Hillary Supporters: Why Does Any Good News for Bernie Trigger Such Outrage?

[davidlynch]

Why is it whenever there is some hopeful news for Bernie that the immediate reaction is go to into ad-hominem mode and start throwing out mean invective like LOSER?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1476156

Why can't any of you find any joy in the fact that Bernie has some support?

He's not making napalm! He's fighting for regular people like you and me.

Even if you disagree with him and you favor Hillary can't you find any common ground in the ideals that Bernie promotes?

[Juicy_Bellows]

1. I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid they can't do that. Nt.

[davidlynch]

3. Juicy were you channeling the HAL? :) n/t

[Juicy_Bellows]

4. Guilty.

[highprincipleswork]

2. Hillary "good". Bernie "bad". Why? Beats the Hill out of me. Perhaps because she's a "winner".

In my experience, winners do not act this way.

[CorporatistNation]

83. Hillary Did NOT Congratulate Bernie ONCE Whenever He WON A Primary... Yet What Did Bernie Do When

Hillary WON... He fucking congratulated her! It's called having CHARACTER... BERNIE HAS IT!

THIS is what Hillary is going to bring us...

e.g., MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

[bettyellen]

5. That's good news? I think not.

[Trust Buster]

6. Sanders implemented the cheapest tactic of them all. He traveled from college campus to

college campus promising students trillions in new spending knowing all along that Congress would not agree to any of it. It was unadulterated pandering on a shameless scale. His candidacy was built on a foundation of deception. Anything flowing from that must be suspect.

[libdem4life]

9. Amazing. Trillions??? No offset? Healthcare for all (3 decades after

Hillary)? Diplomacy before war? 3 million votes ahead...except for those caucus states?

Even the wordy, adjective-filled tome is a bit hyperactive.

But I get that's your opinion. I just wish it didn't have to be smearing people with questionable and overwrought emotion.

BTW...before Reagan, free/inexpensive college was all we had in California. The first 14 were free and loans for the last 2 years, were at 3 percent and a portion automatically repaid annually after each year of professional service.

Then some bank/Republican likely came up with the idea they could get a whole bunch of money, dumb down the masses, and take the "government mismanaged" education fund out of the mix.

Speaking of pandering, deception, shameless, unadulterated, suspect...gosh there were a lot of them.

[Silver_Witch]

86. +100

[davidlynch]

10. So you're saying you can't show any support because you think he's not genuine...

See, I've been listening to Sanders for years on Thom Hartmann's show. He's been on every Friday for at least a decade for a full hour. On this show Thom takes callers, and he lets all of them speak directly to Bernie. I've seen every crazy statement you can imagine thrown at Bernie, and I've seen how he remains respectful and answers every time. He's also never wavered from his positions, I mean he has stood firm in a big way, almost too good to be true.

This has allowed me to see how Bernie reacts when he's caught off guard, and I'm telling you he's never done anything that has made me doubt his sincerity. I have a pretty well-developed BS meter and I've been telling everyone including my closest friends that Bernie is the real deal.

Now could I be wrong? It is possible, but I think Bernie is the best candidate that we've had for a long time, for sincerity and standing by his positions. No one even comes close, the only one I can think of that even approaches Bernie is Carter, and he made some decisions that are terrible in retrospect.

[Gore1FL]

21. There was a time when the Democrats were liberal and fought for liberal ideals

It was awesome. Ah nostalgia.

[grasswire]

55. strange new world, isn't it?

I'm hoping that Democrats can take back the party from Third Way crap.

[senz]

28. Bullshit. Bernie's proposals are sensible AND PAID FOR.

Educate yourself.

The proposal: https://berniesanders.com/issues/its-time-to-make-college-tuition-free-and-debt-free/

How he pays for it: https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/

In detail: http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/working_papers/working_papers_401-450/WP414.pdf

Now quit lying about Bernie Sanders.

[rock]

84. Correct

Although there's no chance (like Bernie's winning!) that many BSers will believe a word you said. Of course, you're not telling me anything new, but I still appreciate it that some one else gets it. Thanks!

[Orrex]

88. Another close one!

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message

On Sun Jun 5, 2016, 11:59 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Correct
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2129132

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

No need to refer to supporters of Bernie as BSers we all know it refers to bull shitter. Isnt Hillary winning. Then why all the hate?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jun 5, 2016, 12:08 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: A tepid post and a waste of an alert. Even today, in the waning days of the primary campaign, we see much stronger language allowed to stand against Clinton and her supporters.

