Does Bernie know how offensive and outlandish his surrogates are?

[Politicub]

This is a serious question. I would like to think that he doesn’t.

Why? Their attacks against other dem nominees are ruthless and twist context, and it will be difficult to walk back their bizarre rants. This will need to happen to heal rifts and turn duty-bound votes to enthusiastic support.

Personally, I do not want to be associated with people like the surrogates for Bernie’s campaign. I want to be a fellow traveler, and I’ve been defending Bernie as of late, but every time I see something like the nonsensical anti-Buttigieg tweets it turns me off. And it’s starting to make me angry.

A house divided against itself and all that.

[Renew Deal]

1. Is the goal to win the election or hurt the Democratic party?

Or both?

[NurseJackie]

47. I believe it's the latter.

It goes like this: In order to "rebuild" the Democratic party, it must first be "destroyed"... supposedly. That's the general implication coming from groups like Cenk Uygur's "Justice Democrats" and those associated with it (as well as other outfits like "Our Revolution" and "BNC" etc.)

[TNNurse]

58. Just remember, Bernie is not a Democrat.

[NurseJackie]

63. I know. It's impossible to forget. I'm being constantly reminded of it every time I hear...

I know. It's impossible to forget. I'm being constantly reminded of it every time I hear things like "the Democratic party is ideologically bankrupt" or that "the Democratic party is the party of the elite" or that the "Democratic party is an absolute failure".

All I'm saying is that anyone who says things like that (and worse!) is clearly trying to divide, weaken, and tear-down the party. What good purpose does that serve?

A divided and suspicious and resentful party only serves to benefit Trump, the GOP and Russia. Why would anyone want to do or say things that benefit Russia?

It's a legitimate question that deserves an honest answer.

[BlueFlorida]

71. It may end up helping Trump

and there is tone deafness about that possibility.

[NurseJackie]

83. Those smears and attacks on the Democratic party (and on Democrats) creates negativity. And...

Those smears and attacks on the Democratic party (and on Democrats) creates negativity. And... that kind of negativity generates apathy. Apathy discourages voter turnout. Low voter turnout gives Republicans a chance to steal the elections.

But, this is the kind of shit that people like Susan Fucking Sarandon were gleefully celebrating. REGARDLESS of the fact that the most vulnerable among us were the ones who would suffer, she was absolutely GIDDY at the prospect of Trump being president. It's that type of vanity and pursuit of "purity" that is the most dangerous. (I guess that's easier to do when you're white and rich like she is... not everyone has her advantages.)



So smug. So content. So happy. JUST LOOK AT HER!!!

[RVN VET71]

107. Why would anyone want to do or say things that benefit Russia?

For exactly the reasons you gave. These people are of 2 types, generally: 1)actual trolls, sowing discontent and animosity deliberately to weaken Democratic resolve and 2)angry fools who are smart enough to post a comment but too dull-witted to understand the ramifications of their adolescent sniping.

[NurseJackie]

111. Those things would be easier to dismiss if ONLY it were from random anonymous online idiots...

Those things would be easier to dismiss if ONLY it were from random anonymous online idiots... but rather than go into details, I think it's safer for me to just leave it at that, for obvious reasons.

[Politicub]

112. And it's heartbreaking to see

Locally, at least here in Atlanta, the Democratic Party works hard at registering people to vote, reminding them when its time to vote, and expanding our local and state-wide coalition. The party is a force for good.

Generalizing what democrats are and are not, which is what some are doing, is taken personally because it is personal. It ignores the hard work that went into local gains; I have seen with my own two eyes how politics are local. Pot holes and local transportation issues matter to a whole lot of folks. And big critical issues, like access to the ballot and running clean elections in Georgia, are important to the party as well.

I love Warren by the way. Would love to see her in the White house!

[onit2day]

118. Using Bernie surrogates to attack him is sad and petty. In his book "Where Do

We Go From Here", he states change happens from the bottom up. That all politics are local which is why is insight is spot on. A government that represents all of us not just campaign mega donors. If you read his book you'd see just how much he already does get it and how much he stands for you and our dem party claims of what we want. To me the best ticket is Sanders/Warren to bring the gov. and the party to being representative of we the people. Sanders would have beaten Trump the first time around and definitely will in 2020. Using the term surrogates without being name specific only means to me a couple people in a huge crowd shouting. We are aware of this group mentioned in the NYT are trying to find ways to attack Bernie so he won't be our candidate...which is extremely divisive.

[Politicub]

123. I mean what I say. I said the surrogates and I mean it. And petty is a personal attack.

But I digress.

The candidate himself? I like Bernie and his policy positions. I enjoy watching him live. Depending on how far he makes it, I'll read some of his books.

But, the surrogates? Can't stand them so far.

[onit2day]

122. Or being FDR honest and trying to bring the party back to its FDR roots

Yes I use the term FDR because this is closest to Bernie and shows me just what our party is supposed to stand for...and will again when we let the people decide and not the electoral college or the DLC

[Go Vols]

133. +1000

[onit2day]

114. In name only.He's done more for our party than most other dems.Walks like a duck

[Thekaspervote]

151. He's done more for the party..like divide and cause infighting

[Eliot Rosewater]

62. You got it. I keep hoping people will figure it out, but most still have not.

Hey, I am so far left I could be on board with that big of a change if it were not for FASCIST NAZIS occupying the WH as we speak!

