2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIF you want Bernistas to work hard for HRC if she's nominated...don't call his platform "fantasies"
And don't piss on us for having ideals and not giving up on them.
If your candidate does get nominated, you and her will need to treat everyone whose votes you seek and all of the things we stand for with respect. There is no good reason you shouldn't be glad to do that.
There aren't any votes any Dem could get in the fall that that Dem can ONLY get by saying "we'll only try for crumbs".
The path to victory is through respect, through the building of actual enthusiasm and through honoring the dreams and the dreamers.
NOT through saying "it can't be done".
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NowSam
(1,252 posts)b4 any trust can be established.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)the Iowa delegation(including superdelegates)will be split 50-50 between Bernie and HRC.
PatrickforO
(14,576 posts)The cheating bullshit has to stop now.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)regardless of the situation. The people who don't work hard to keep Republicans out of the White House arem't true Dems IMO.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)There is no excuse for dismissing Bernie's platform as "fantasies". That is disrespect, and you can't ask for people's votes if you diss their dreams.
Progressives always do more of the grunt work in fall campaigning anyway. We are entitled to have our ideals respected in exchange for that.
And why possible reason is there not to respect them?
And HRC supporters have no monopoly on the term "True Dems". We are all "True Dems". To be a True Dem is to be clearly progressive on the issues.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Please explain how you win the general election with 30%. Please be specific.
(We'll ignore that you're shrinking that below 30% for now.)
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Is a true dem a loyalist who tows the party line, right or wrong? Most of us are stating to realize improving America requires more than fealty to an antiquated and corrupt two-party system. I've been a democrat from day one, but after the election I'll be a proud independent. 
840high
(17,196 posts)what I am. I do.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)
daleanime
(17,796 posts)racist, sexist, commies, etc.....there's not much mud left to throw.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)
mpcamb
(2,871 posts)You're right tho. It's getting harder and harder to say that.
tokenlib
(4,186 posts)..no chance of contributions of help with the campaign. She would be the lesser of evils candidate and I would be gagging just casting the vote.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)your buttocks so that you vote for Hillary when she wins the nomination.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)categorizing the act as a kissing our collective butts.
But go on. Hill is gonna do great trying to get elected with 47% of Democrats and next to nill independants.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)It's about 30 percent Dem and 40 percent Independents.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It's just the decent and, dare I say it, "pragmatic" thing to do.
Bernie's platform is the ideals of most of the Democratic Party...including a lot of HRC supporters who still buy the "only HRC can win" myth.
If your candidate does get nominated(and that's far from certain right now) she will have no real right to ask much of anything from Sanders supporters if she doesn't treat our ideals(which are the ideals of pretty much a majority of the country by now)with respect. Why would you even object to that?
If Bernie wins the nom, he will treat the HRC supporters will full respect. So you're obligated to do the same it if goes the other way.
There are no votes any Dem can only get in the fall by treating us as if what we support is delusional.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)But your side talk about Hillary Clinton like a DOG all day long. Now you want respect. You have to give respect to get it back return. Period.
I agree with some of Sanders principles, but not all. It seems as if- it is your way or the highway-this is exactly what the lady in the town hall in New Hampshire said to Bernie Sanders.
You said "which are the ideals of pretty much a majority of the country by now ". Where is the evidence to support that statement?
No one can tell you guys anything, unless it is agreeable to your principles.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)The assumption of a lot of her supporters that she was simply entitled to the nomination, the false accusation that Bernie thought fighting bigotry was less important than working for economic justice(and the absurd claim that the social justice and economic justice struggles could possibly be in conflict with each other) and the meme that Bernie had no right to even be running for our nomination because he started politics as an independent(even though he had always organized with Dems in the House and Senate, which was all anyone had the right to ask of him).
It is those things that cause, in my estimation, probably 95% of the hostile and intemperate posts.
What makes you a True Dem is being progressive, not party affiliation. By itself, party affiliation isn't anything at all.