No reason to hide this.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I'm a Bernie supporter and I hate censorship!
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Pretty weak sauce. Alert stalk much?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: You've got to be joking that this was alerted on.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[libdem4life]

7. You sound like a Liberal to me. Imagine. Taking the other side's

information in...as information...and not being so testy and juvenile by taking it personally and throwing out the "scalding" one-liners. Also, Kill the Messenger is alive and well...and used equally.

[Trust Buster]

8. Nonsensical. He shamelessly pandered and you know it.

[libdem4life]

11. But you are dead wrong. Period.

Yet, entitled to your opinion, of course.

EDIT: Removed words.

[YouDig]

12. The convention will not be "contested", and it would be bad news not good news if it did.

All that matters now is beating Trump, and a contested convention, or whatever nonsense Bernie tries to pull at the convention, all makes Trump more likely to win in November.

Don't be surprised if Democrats don't celebrate things that are good news for Trump.

[davidlynch]

15. You are characterizing Bernie's determination as trying to "pull" something...

He isn't trying to "pull" anything. That word implies that Bernie is trying to do something underhanded or deceitful. By seeing the process through he's doing just that: seeing the process through. If anyone is trying to "pull" something it is HRC's campaign trying to short-circuit the process.

[YouDig]

17. He's trying to pull a superdelegate coup, he's not even hiding that anymore.

That is something deceitful, overturning the electorate, and it's not going to work. All it can accomplish is to help Trump bu dividing the party and further enraging his supporters. He should be encouraging them to join forces against Trump behind HIllary, not feeding them nonsense about contested conventions.

I hope that he's bluffing and he'll concede gracefully once the last votes come in from DC.

[davidlynch]

20. You guys are paranoid he doesn't have magic powers to "pull" anything...

The superdelegates are not stupid and they're not going to by hypnotized by Bernie or anyone else. Their decision is theirs and Bernie's campaign isn't doing anything sneaky or underhanded to try to manipulate them.

[YouDig]

24. I'm not worried that he's going to succeed. I'm worried that his attempt will divide the party

and help Trump win. He's talking about a "contested convention". Jeff Weaver was saying on MSNBC that Bernie could get up there and give an anti-Hillary campaign speech the day before the floor vote.

I don't think he has magic powers. But he is going to get a speaking slot, a good one, and if he uses that speaking slot to attack Hillary rather than support Hillary and attack Trump, that is basically sabotaging the Democratic nominee in the aid of Trump. And it doesn't require magic powers, it just requires a big ego and a lack of perspective about what actually matters.

[davidlynch]

32. Big ego? You guys must be in some parallel universe...

Your descriptions of Bernie don't match the observable phenomena. If ego gratification were his goal, we would have seen some kind of evidence of this, but I can't think of a single incident.

We have no way to predict what Bernie will do with a speaking slot, but knowing everything about him, my guess is would keep saying exactly the same thing that he has been saying: get money out of politics, health care for all, and so on. His message discipline is almost too strong, it drives me crazy and I'm a Bernie supporter.

[YouDig]

60. I see a guy with a big ego, what can I say.

And he also always thinks he's right and everyone else is wrong, and that he's the only person in the government with morals.

On top of that, I can't think of any reason except ego for him to act the way he's been acting the last few weeks. Especially if he doesn't concede after DC votes come in and he's way behind in pledged delegates. At that point it's all ego.

And he can talk about money in politics all he wants, but if he attacks Hillary, the Democratic nominee, for having a superPAC or for ties to Wall Street or any of his other talking points, right there at the convention where she is being nominated, then he is nothing but a tool of Trump. And right now neither you nor I know whether he's egotistical enough to do that.

[Lord Magus]

80. We HAVE already seen evidence of it.

Declaring to his supporters that he's still going to win when he has no actual path to the nomination is a clear sign of it.

[glinda]

40. The Party is already divided due to values and issues that

people feel are of importance to them. And it appears these things are not being addressed in a satisfactory manner to some. Unifying is an interesting term which to some means to toss out strong moral and ethical convictions for others that may seem diametrically opposed to them.