So, call me crazy, I think we put out the fire BEFORE we discuss what color to paint the kitchen.

[NurseJackie]

66. I love house/home analogies. In the past, I've said...

I love house/home analogies. In the past, I've said that it often seems as though there's an element who want to raze and bulldoze the house because a floorboard was squeaking, and a faucet was dripping. Rather than fix what can be improved, the myopic solution is to "destroy and rebuild". All in the name of purity.

[comradebillyboy]

159. "I think we put out the fire BEFORE we discuss what color to paint the kitchen."

Well said.

[jmowreader]

65. Our Revolution predates Uygur's group

That group was Bernie’s campaign organization and changed its name to continue on. Think Organizing for America, which started life as Obama for America.

[qazplm135]

60. kinda both

He wants to win to start "the revolution" and he would much prefer to destroy the Democratic party that he clearly views as only good enough as one of the only two options to create a democratic socialist party.

[ehrnst]

68. He does have the support of 'Justice Democrats' who have in their mission statement

to "rebuild the Democratic Party from scratch."

You can't rebuild if you don't demolish first.

Also, his hires for his senior campaign staff make a statement as well...

[onit2day]

113. They said same thing about FDR.Bernie does not want to destroy the Dem party

What he wants is to return to its roots. To stand for the people. He's an FDR candidate whose loyalty is not to Big donors. Last dem convention had (closed to the media) closed door rallies with lobbyists and mega donors which is fine but makes it easy to lose site of the working man's agenda. BTW...we already are a Democratic Socialist party since our platform demands a social safety net. We've been one since FDR, in spite of Bill Clinton's attempt to roll back our social safety net.

[floppyboo]

115. this

[qazplm135]

120. yeah no

there are no democratic socialist roots to the party. FDR was certainly more liberal than what came before (how could he not be), but he was far from a democratic socialist and Bernie is not FDR.

The rest of your post is expanding the term democratic socialist to mean "demands a social safety net" which is such a broad definition as to be meaningless.

Bernie only joins the party when he has to in order to win the nomination. Otherwise, he reverts to being an independent. That tells me he values what the Dem Party can give him, not what it stands for. And that's fine. But by no means does he think the Dem party is worthy and "just needs to return to its roots."

You yourself say we've "been one" up until Clinton. OK, then why wasn't Bernie a Democrat in the 70s and 80s?
He doesn't appear to think that way.

[onit2day]

132. Bernie has always been a democratic socialist and has Done more for the dem party

than most other dems. He campaigned more for Hillary than any other elected official plus he brought more young people into the party as well as being a very successful fund raiser. He does everything an elected dems does but didn't call himself a dem. This upsets you. To me that's is being a purist.
Now the dem socialist party stands for SS, Medicare, Medicaid, EPA, FDA, Min wage, unemployment compensation, 40hr wrk week, child labor laws, the list goes on and on. These are all socialist programs which the dem party stands for...therefore we as a party are all democratic socialists. Next time a dem says I'm not a socialist ask them which of these programs they do not support, or have never used.

[qazplm135]

137. no he hasn't

that's just a talking point thrown around to get around the fact that he eschews the party except when he needs it to be President.
I can name dozens of folks who have "done more for the party" than Bernie Sanders. He's certainly captured the attention of a certain movement over the last few years. That's not doing more for the "dem party" than the folks who have actually joined the party and worked inside it to make it better and stronger.

You as well throw around loose language. Being for social programs does not make you a socialist. Is our economy a mix of capitalistic and socialistic concepts? For sure. Does that make us a socialist country? Of course not.

Does our party embrace some socialist concepts? For sure. So do the Republicans to a much lesser degree. It's one thing to list out some socialist-inspired policies that we all like and say, see mixing in socialism in parts of our economy is something we've been doing for awhile.

It's another to turn that into "we are all socialists." We aren't. We are a hybrid economy that to some degree fuses the two economic concepts together. Other countries like in Scandinavia, mix in more socialism, and less capitalism than us for example. It's a continuum.
You are a socialist and you want everyone to be like you, so you create this argument that, secretly, we all are.

As for Bernie...When you don't join a team, or only join a team when you have to, it sends a pretty clear signal what you think of that team. If you choose to work from the outside vice inside, you are also sending a pretty clear signal.

[JudyM]

161. Aw, c'mon, don't destroy the narrative.

[LongtimeAZDem]

2. If he doesn't, that's still on him. As we used to say, "it was in all the papers"

[Snotcicles]

3. Lol. nt

[yaesu]

4. I'm hoping all candidates keep the mud slinging to a bare minimum, would prefer none at all

but I know that is asking too much. I will be taking note & those campaigns that go overboard with it will not get my support.

[McKim]

5. Stop the Bashing!!!!!

Stop the Bernie bashing, please! It does no good for us. Without him we wouldn’t even be talking about Medicare or All and Free College!!!!

[Politicub]

7. Is this sarcasm?

I didn't bash Bernie. I am calling out his surrogates for their bad behavior.

[murielm99]

79. It might be satire.

Saying that BS is responsible for the talk about free college and Medicare for all is comical. We know better.

[Politicub]

82. It's hard to tell these days

[Autumn]

156. Write them a letter about "their bad behavior", I seriously doubt his surrogates post at DU.

You calling out their bad behavior here only reaches Bernie's supporters, fellow DUers who are not guilty of bad behavior.