George Wallace was a registered Dem. So was Lester Maddox. Would you say they were True Dems and Bernie wasn't?
Would you say that they had the right to seek the Democratic presidential nomination and he doesn't?
And would you agree that HRC supporters need to admit, once and for all, that Bernie is not going to run third-party in the fall and that he has nothing in common with Nader?
I will support HRC if she is nominated. Please don't make it agonizing for me to do so and please don't make it a nightmare for me to try to persuade young activists to do so. Make it as easy as possible for me to do the work of electing a Democratic president.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)Your words - "Please don't make it agonizing for me to do so and please don't make it a nightmare for me to try to persuade young activists to do so." Likewise.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)The big difference is, there are no positions Bernie takes on any issues that any HRC people have any reason to feel uncomfortable with.
Bernie is just as solidly anti-racist, anti-sexist, pro-choice, anti-homophobia and trans-phobia as any HRC supporter is. He was never weak on any anti-social oppression issue.
mythology
(9,527 posts)but I think that some of Sanders' plans are funded on pure fantasy. It's hard for me to get behind that as I like to keep things grounded in reality. If that makes it hard for you to support Clinton if she's the nominee, well, that's kind of on you. I'm not saying you shouldn't support him, or you shouldn't vote for him the primary, but there's a lot of whining coming from other Sanders supporters in this thread that indicate they've already made up their mind. It's hard to ask people to be nice to those who openly admit they refuse to listen.
Squinch
(50,955 posts)a Democratic president?
How about you stop making weird fuzzy demands that people show you personal respect? YOU are not doing the work to elect a Democratic president. ALL of us are. I'll say it again: NO ONE OWES YOU ANYTHING! So how about you get a grip on the idea that this is not really about you?
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)She prefers them over us. She can have them find the votes.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)I don't think anyone doubts that too much.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)be no unicorns and rainbows, but you might get a few dirty wooden spoons full of soured gruel in a Clinton administration.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)but I am baffled by anyone who wants to be on board with a candidate
who has extensive ties with WS and a hawk approach to foreign policy.
ismnotwasm
(41,988 posts)No problem.
Vinca
(50,276 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,988 posts)Up to you.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)Stop saying what a low blow it is for Bernie to say
sometimes Hillary's a progressive,
sometimes she's a moderate.
Alligator tears are a turn off.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)they were never going to anyway.
I think "Bernistas" are getting as much respect as they give.
But that's just this person's point of view.
jham123
(278 posts)I was going to post something similar. I'd like to know, after all this terse discussions is, why is it just a assumed position that the Bernie folks are going to just magically swap alliances over to Hillary if Bernie loses the primary??
I mean, no one is even raising the question. How many wouldn't vote for Hillary and how many wouldn't vote at all?
*Edit*
Now that I read all the responses, answers to my questions are coming clear.....
Just use this thread, it seems to me that roughly the same percentage from Monday night are not even willing to consider voting for HRC if Bernie loses
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)so many before them, but outside this bubble it is clear to me that you will have far fewer number of converts than there are Bernie supporters.
jham123
(278 posts)Splain it to the new guy.....
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)supporting or any advocating for alternative or third party candidates will get one "tombstoned." Tombstoned is essentially a banning of one's account. It's in the TOS agreement when you sign up here. I find it to be bullshit, but I agreed to follow the rules so I sort of dance carefully around my feelings about how I will eventually vote.
That's my understanding of it, anyway. There are probably people better versed in this than I am who will probably be able answer your question better.
Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #31)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #39)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #42)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)jham123
(278 posts)Thank you for the explanation. I get it now. Sorry for making you stick out your neck and being a nice guy you have someone trying to cut it off.
Keep up the good fight and dodge the future haranguings
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)It says anyone not supporting a Democratic nominee is not welcome here.