[Orsino]

65. A contested primary is probable. Guaranteed...

...unless there is a concession prior to that first (and likely only) vote.

We don't have to fear that vote.

[demwing]

13. Her supporters have different goals - they act like politics is a ball game

and the one thing worth consideration is not the good you do, but whether or not you win.

[senz]

29. As does their candidate: win, and to hell with anything and anyone else.

Total nihilism.

It should be stopped at or before the convention.

[seabeyond]

36. The goal in a primary, ... to win. Is a bad thing. This thread is really meant as a joke, right?

[pdsimdars]

75. But she isn't even doing that. Only hundreds of dispirited people come to her "rallies"

and THOUSANDS of happy, enthusiastic people and families show up for Bernie. That speaks louder than words.

[rhett o rick]

14. They don't want to hear anything rational. They have chosen to follow Clinton no matter what

she has done, no matter what her positions are, and no matter what she will do. It's Authoritarian Adulation.

[sufrommich]

16. Because claiming there's going to be a contested convention isn't true?

It smells very much like a tactic to hang onto donors. There is no way the Sanders campaign believes that.

[davidlynch]

18. "Contested" simply means Superdelegates will have to vote to decide the outcome...

Which is true. People seem to have a lot of confusion, words like "contested" and "brokered" are technical and they have very specific meanings. "Contested" just means that there will be a vote, so this isn't a "tactic" to do anything. Once again, your side reaches for the invective and hyperbole rather than reading and understanding.

[sufrommich]

19. Yes,I know what the technical term means. I also

know that the Sanders campaign leaves that part out in order to rev up his donors. They knowo there isn't going to be anything close to there being an actual fight to see who gets the nomination,he's playing his supporters.

[davidlynch]

22. There is no way: Bernie isn't the type to "play" his supporters...

This is one of the benefits of following Bernie for so long, I'd bet money on it. Also, how on earth do you presume to know his motives?

[sufrommich]

23. What other motive could there be?

Do you think there's going to be a floor fight for the nomination? Do you think Sanders thinks there's going to be one?

[davidlynch]

25. Bernie is hoping the SDs will think he's the stronger candidate to beat Trump

Bernie is not being coy about this, he's said this clearly. His chances are small (he can do the math) but the probability is not zero. If there is any chance, he owes it to his supporters to at least see the process through. There is no intrigue here, he's been up front about all of this.

[sufrommich]

26. There isn't going to be a stampede of delegates to Sanders

and he knows that.

[davidlynch]

33. You seem to have a crystal ball, you are saying it as if you have inside information n/t

[qdouble]

74. The super delegates announce who they are voting for...who they intend to vote for is no mystery.

The vote at the convention is procedural...it's not as if every election year there's some sort of mystery about who will be the nominee if a candidate is ahead in pledged delegates.

[bigtree]

27. that's not 'good news'

...it's delusion.

[davidlynch]

38. Good news is process will be followed to its conclusion...

And not short-circuited, remaining respectful to Bernie supporters until the end.

[bigtree]

61. but will Bernie folks respect the process?

...that's the berning question.

[davidlynch]

67. I am certain that Bernie will handle this with extreme dignity...

...and if it turns out that I'm wrong about that, I'll come back here and apologize to you.

[rjsquirrel]

30. Hopeful in what sense?

Hope is only a thing when you still have it.

[davidlynch]

35. Probability of a superdelegate switch is non-zero...

So there is still hope and reason to not short-circuit the process.

[rjsquirrel]

37. Probability of a meteor strike ending life on earth

is also non-zero.

I'll be in the basement.

[davidlynch]

42. Probability of SD switch is almost certainly greater than ELE meteor strike...

For example, an indictment or any other negative news. In fact, SDs could switch based on polling data if it showed that Hillary would almost certainly lose to Trump. We'll know July 25.

[rjsquirrel]

48. True enough

But you're the one who said "non-zero" and I'm a scientist. 🤓

[Lord Magus]

81. No, superdelegates could not switch on the basis of polling data.

I guarantee you, the chance of that happening is literally zero.

[seabeyond]

31. Seriously? Lmao. He is out to cause problems. Good news for him, so we should all rejoice? Odd.

[davidlynch]

34. How do you know his goal is to "cause problems"...

Everyone from your camp says things with such finality as if they are absolutely true, but you have no way to know any of this.