[highplainsdem]

12. I don't think Bernie originated either of those ideas, Medicare For All OR Free College.

For instance, John Conyers started introducing a Medicare For All bill in the House every year beginning in 2003:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Health_Care_Act

I've seen the idea of free college floated for what seems like a long time, following European models.

BOTH Medicare For All and free college are getting much more attention now because of high medical and educational costs. Not simply because Bernie's talking about them.

[thesquanderer]

18. Sanders was the only Dem candidate talking about these things in 2016.

Of course he's not the first to come up with these ideas. But he was the first to seriously propose them as a viable presidential candidate, and was largely responsible for "mainstreaming" these ideas such that they began to get serious traction in congress. It's not like health and education costs were affordable then and have only now become unaffordable.

[JaneQPublic]

165. Dennis Kucinich backed free college and universal health care in 2004 primaries.

- Cut the Pentagon budget 15% for tuition-free college. (Oct 2007)
- Free education from pre-kindergarten to college. (Sep 2007)

- Medicare for All: universal single-payer national system. (Aug 2003)
- Raise taxes for guaranteed, single payer, universal care. (May 2003)

MORE...
http://www.ontheissues.org/Dennis_Kucinich.htm

[thesquanderer]

166. We may disagree about whether Kucinch was a "viable presidential candidate" :-) (nt)

[JaneQPublic]

167. Viable enough to be allowed to participate in DNC-sanctioned debates (nt)

[we can do it]

25. You forgot the sarcasm thingy.

[BlueFlorida]

72. Medicare for all was Ted Kennedy's idea

back in the early 70's and Nixon almost came on bard with it.

[DCofVA]

126. I agree with you, McKim.

Bernie-bashing has become a psychosis in this forum.

[Thekaspervote]

152. Bernie supporters bring it on themselves by constantly bringing up the same issues

[artislife]

155. hmm

we are the only ones who constantly bring up the same issues.


Alrighty.

[ehrnst]

148. Ted Kennedy was talking single payer in the early 70's and Hillary was talking about

debt free colleges for the middle and working class before Bernie was talking about it at all.

Bernie finally came around to Hillary's idea that the wealthy should pay something for college after the 2016 election.

John Conyers has been proposing a Medicare for all Act every year since 2003...

[LovingA2andMI]

6. Bernie....

Does not care. Which says EVERYTHING about Bernie, doesn't it?

[WeekiWater]

8. They were chosen for a reason.

His press secretary is exactly who he wanted disseminating his message. They are of like mind.

[comradebillyboy]

160. Yes, they are disseminating his message.

[highplainsdem]

9. Of course he does.

[MaryMagdaline]

10. I'm sorry but Pete's statement that you might vote for Bernie if you're

Inclined to burn everything down hit Bernie hard. He basically told a group of young people, “I used to love Bernie, too, I even wrote a paper on him but don’t vote for him and burn things down.” Legitimate hit on Pete’s part (“Feel the Bern” is subtle invitation to burn it down). Response was called for by Bernie. The attack by Bernie: Pete’s a sellout - his success is due to gentrification and kissing up to the rich.

These are deeply personal attacks. I don’t see either candidate crying about it. I think they can handle themselves.

[Politicub]

14. There's an in-crowd and everyone else

In the body of Bernie supporters.

If he and his surrogates want to attract people, then they should act like it.

Mayor Pete is a cultural phenomenon that goes beyond his candidacy. People like me are attached to his and his story. Do you not understand this? His candidacy is historical and needs to be regarded as such.

Will Pete win this time around? It's certainly a long shot. But will he be our president someday? Absolutely.

[MaryMagdaline]

17. I appreciate the insight from a Pete supporter

You see him as an historical figure.

I actually like his political skills. I think he has sharp elbows and sharp instincts. That does not mean he isn’t inspirational. I think he is both. I actually appreciate politicians. It’s not a dirty word to me as it is with most people. I think Pete speaks poetically and rationally at the same time. I also don’t think he’s some delicate flower. If he keeps winning these small skirmishes/debates, it will sharpen his skills for the general. I am enjoying watching his development.

I am looking forward to Pete and others making this one hell of a debate season. (With jay and Pete leading on environment)

Peace and love to Pete followers. A good man and a good choice.

[Politicub]

33. Inslee's critical message

Thank you for your post. I’m kind of emotional this morning and it helped me to hear what you had to say.

I saw Inslee as your preferred candidate. I hope he goes far in this race. I would be thrilled to support him in the general.

I’m reading a book called The Uninhabitable Earth – Life after Global Warming. Inslee’s message about how everything is affected by climate rings so true to me. The book goes into immigration, civil unrest that will come, and the absolute need for the world to take on the hard work of re-orienting itself to survive the a catastrophe is heading our way. And do it now. We cannot stop global warming at this point; we can attempt to slow it down, but no matter what, it will affect our lives in every way.

It’s one of those things, climate, and the effects of pumping unending flumes of carbon into our atmosphere, that I can’t really wrap my head around its magnitude. I want Inslee to have more attention and the other candidates to listen to him about the urgency of climate change.

[MaryMagdaline]

51. Yes to all of the above. I like "systems" guys

Inslee, Pete, Warren, all understand systems and the effect their ideas will have on the overall system. I like inslee’s optimistic platform and how he merges climate with labor issues by emphasizing jobs. There isn’t ANYONE in this election who does not have some great ideas, but Pete is really presenting his ideas well. Two co-workers are all excited about Pete. He definitely has the makings for a movement.