Thank you for the explanation.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Calling Clinton's candidacy "Third Way, DLC, Corporatist, Warmongering Republican-Lite" works well because of the weakness of her low information, uninformed ignnorant suppoters.
Is that the "respect" required for victory?
still_one
(92,217 posts)call Hillary a war criminal, worse than bush and other such blurbs that get posted all the time
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)
thucythucy
(8,069 posts)And I'm a supporter of Senator Sanders.
The assumption that those who support an opposing candidate are inherently wicked, evil, less intelligent, less moral, is no way to win support for your candidate of choice. Too much shit-slinging at DU these days from both sides.
still_one
(92,217 posts)other
beaglelover
(3,486 posts)
Electing a Democrat over rather Republican is about mainstream Democrats giving you respect?
That's pathetic.
polichick
(37,152 posts)"It can't be done without pissing off the powers that be, and that ain't happening. How do you think we got so rich?"
DanTex
(20,709 posts)the party if the primary doesn't go your way. It doesn't really give people a sense that we're all in this fight together. You want to establish a sense of unity, of comradery, and "if my guy don't win then you all can go to hell" doesn't really do that.
Sorry but I'm not responsible for them. If they want to cut off their noses to spite their faces that's their own doing. I have tried to explain why that is a lousy idea and they just get mad.
The chips fall where they may. If we have President Trump or Cruz it's on them.
Response to Ken Burch (Original post)
stopbush This message was self-deleted by its author.
Are we to have hug an emoprog day or what?
Squinch
(50,955 posts)know that most of the Bernie supporters here are quietly cringing at posts like this but sticking by their candidates. I think most of the Hillary supporters understand that most of the Bernie supporters are people they have been friends with who simply disagree on how to best get what we all want.
In the end, all the grown-ups will be fine.
brooklynite
(94,591 posts)Squinch
(50,955 posts)No one owes you anything.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)The Nineties showed that settling for that got us nothing at all.
In 2000, nothing was any more progressive than it had been in 1992. No meaningful gains for poor or working-class people, no gains in the fight against racism or sexism or homophobia/transphobia.
Just a few people calling themselves "Democrats" getting to sit around a Cabinet table.
We don't need to check our souls at the door to get into the White House.
This is not a permanently right-wing country.
Squinch
(50,955 posts)No one owes you anything.
God forbid your purity should be compromised. And, hey, president Trump or president Cruz will really go to bat for those working class people, women, POCs and LGBT people you are so concerned about.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)But we don't need to take any non-progressive stances(like supporting continued military intervention in the Arab/Muslim world)to win in the fall.
The voters aren't demanding that all presidents be war presidents.
1992 proved settling for a centrist never gets us a damn thing.
We can win on our ideals. Why not try?
Squinch
(50,955 posts)Barney Franks said it very well:
snip
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ers-213591
boston bean
(36,221 posts)My answer will depend on you response.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And there is equal bullying and bad behavior on both sides.
Do you denounce everyone who spreads the lie that Bernie cares less about fighting bigotry than he does about economic justice? The continued spread of that smear is a form of bullying?
As is the smear that the Sanders campaign doesn't respect POC's, LGBT people, and women(all of whom are heavily represented among Bernie's supporters, and in growing numbers).
boston bean
(36,221 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)He never dismissed the priority of fighting racism, and he never said that fighting against racism had to wait for the establishment of economic justice.
So all the attacks on Bernie on "social justice"
something a democratic socialist can always be assumed to be committed to supporting)were unfounded. Were lies. Were bullying.
I denounce bullies on my side and you apparently don't.
Why not?
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)Most democrats will vote for the nominee without making demands for special treatment. The other ones with the attitudes or just plain sore losers, they can stay home and pout.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)HRC, if nominated, will have no right to take her nomination as a rejection of Bernie's program. And she will have no excuse to move to the right on any issues at all after the convention, because there aren't any votes to be gained from anyone in moving further right.