[seabeyond]

39. Because he lost and continues on. Because all of his history the last 5 decades has that intent

and the proof is in the puddin' the last yr.

[davidlynch]

43. Your premise "he lost" isn't technically true, so neither is your conclusion n/t

[seabeyond]

45. Ok, it will be Tuesday.

[Fuddnik]

59. !

[Tarc]

41. Why is the thread you link to characterized as "good news for Bernie" ?

I was expecting you to be complaining about another Birdiesanders or some sort of happy fluff piece.

There can be no "contested convention", that not how it functions. Between that and the tired "please don't count the superdelegates, please please!" canard, that there there is rightly chock-full of criticism.

[davidlynch]

47. "Contested" simply means Superdelegates will have to vote to decide the outcome...

So when you say "that is now how it functions" how exactly do you think it functions?

[davidlynch]

52. I don't know why I'm trying to respond to this rationally...

I feel like I'm talking to an AI system like Eliza that's just parroting and re-phrasing my comments. No matter what, the response will boil down to "BERNIE IS A BAD, CHILDISH EGOMANIAC".

[Tarc]

53. Because all along, Sandersfans have made it sound like the Republican convention

where, if no candidate had hit their magic number of 1,237 delegates, the doors would've been opened to the possibility of someone other than the pledged delegate winner winning the nomination. This is where the losing candidaqtes could have mad ethei pitches and pleas to the delegates to vote for them instead of Trump.

There will be no 2nd tier at the Democratic convention, the superdelegates vote right alongside their state's pledged delegates. It doesn't matter that Clinton enters the convention shy of 2,383; at some point in the process, probably with some finagling to let New York be the one to put her over 2,383, will be nominated.

There is no place or opportunity for the supers to consider Sanders.

[CrowCityDem]

44. News is one thing. Bernie telling lies and giving false hope does not qualify as 'good news'.

[davidlynch]

49. What is the "false" part of the "false hope" to which you are referring? n/t

[CrowCityDem]

50. "We can win", "superdelegates will switch", "the convention will be contested", etc.

[davidlynch]

57. Thanks for responding, but how do you know...

these things are impossible? What inside track do you have for information to make such definitive statements, as if they are statements of fact? As far as I know, no one knows whether the SDs might switch. Why are you certain (probability 1.0) that they won't?

[CrowCityDem]

63. SDs have never overturned the voting results, and they won't start for Bernie. That's how.

For as much as Bernie has complained about how undemocratic they are, the nomination would be viewed by many as completely illegitimate if they handed it to the person with far fewer votes and delegates. It would be an insult to democracy, and I know for damn sure the establishment isn't going to run the risk of alienating the minority voters who have powered Hillary's win to give the nomination to someone who considers them as bad as Republicans.

[davidlynch]

66. The only way would be if they were damn near certain that HRC was damaged...

...in such a way that supporting her would be tantamount to throwing the election to Trump.

I do agree with you about it being an insult to democracy, but something like this apparently happened before. Hubert Humphrey was able to get the Democratic nomination by kind of gaming the delegates so that party insiders effectively selected him.

I personally don't want Bernie to win that way, it isn't worth it. But who knows, anything could happen, and circumstances could change in such a way that it would make sense to switch.

[CrowCityDem]

69. When Humphrey won, not nearly every state had a primary. Party bosses still picked candidates.

[Maedhros]

46. Because they hate liberals and progressives, just like we hated Bush. [n/t]

[NCTraveler]

51. Did you see what happened when Samuel L Jackson endorsed Clinton?

At one point a sanders supporter said they didn't know who he was but could tell from his photo he was a half rate actor. Off a picture.

We all know what it's about. This meta is a big part of it.

[davidlynch]

54. If some Sanders supporter said that, then he/she is an ass...

And does not represent the movement as a whole.

[NCTraveler]

56. It's how you are definite it. Very situational.

While promoting the meta aspect.

[davidlynch]

58. There are idiots in every group...

...and sometimes "Sanders Supporters" are found out later to not really be supporters after all. But the notion that Sander's supporters are childish, stupid people inclined to violence is definitely the current narrative (e.g., "chairs thrown" and "rushed the stage" in Nevada).