[Thekaspervote]

153. +1000

[crazytown]

15. Except

“I used to love Bernie, too, I even wrote a paper on him but don’t vote for him and burn things down.”

He said nothing of the sort. That is unadulterated fabrication.

[MaryMagdaline]

19. Really? That's exactly the message for his well chosen (more diplomatic) words

There’s always a message beneath the message.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

27. Yup... the old "fake quote" trick... where have I seen this before?! hmmm...

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

43. On attacks of fact checks on 'certain' candidates, perhaps?

Or denying they said things like "I don't consider my self to be a Democrat?"

[crazytown]

45. The problem with all these controversies

Is that it overlooks the main point - Tump lied his head off. He portrayed himself as the champion of those left out and hung out to dry

I have visited the laid-off factory workers, and the communities crushed by our horrible and unfair trade deals. These are the forgotten men and women of our country, and they are forgotten, but they will not be forgotten long. These are people who work hard but no longer have a voice. I AM YOUR VOICE”

He lied about caring for ordinary men and women and some people were fooled. But not this time I hope - a great ad for all Democrats.

Link to tweet

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

46. Excellent point!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[IndyOp]

37. I think Buttigieg's "burn things down" comment is a poor way of saying

"turn everything upside down".

Buttigieg's point is that a lot of people were deciding at the last minute before the 2016 election whether to vote for Trump or Sanders - because they wanted to lay waste to the "old boys club" in DC and drain the swamp, etcetera.

If Buttigieg's persona is to remain the calm, rational candidate then he needs stay away from zingers that start mud fights. Campaign rally crowds love zingers, but he has to resist temptation.

[ehrnst]

44. I heard that exact phrase used by some of the people he is talking about. (nt)

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

48. Well said... and good advice for Mayor Pete.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Cosmocat]

75. He stated a simple truth

"Feel the Bern."

A play on burn it down.

I voted for Bernie in the primary in 2016 (admittedly knowing I was going to vote Hillary in the general).

But, over time, it has become fairly obvious that Bernie, and his campaign, is malicious.

They want to play it like conservatives do - be the bully and play the victim.

And, he is willing to get into the light grey Roveish activity more so than candidates who don't flip to D only when they want to run for POTUS.

[ancianita]

105. Malicious? T hen you do not know Bernie one bit. AT ALL.

[Cosmocat]

108. Let me state that better

He and his campaign are malicious in how they campaign ...

[ancianita]

110. It's not better, it's coverup of your own bashing of a Democratic candidate.

[Thekaspervote]

154. Once again..bernie is not a democrat.. just ask him

[BlueFlorida]

76. Mayor Pete only repeated a phrase that was touted nt

[MineralMan]

41. He said those words? Really?

Or, was it you who said them? Do you have a link that shows Mayor Pete saying that?

[MaryMagdaline]

64. If you're into literal translations, so be it.

I think I got Pete’s subtle message right. I think Bernie’s reaction to it (“intellectual dishonesty” and all) suggests that he took it the same way. I think he tried steering Bernie followers into a solution oriented discussion and to a way of solving problems. He might have been harsh (Bernie’s staff obviously thought so). I thought it was smart, presidential and it grabbed my attention.

If there’s no meaning underneath the meaning, politicians can just hang it up now. Post their platforms on their website and go home now.

[BannonsLiver]

86. ...

[redstateblues]

11. It's a feature not a bug

[comradebillyboy]

13. Bernie's hires reflect Bernie's values. These are the people Sanders chose

to represent him. They are doing what he hired them to do.

[ancianita]

109. No, his hires reflect his campaign TACTICS. It's a primary campaign. Knock off the Bernie put-downs.

[Blue_true]

157. I was going to write something like that.

The people that he chose to lead his campaign were pitbulls attacking Hillary and democrats into the general election of 2016. Bernie saw that. Yet he picked them to steer his 2020 race.

[comradebillyboy]

158. He can't let go of his 2016 loss to Hillary.

His vindictiveness is a serious distraction from running a professional campaign.

[m-lekktor]

16. Except his surrogates aren't "offensive and outlandish" It's called a PRIMARY!!

[MaryMagdaline]

21. Exactly. Two adults battling it out. We will survive

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

50. Theyll make each other better candidates in the general election, much like was the case for Hillary

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[MaryMagdaline]

52. Agree!

[ehrnst]

146. You mean like handling criticism like Hillary did will make Bernie a better candidate?

How about his supporters? You think that they can learn that Bernie can take fact checking without people swarming the fact checkers?

Good to see you learning something!

[we can do it]

22. That's your opinion.🙄

Divisive candidate, divisive staff.

[lapucelle]

24. I find BS's press secretary outlandish and offensive.

There was no primary going on when she spewed this particular venom.

[PatrickforO]

31. Wow! Gray is Bernie's press sec'y?

Looks like she was a leader in siphoning off desperately needed votes for Clinton.

[lapucelle]

39. Like Sirota, she tried to scrub her twitter account, but some of her garbage remains.

[IndyOp]

40. Stein

[PatrickforO]

29. Sorry, but Buttigieg was talking to some high school students about how

great Bernie has been and why he looked up to him so much, and then said basically that lagging middle class income and uncertainty could send voters to either Bernie or Trump.

How Ro Khanna could possibly say that is Buttigieg 'comparing Bernie to Trump' is beyond me.