The voters don't want fall campaigns were Republicans run on full-throated defense of all they stand for, but Democrats act like it's shameful to be progressive.
And the center doesn't exist anymore. There are only the haves and the have-nots now.
Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)You do the math.
Iggy Knorr
(247 posts)+1 to my list
Response to Ken Burch (Original post)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
840high
(17,196 posts)Squinch
(50,955 posts)Response to Squinch (Reply #78)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)or Rubio or Trump if she gets the nomination so she can squirm as far right as her opponent allows and you are stuck with her as the option nearest to your values.
treestar
(82,383 posts)do not get the White House? It's odd to worry about whether the other Democrats are respectful enough of you. The Republicans sure won't be.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)to make the world we need.
It's about not wanting anyone we nominate to run against the goals of that movement...goals that we don't need to run against in any case, because none of them are unpopular.
The whole tradition of the nominee just expecting one-way loyalty has to stop. It hasn't ever been good for this party.
Why not try to win by honoring the dreams?
Response to treestar (Reply #62)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
Squinch
(50,955 posts)Because that's what its all about. 
H2O Man
(73,558 posts)Recommended.
It seems to me that a few Clinton supporters are going out of their way to insult Sanders supporters. When someone says that Ms. Clinton needs to expose Sanders's "fantasies" without offending his supporters, it strikes me as a cheap shot, taken with a built-in excuse.
demwing
(16,916 posts)I'll vote straight Dem ticket against the Republicans, but that's all.
In fact, I intend to talk shit about her at every opportunity. I hope her administration gets nothing accomplished, good or bad, and that she gets primaried by - and loses to - Warren in 2020. After she's out of office, I hope that some crappy thing she did in her egomaniacal quest for the Presidency comes back to bite her, and that the Clinton legacy will be one of shame and disgrace.
Finally, I hope her single term does nothing to negatively affect America, but that instead, the wake she leaves behind her leads to a progressive revolution in the Dem party, killing any chance of a future blue dog third way resurgence .
How's that for a dream?
NYC Liberal
(20,136 posts)I support Democrats and will vote for the Democratic nominee, and I won't demand that others pat my head and give me some warm milk to do so. I will do it because I believe that is what is best for this country.
We are all free to base your vote on anything we wish, though.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I vote on policy. Who I vote for is my business. We are old fashioned that way as an old fashioned, if small, media outlet
But trust me, I vote on policy, and that is at all levels.
bigtree
(85,998 posts)..if you want support for your candidate, maybe folks here calling Hillary Clinton and her representatives a liar at every opportunity isn't a good idea either.
What this line of reasoning of yours suggests is that you believe only Sanders supporters have 'ideals' or have progressive aspirations. There are 'dreams and dreamers' who comprise the majority who support Hillary Clinton around the nation. Bernie Sanders does not have a lock on lofty aspirations from supporters. It's a flaw of the appeal of Sanders supporters here which assumes his support is unassailable, and his rival's support, something deserving of scorn, instead of regarding the differences of opinion as fair game.
NanceGreggs
(27,815 posts)... the WH remain in Democratic hands will support, work for, and vote for the (D) nominee. Those who don't give a shit whether the next president is a Republican won't.
It's that simple.
"If your candidate does get nominated, you and her will need to treat everyone whose votes you seek and all of the things we stand for with respect."
People who have consistently threatened to not vote if they don't get their way, who have used RW talking points to malign HRC, who have posted vile comments on the FB pages of Democrats who have endorsed her, who have labelled Democrats "sell outs" for so much as speaking about her in a positive way, and who have belittled her supporters by calling them status quo loving, warmongering lackeys of the 1% are not deserving of my respect - and they won't be getting it, ever.
Democrats will vote for the Democrat. Those who refuse to do so can sit home on election day and pretend that their "principles" are more important than the welfare of their country and their fellow citizens.