[NCTraveler]

62. Ok.

[Orsino]

64. Another goddamned "supporters" thread. n/t

[pdsimdars]

76. Awwww

.

[winter is coming]

68. For some people, being an avid supporter of X means that anyone who doesn't

share their avid support for X is attacking X--and, by extension, themselves. I find this response more often among people who have what I'd consider an authoritarian mindset. Perhaps Hillary's more appealing to that personality type.

[beachbum bob]

70. because 99% of sanders supporters don't anything about bernie

for starters

[Matt_R]

73. hi, could you rephrase.

Your message did not come across well, apologizes if English is not your first language.

[Live and Learn]

71. The populace must be left devoid of any hope whatsoever. Hope is evil. nt

[oberliner]

72. How is that "good news" for Bernie?

That's nothing at that link that is "good news" for anyone.

[Bluenorthwest]

77. Because their opposition to Bernie is based on bias, not on politics.

Several of them have admitted and several more have been exposed as being motivated by bigotry and being willing to say things that are not true just to bash at members of that minority. How many of them need to confess to this before this community has the courage to discuss that which is festering here, Trump like and noxious?

[GoneFishin]

78. It's nothing personal. They are just doing their job. nt

[Califonz]

79. I only see 17 replies out of 80

I love my iggie list.

[NorthCarolina]

82. Corporatists are in a never ending battle against populists. -nt-

[2banon]

85. Hillary Supporters resist (or resent) the democratic process, the actual meaning of democracy.

Hillary supporters seem to believe that "elections" is the sole definition of democracy.

"Elections do not a democracy make." someone once said a very long time ago, but somehow that knowledge has been lost and forgotten.

The corporate media was allowed to redefine the meaning of this process and a number of generations grew up misinformed, no thanks to self serving politicians who seem to prefer an ignorant electorate, and never bothers to make the point.

Though casting one's vote has a very significant role in self expression, it's only one component of engagement in any genuine democracy.

None the less, it is the ultimate act of self expression, and that cannot be understated not should it ever be undermined.

Hillary supporters are engaging in undermining the process by insisting on calling the election results in advance of election day in California.

I see it as a form of psychological voter suppression, but fortunately it doesn't seem to be working in California to the extent it would easily have in the past.

Regardless of this primary season election result, from everything I'm seeing unfolding before my eyes for the first in my entire adult life a genuine political revolution is actually unfolding

Not completed by a long shot, but the birth of the movement is flowering and I'm overjoyed beyond measure to finally see it happening in my lifetime.

[Miles Archer]

87. Because...

...some...not all...Clinton supporters go to into ad-hominem mode and start throwing out mean invective like LOSER? in many of the Sanders threads, and Sanders supporters don't like it.

Because...

...some...not all...Sanders supporters go to into ad-hominem mode and start throwing out mean invective like LOSER? in many of the Clinton threads, and Clinton supporters don't like it.

It's coming from both sides. We have gotten to the point where people don't actually have to say "go fuck yourself" in those exact words. Their responses pretty much make it clear. Civility has now become a goal here, rather than a practice. It's understandable. Die-hard Clinton supporters aren't signing up for what Sanders have to offer, and die-hard Sanders supporters are not any more interested in Clinton. That disintegrates into a yelling match over who is a "real" Democrat, who is a "real" Progressive, and a witch hunt for lurking, Trump-supporting "moles" among the herd.

I've posted a couple of times in ATA during the last week. Skinner's last response to me was:

"Here's the deal: People need to stop pointing the finger at the supporters of the other candidate and start considering the possibility that their own behavior and the behavior of other people who support the same candidate are part of the problem here. If people desire a reconciliation, they will need to make some sacrifices to help make it happen.

"We only make peace with our enemies, my lord. That's why it's called 'making peace."' --Littlefinger"

...and he's right, and while I am not 100% convinced that DU, en masse, is prepared to do that, I've had enough. Mean-spirited conflict is not fun, it's counter-productive, it's not a good use of my time. Discussion, which includes people who respectfully disagree, maybe. But not pissing contests. I've learned that it doesn't take much to set off one of those skirmishes, but I'm no longer going to satisfy someone looking for a fight.

[noiretextatique]

89. He's a SOCIALIST!!!!!!!!

[itsrobert]

90. Sanders resorting to desperate tactics is Good News for him?

Thanks for the laugh.