In 2016 it was very hardball because we had two candidates that brought forth a lot of passion, either + or -, and surrogates from both fought very hard and sometimes very dirty.

Democrats are in a different mood this time around, and Bernie should probably be aware of that. We've got to get rid of Trump.

As to me - well I was a big Bernie supporter in 2016. I can remember how much passion I had, how much passion all of us who supported Bernie had. But Bernie's time is done. As Don Fagan sang, "the time of his time has come and gone."

In '16, he did a great thing driving the political dialog to the left, and influencing the platform. Those things were very good. But now, Bernie's ideas aren't new and they aren't even radical. The mainstream Dem candidates are all talking about them, and expectations about healthcare, debt-free college and addressing climate change are very high. Gun control, social justice and other issues are also bubbling up and must be addressed.

Times they are a'changin. The mood is changing. I know that for me, it is no longer good enough to have a candidate that spouts the proper hyperbole (I love hyperbole!). Nope. The new president, and the new Democratic Congress need to move forward aggressively and start doing things that benefit the American people. We have to fight, and yeah Bernie says he will, but this Ro Khanna deal smacks of the same kind of dirty politics that hurt us so badly in '16.

This approach won't gain Bernie many supporters. Buttigieg will in fact be peeling off millions of millennial votes, which is what Bernie is afraid of, and rightly so. Of all the candidates in the race, my feeling is the Buttigieg is the one who can best get that group impassioned enough to show at the polls. I don't think Bernie can this time around.

[BlueFlorida]

78. I see it differently

This will badly hurt Bernie. Mayor Pete is vacuuming the young voters away and Bernie's campaign is panicking.

[SidDithers]

20. He's "too busy" to notice things like that...nt

Sid

[PatrickforO]

23. Surrogates did a lot of damage during the 2016 primaries, and I

suspect some of those destructive memes came from outside the American political system.

As to this, if it is the best Ro Khanna has, then maybe Bernie should rethink his role. Dirty politics.

[ancianita]

26. Be aware that surrogates' attacks are an early "Trump test" of the party's resilience.

Don't say, "Oh, but not THIS!" Yes. This.

We all know that any candidate who wins primaries will be targeted by Trump surrogates, too.

Remember the days when Obama's rallies were met with opponents walking around with guns? How will you deal with THAT eventuality? Hm?

Everyone in the Democratic Party might as well get used to that eventuality.

Don't position yourself to be an "against" voter. As the saying goes, politics ain't beanbag. And neither are a party's state primaries.

Right now, primaries are the testing ground for handling attacks with what will impress voters as presidential.

Any candidates' supporters need to stop their mockable whining about "offensive and outlandish," and get on with winning the country.

Remember. It's the PRIMARY. Deal.

[Politicub]

35. I don't think you understand what I'm saying.

Maybe I didn’t do a good job of conveying how this affects me and why this bothers me so much.

I am DEALING WITH IT as you wrote. We all are.

[ancianita]

53. I understand that how members "deal with it' shouldn't be to cast shade on any candidate.

It doesn't matter if Bernie "knows" or doesn't know.

If you know a "house divided against itself" isn't good for a party, then don't feed the division.

We all need to be better than that.

About any and all support, including yours:

Support never has to equate with agreement.

Party support never has to equate with agreement about the party's nominee or his supporters.

Support means that you don't cast shade on the presidential qualities of a candidate because of what his/her campaigners say or do.

Look at how your OP not only shows the media already running with how divided we are, but helps media.

Threads that bash our own, even during primary season, drag party morale down before media.

State the candidates' cases, and let the rest of members make theirs, however "weird."

And let's stop with the "Bernie is so mean to have such mean people" threads. Media want that kind of profit-making attention.

Support the party's members and candidates, or you'll just amplify the wedge that media wants to create their horse race.

Let's run these races on positive terms of party support, not media's.

[Politicub]

104. Okay

Division sows more division.

[MaryMagdaline]

97. good points!

[beachbum bob]

28. ideologues on the left more danagerous than those on the right as 2016 is proof positive

[The Blue Flower]

30. How do you know they're legitimately his?

Could well be trolls who have division as their intent.

[highplainsdem]

34. Are you kidding? The surrogates being talked about are two co-chairs of his campaign

(Khanna and Turner) and an adviser who's also on the Our Revolution board (Zogby).

We're not talking about anonymous Twitter accounts.

[LexVegas]

32. Yes, he does. That's the point. nt

[Blue_Tires]

36. I've been asking this question since 2016 and have been mostly ignored, sadly.

The real tragedy is with better people around him Sanders could have snapped up the nomination easily...

[highplainsdem]

42. These are the people he wanted, though.

And it's useful to him if they can be used as attack dogs going after his rivals while he claims to be staying above the fray and doing only positive campaigning.

It was very disappointing when he brought them on again after what they did earlier. I was hoping for better.

[Blue_Tires]

84. And then there's Sirota which is another discussion entirely...

For someone gunning for the Dem nomination, Sanders has certainly packed his campaign with an All-Star team of self-styled liberals who absolutely *HATE* the Democratic party...

[Politicub]

117. "Could have snapped up the nomination easily"

I agree. He could have united the party and sailed through the primaries. And I would have no quarrel with supporting him. I still don't. I just have to ignore a lot of stuff and keep thinking about beating Trump. As they used to say, you have to dance with the one that brung ya'.