Some BSers are under the delusion that they are a massive movement representing millions of votes that they can withhold if not coddled and cajoled. The truth is that the average voter supports the candidate they prefer during the primary process - but once a nominee is declared, they get behind that nominee. The HRC supporters in 2008 did not sit out that election out of pique - nor did the Edwards supporters or the Biden supporters. Once Obama was the chosen standard-bearer, Democrats got behind him in order to defeat the Republican and elect a Democrat POTUS.
It is always amusing to see BS supporters here speak as though they somehow control everyone who has supported Bernie in this race, as though all of them are on-board with this idea that they are some powerful monolithic group that can be manipulated into doing the bidding of a vocal few - when in fact, most BSers will walk away from Bernie's primary defeat thinking, "It's too bad my guy didn't win, but now it's time to move on."
HRC is the front-runner, and has been from the outset. She didn't get there through a lack of enthusiasm or tepid support. She got there because the majority of Democrats want her to be the next president.
Once our nominee is named, you can get behind them - or you can sit and sulk, and complain about how you should have gotten more "respect" from the very people you've spewed unending vitriol at over the past nine months since Bernie threw his hat in the ring.
Respect is earned - it is not something that's handed to you on a silver platter because you think people are afraid of what you'll do if you don't get it.
Response to NanceGreggs (Reply #79)
1000words This message was self-deleted by its author.
NanceGreggs
(27,815 posts)Nor are my candidate's supporters demanding it.
Nor have BSers earned it.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Disabled members of the board, or actual minorities, all in the name of your candidate? So called Bernie bros are a myth to me. I have yet to encounter them. But I have encountered real ugliness form real HRC supporters here.
So keep that in mind as you post your smug postings. By the way, assuming for a second that Bernie is the nominee, I expect those two sites, I believe you post at one, to become PUMA II central m'kay.
You are right about respect. I have none for people who attack board members that visciously .
NanceGreggs
(27,815 posts)... demanding the respect of BSers? Threatening to not vote for Bernie if he was the nominee? Suggesting that they have to be wooed in order to vote for the Dem in November if it''s not who they wanted?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)People attacked OS, and hurt him.
And people are still having a grand old time questioning if I am a minority or not. And I don't and won't endorse any candidate. They are not doing it here, because likely they would get hidden.
As I said, I have no respect for people like that. I have experienced meanness from meanies and bullies who support HRC. You want that respect, start by policing your own people and stop that crap. Or not.
That bridge behind you, every one of you who participated in those two sites, poured the gas and lit the napalm. They are burning.
NanceGreggs
(27,815 posts)... I'm not the one asking for respect - the BSers are.
As for the websites you keep on and on about, I assure you that you are NOT the focus of everyone's attention 24/7 - despite the fact that you seem to think you are.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)You are the focus of attention 24/7 by media folks who are waiting for 2008 to repeat itself.
And I will add this, you want respect, you start by not doing that shit. Once you did...well I used to respect you. Your double standards are appalling. Now back to soft ignore with you. My impression of your whole group is of bullies and worst.
NanceGreggs
(27,815 posts)... I'm not the one demanding respect - the OP is. So why don't you discuss it with him?
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)using the same memes, only tailored to fit his profile. Do we really need to hear about Hillary's Wall Street ties from a fellow Dem for eaxample? [blockquo
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)candidates would be free to adopt those portions of their primary candidate opponents' platform that make sense ... without free of being called "flip floppers" and other names.
It would strengthen the party.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Your sensible post has elicited some sensible responses. It has also elicited some responses that illustrate and exacerbate the very problem you identified.
What really seems strange to me is that Clinton is the favorite. Most objective observers give her the edge, and many of her supporters on DU go beyond "edge" and proclaim with complete confidence that she will certainly win; indeed, that the campaign will be effectively over by March 2.
You'd think, if they genuinely believed that, they'd already be in each party's typical post-primary mode of stressing reconciliation between the competing factions. Suffice it to say that they aren't.