culpa "These Are My Confessions" excerpt was posted on DU.

Here the skinny.... We're Not in the mood of hearing/reading the S**t, don't plan on buying the book POINT, BLANK, PERIOD -- Trashing the Thread and Full Ignoring the Crew of "Nope Not Gonna Stop" as they are getting ready old.

Anything else should be on this list?

[bagelsforbreakfast]

235. Okay, now back to JARNDYCE vs JARNDYCE, who won? n/m

[Heartstrings]

251. Move forward, not back!

Why is this so difficult?

Move on and focus on midterms!