I am looking forward to the debates. It will get us all on the page with the same source material about issues (ha ha! I'm a dreamer ).

[MineralMan]

38. Bernie is running as a Democrat, but some of his top campaign folks

are Green Party/Jill Stein voters. He knew that when he hired them, so there must be some strategy anticipated by hiring them.

Personally, I find that alarming. I also think it's a bad idea, since a lot of people have long memories, and have noticed this.

[NurseJackie]

59. Unless there's a flaw in how the Democratic voters of this country think.

a lot of people have long memories, and have noticed this.

Unless there's a flaw in how the Democratic voters of this country think.

[MineralMan]

129. There are flaws in how we all think. That's not the point.

The point is who wins the election next November. That's really the only thing that matters at this point.

I have a strong opinion about that. Perhaps I'm thinking incorrectly, but Donald Trump got elected. That is most certainly true. We need to VOTE HIM OUT!

So, I'll be voting for the Democratic nominee next November. I just hope it's someone who can win. Do Democratic voters have "a flaw" in their thinking? Probably, but they will be the ones voting, won't they?

[ehrnst]

69. Yes, his choice of staff says volumes, doesn't it? (nt)

[MineralMan]

130. Well, he certainly knows who his staff is, and how they voted.

Apparently, that's OK with him. It's not OK with me, though.

Here's the thing: The people on his staff who voted for Jill Stein and admit it would not be allowed to post on DU. Think about that. And DU is not a center-leaning website.

If Senator Sanders wants Green Party voters on his staff, that's his decision. I will be voting in the Minnesota primary election. That will be my decision, and I don't want anything to do with any third parties. So, my choice is simple.

[floppyboo]

124. 'so there must be some strategy anticipated'

I'll buy this. Need to find a new 8% (I think that's what I read) to swing this thing. 40+ % are indie/third party. At least that many from Dem/Rep/Indie/3rd didn't vote.

Question:
1) Which policies of Sanders would prevent you from voting for him as Dem nominee? Would disqualify him as a Dem?
2) Do you want to win if it means the party moves towards Democratic Socialism? Would you have to change the name of 'your' base party again? maybe back to whig?

[MineralMan]

128. I will not be voting for Bernie Sanders in the primary.

As for your second question, this country is not ready for anything with the word Socialism in it. It will not elect a President who espouses that, I guarantee. That would be certain to cause the reelection of Donald Trump.

Of that much I'm certain.

[Nanjeanne]

49. I don't find them offensive or outlandish. And not sure what the purpose of this OP is other than

more stirring of the pot.

There are 20+ people running in the Democratic Primary - and all have virtues and faults. All have annoying surrogates and good ones. All have divisive and abusive supporters and others who simply like their candidate and look to support them without denigrating others.

Much is in the eye of the beholder, I guess.

But it is so sad to see that this kind of stuff gets much more play than any kind of honest discussion over policy.

Ro Khanna (who I'm assuming is the reason for this post) is one of the most intelligent and thoughtful representatives in Congress. He is a great Democrat and a great voice for us in the media. He is one of the best in interviews on tv and is well respected in Congress. He supports Sanders and nothing he said was offensive or outlandish. He simply called out Pete on what he felt was a wrong comparison and he had every right to do that. As did Pete to say what he felt was his point of view.

[LongtimeAZDem]

55. Khanna deliberately misrepresented Buttigieg's comments.

I say deliberately because, as you point out, he is too intelligent to have misunderstood them.

[Nanjeanne]

57. I don't believe he did misrepresent them. As I said, we filter opinions thru our own perceptions.

Ours differ.

[LongtimeAZDem]

67. He said Buttigieg compared Sanders to Trump. He didn't; he said that disaffection with the system

leads some people to alternative candidates.

Claiming that he directly compared Sanders to Trump, as he did, is simply a lie. Period.

[Politicub]

73. The purpose of this OP is to share how this one active

volunteer in election campaigns sees the landscape and, hopefully, get someone to listen.

I’m not stirring the pot. I am bothered by the behavior of surrogates. I have been told in this thread to get over it, deal with it, and toughen up.

I can assure you I am tougher than a lot of people think. And I also put my heart into supporting someone and canvassing when the time comes. I’m in my mid 40s, and what I have learned over the years this is how important your story is for connecting with other people.

And to effectively do something like canvassing or outreach, one must be able to connect with a candidate, the message, and the campaign. My story is still unfolding Some of the hardest work I’ve ever done is working on understanding myself and confidently sharing my story. I have a long way to go. The work has been worth it.

The people that who are working on Bernie’s campaign are making it very difficult to find a point of connection for me. If there’s any reason that I made this post, it is out of frustration. I am ready to roll up my sleeves and start the arduous process of working toward the general election. I want to feel good about the person I do that for.

Someone can be tough without alienating potential supporters. This is not easy and takes careful consideration to do it right when a spokesperson for a campaign speaks out.

[Nanjeanne]

101. The surrogate - Ro Khanna - is a very well respected and thoughtful and hardworking Democrat in

Congress.

He was perfectly rational, non-divisive and non-offensive in his response to Mayor Pete's comments. It is what surrogates do and there was nothing wrong with their discourse.

To try to make this a big brouhaha is more divisive than anything either Mayor Pete or Ro Khanna said.

The only person who alienated potential supporters - in my opinion - was Mayor Pete. Sanders supporters do not typically like being "blamed" for the state of the country and compared in any way - with Trump supporters. As someone who originally donated to Pete in order to get him onto the debate stage - I was offended. But I stopped donating to Pete's campaign way before this comment. I stopped when I found out he was sitting in meetings with Neera, Schumer, Pelosi and doners discussing the "Sanders" problem. Coupled with that and the lack of support for my three key issues - Medicare For All, Tuition Free College and "All Lives Matter" - I stopped giving.

Nothing - and I mean - nothing - about Rep. Khanna's remarks were outlandish or offensive and that is what I object to regarding your OP.

Different strokes and all that . . .

[Politicub]

106. First impressions are lasting impressions, which can be a burden sometimes

Now I know about Rep. Khanna. You left out that he's Sanders' campaign co-chair.

It could have been great to get to know Rep. Khanna under better circumstances. But then again, he wouldn't have gotten noticed.

Carry on.

[Nanjeanne]

119. I didn't leave it out. I thought it was a given as you called him a Sanders surrogate. If you

dislike Sanders so very much that you need "better" circumstances to know Ro Khanna - I'm sorry I can't help you.

Ro Khanna was quite well known amongst many Democrats that follow progressive Reps in the House. Being Sanders' co-chair isn't getting him "noticed". But I was absolutely thrilled when I heard that a Rep I had so much respect for was going to be working with Bernie.

If this was your first impression of Ro . . . and your impression of him is he is outlandish and offensive based on a very innocuous response to a less innocuous comment - I'm afraid you are going to be clutching your pearls a lot during the Primary season . . . it's just getting started.

Don't stress . . .

[vsrazdem]

54. I was glad to see Pete clarify his remarks just now on MSNBC.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

74. Yes, that's what I kept saying I hoped he would do. Good for Pete!! Smart move!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Nanjeanne]

131. That's good to hear.

[Shemp Howard]

56. Same as it always was.

For most people:

Harsh criticism of a candidate I don't like is acceptable.
But harsh criticism of my candidate is harmful and divisive.

[BannonsLiver]

88. You nailed it.

That’s pretty much how I see Sanders supporters.

[Shemp Howard]

102. That's the way I see all supporters.

Bernie's people, Warren's people, Buttigieg's people, etc., etc.

No one (including me) is exempt.
Harsh criticism is perfectly fine, unless it's directed at my candidate.
Then it's harmful and divisive.

[BannonsLiver]

103. Nah I think some are better at it, or take more joy in it, than others.

Will leave it at that.

[madaboutharry]

61. If Sanders is not aware of how offensive and outlandish they are, then

doesn't that say something about his own demeanor as well as his leadership skills?

It all comes from the top. Either they are following campaign policy or there is no control over the operation. One is as bad as the other.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

80. So, you think it would be fair to hold Hillary responsible for followers who argued for PUMA ...

and then voted for McCain? Doesn't seem fair to me.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Politicub]

85. You have beaten me into submission. If it makes you happy, I'll officially hold Hillary responsible.

Will you please stop posting that over and over again on this thread?

Do you feel better now? Someone has finally cried uncle after all your attempts at removing the scales from their eyes.

I don’t really care that much, honestly, about two years ago. I think Hillary Clinton would’ve been one of the most effective presidents we would have ever had. But we will never know at this point.

My eyes are on the prize for 2020.

On edit: Ugh. I don't like my post. It's not really true since I don't know that much about the pumas. It is one of those didn't know/didn't care. And now, it's doesn't matter. I'm just tired of seeing the same posts that are along the same lines as, "But the PUMAS though!"

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

125. Beaten you into submission?! Huh?! That was the FIRST time I mentioned

Hillary's followers pushing PUMA and voting for McCain in this thread (unless I missed something). Should I not have mentioned how unfair it would be to hold Hillary responsible under the same "Bernie Standard" being pushed here? My apologies if I offended you.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[ehrnst]

144. The "Bernie Standard?"

So 'splain us how PUMAs were even remotely Hillary surrogates.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

147. No worries.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[madaboutharry]

90. The PUMA folks were not employed advisors

during her campaign. I don't follow your argument.

[ehrnst]

145. Can you tell us how PUMAs were surrogates for Hillary?

This should be interesting.

[BlueFlorida]

70. I am beginning to suspect that he likes the angry tone

it works for an anger driven campaign.

[Politicub]

77. I think you might have hit the nail on the head

There is certainly a lot to be angry about that Trump has done. And I think there’s angry people who feel left out of the political process. If anger Is the intended tone, we shall see soon how well it works.

[BlueFlorida]

81. It worked the last time for both candidates

who ran against Hillary because anger-driven campaigns was a new thing.

I doubt it will work this time around. Hope and competence will win over pure angry slogans and platitudes.

This time around, people are seriously asking "how will your plans work? Show me the money."

[Chakaconcarne]

87. The pool is too large to start this shit so early...

We just need to let these people know it's not okay...

I'm certain Russia will be along soon to start sowing the divide.. We don't need help from our own people.

[Politicub]

99. Yes. This.

One of the things that I grokked from Volume 1 of the Mueller report is how the Russians were so successful in their deceit.

A Russian operative would plan a physical event and use social media forums and groups to drum up attendance. Then at the last minute, the operative would say he was sick or something came up and he can't run the event. Then he would ask one of the group members if he could run the event instead, in his place.

This was cunning because it 1) tapped into a group that was already driven into a frenzy by Russian propaganda. And 2) It substituted in a non-Russian true believer, who probably had some kind of credibility with the group, as leader. Now, a trusted figure from the group would be leading it.

It was frightening in its effectiveness.

I think the only way around it is to not go negative. The Russians aren't going to amplify negative posts from trusted and well-known liberals and democratic figures if they're positive or at least neutral.

If everyone is negative, how can anyone know what's real and what's manufactured?

[BannonsLiver]

89. "Only the best people."

[samnsara]

91. i dont think so...their behavior two years ago during the elections were...

...outrageous and borderline deplorable..and yet there was nothing done to stop it or discourage it. The vids of them tossing money at HRCs motorcade..the gauntlet the young black woman was subjected to.. the surrogate standing in front of a screaming crowd of 20,000 people calling HRC a 'corporate whore' and them cheering....the bullying and harassment witnessed at the caucuses. (I felt) BS didnt try to stop the attacks other than a mild verbal admonishment. THATS why i dont support BS...but YES if hes the DEM nom..he will get my vote.

[MrsCoffee]

92. Yes.

[Blue_Tires]

93. To officially answer your question, yes...

And to bring the point home, he specifically hires these types because they ARE "offensive and outlandish"

[dlk]

94. Either He Doesn't Know or He Doesn't Care

[LongtimeAZDem]

95. Either one reflects poorly on him

[Kurt V.]

96. that street runs both ways

[artislife]

121. It is more like a super highway. nt

[Perseus]

98. Could it be that Russina trolls are doing it and making us believe it is Bernie's surrogates?

One has to wonder if this is what is happening, it is partly what happened in 2016.

[Politicub]

100. Unless the Russians are hacking into surrogate social media accounts...

and there is no evidence that they are, then it's the words of the people themselves. None of the surrogates who are public figures have said they've been hacked, so I'm assuming that they mean what they say.

[Hortensis]

116. Yes and no. He has two big draws: Persuading good but gullible

Democrats by the power of his words alone that he himself is just a good Democrat on steroids who'll do more. (Gullible because they don't check his record.)

And then there's his appeal to very different types with his contemptuous, terminally oppositional message that the Democratic Party in its present form is irredeemably corrupt, an elitist danger to the nation that must be purged and rebuilt for the good of the people. THESE people are drawn by and must have the attacks on Democrats. Or they'll find someone else.

His regular Democrats, of course, are the reason the more despicable attacks are launched by surrogates.

As for whether Sanders knows, I've always wondered just how far out his thinking is. We know he's perfectly aware of how far over the line his surrogates' attacks are because of the limits he sets on what comes out of his own mouth. But I'm not sure he always believes even the worst of them are not essentially the truth. As he sees it.

[stillcool]

127. as they say...once

is a mistake. Twice is a coincidence. Three times is a pattern. You get into double, triple digits, and it's what defines you.

[Go Vols]

140. How about a "trove"

PHILADELPHIA —Democrats arrived at their nominating convention on Sunday under a cloud of discord as Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, abruptly said she was resigning after a trove of leaked emails showed party officials conspiring to sabotage the campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/us/politics/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dnc-wikileaks-emails.html

[stillcool]

149. ooh...2016!

are you sore?

[W_HAMILTON]

134. Of course he does -- just look at the ones he hired.

[Gothmog]

135. Sirota is attacking Senator Warren

Link to tweet

[betsuni]

141. It's like the campaign is an angry child.

They're pushing that "I was first" thing hard, but who believes it, it's absurd.

[NastyRiffraff]

136. Of course he knows

Either he knows very well what they're doing, and why, or he has no business running for anything because he'd be as stupid as the current White House occupant. It's a strategy by his campaign officials. If it's not his strategy, he should say so, and fire them.

[aikoaiko]

138. Its politics.

I didn't have a problem with Buttigieg's comments or Khanna's.

Buttigieg did link Bernie and Trump and Khanna fired back.

If social media pundits didn't pick up on it, hardly anyone would have noticed.

[Aaron Pereira]

139. This is a primary and responding to a callout is not outlandish.

When candidates go after an opponent by name and equate them to Trump it's red meat for surrogates. I think we'd have a better primary if Democrats stayed positive and stuck to their own message.

[Politicub]

143. But that's not what happened

But I digress.

From this I have learned some new candidate pro-tips for the primary:
1. Do not compliment your competition.
2. Try not to say your competitors name.
2a. If you break rule 2, make sure there are enough words between the competitors name before you say Trump.
3. Do not acknowledge that Trump rode in on a wave of dark populism because reasons.
4. Above all, do not make a nuanced argument or sound like an intellectual. In a communications environment propelled by tweets, keep sentences below 140 characters.

[betsuni]

142. He doesn't understand that it is offensive and outlandish. That's his style.

He has said, "This campaign was never just about electing a president of the United States, as enormously important as that was. This campaign was about transforming America." There you have it. For him, both parties are preventing the transformation of America by the people. Democrats know the only way to transform America is getting majorities in the legislature and replacing the lunatic in the White House.

[aikoaiko]

150. Sometimes there are missteps, but Bernie is feisty and so are his staff

[Politicub]

163. And supporters serve a heaping helping of martyrdom, too.

Aaaaaand.... The bug makes an appearance. So much for not repeating the hot mess that was 2016.

[Jakes Progress]

162. Yes.

[kcr]

164. He knows and doesn't care.

[Cha]

168. I would think so.