Support NeoGAF

[Blader]

a) Because that has not been Mello's position, historically. This isn't a Birden/Kaine/Kerry/etc situation.

b) Because Bernie made it an issue when he full-throatedly endorsed Mello and another anti-abortion Dem but said "he didn't know" if Ossoff was a progressive. The juxtaposition of the two things immediately sent up red flags. He tried to fix the Ossoff stuff w/ a statement but lots of people had already noticed and were pretty pissed.

I think this is what the "why are people criticizing this?" crowd is missing. It's not that Bernie is compromising in campaigning for a historically anti-choice candidate, it's that he's campaigning for that candidate while, at the same time, labeling an economically moderate candidate in another race as not a progressive. Well, Mello is certainly no progressive on abortion, yet that doesn't seem to have stopped Bernie from helping out at all.

He walked it back and frankly Bernie's campaigning would be better served in Nebraska than Georgia anyway, but it's the hypocrisy that rubs people like myself the wrong way.

 

[Lord of Ostia]

a) Because that has not been Mello's position, historically. This isn't a Birden/Kaine/Kerry/etc situation.

b) Because Bernie made it an issue when he full-throatedly endorsed Mello and another anti-abortion Dem but said "he didn't know" if Ossoff was a progressive. The juxtaposition of the two things immediately sent up red flags. He tried to fix the Ossoff stuff w/ a statement but lots of people had already noticed and were pretty pissed.

Not familiar with the specific candidate you are talking about, I was speaking in a broad sense of Democrats and the Democratic platform.

That said, if they are trying to limit abortion in their state, then yeah they shouldn't be part of the party. I'm talking simply personal beliefs here.

 

[Father_Brain]

What is with this line you keep repeating that criticism of him "is not made in good faith". People who don't like Sanders have a right to an opinion as well! I'm not seeing people deliberately slagging off on Sanders in order to push some nefarious secret agenda.

If people are criticizing Sanders and the DNC on abortion because they genuinely, sincerely want him and the DNC to do better on reproductive rights, that's great.

If people are criticizing Sanders on abortion because they despise him and want him to shut up and/or go away forever and are thus latching onto any argument that can be used to attack him, that's bad faith even if their criticism is correct on the actual merits.

I don't need to name names, but I think it's fairly obvious that plenty of Sanders' most ardent critics fall into the latter column, and as I said above, I don't believe anything Sanders could say or do would satisfy them short of falling in line and vowing never to say a critical word about another Democrat again.

 

[excelsiorlef]

You can't just sweep that under the rug.

Here's Bernie's word on Ossoff:

“He’s not a progressive."

There.

Yeah, he cleaned it up AFTER he got his ass lit on fire by Democrats actually out there working to get other Democrats elected to office, but the sentiment is not wiped clean. Bernie Sanders has made it more than clear that your stances on social issues don't determine to him whether or not you're progressive.

And that's a huge problem for the party that largely represents minorities and women.

Yep.

This is an issues completely of Sanders' own making.

Had he not simultaneously called Mello a Progressive and called Ossoff not, there'd be no issue.

 

[fantomena]

Sometimes, I don't get PoliGAF.

Im pro-choice, but I don't see anything wrong with supporting a pro-life candidate as long as Im personally still supporting pro-choice bills.

 

[legacyzero]

.. are you trying to tell someone that actually lives in Omaha how one can be successful in Omaha? The city regularly trades back and forth between Republican and Democrat mayors. It isn't a grand achievement to elect a Democrat to office in Omaha.

.. are you going to answer my question?

Sometimes, I don't get PoliGAF.

Im pro-choice, but I don't see anything wrong with supporting a pro-life candidate as long as Im personally still supporting pro-choice bills.

It's Bernie. A majority of PoliGAF hates Bernie. From no-good-reason, all the way to "YAAAS QWEEN".

And God forbid #ImWithHer sees you tweet anything about him.

Bernie ain't perfect, but I see a lot of hate for him for plainly no good reason.

 

[TyrantII]

why

Big tent parties and progress demand it.

Put it another way, Joe Biden isn't going to outlaw abortion even as a pro life Catholic. Mike Pence will the second he has the votes from the right.


That's your choice. Be an adult.

 

[Armaros]

Sometimes, I don't get PoliGAF.

Im pro-choice, but I don't see anything wrong with supporting a pro-life candidate as long as Im personally still supporting pro-choice bills.

Besides the fact that the person in question has infact endorsed and supported anti-choice legislation?

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Sometimes, I don't get PoliGAF.

Im pro-choice, but I don't see anything wrong with supporting a pro-life candidate as long as Im personally still supporting pro-choice bills.

But Heath Mello hasn't supported pro-choice bills?? That's sort of the problem. He hasn't taken the Kerry/Biden/Kaine/etc approach to this issue - he's very much anti-choice.

 

[fantomena]

Besides the fact that the person in question has infact endorsed and supported anti-choice legislation?

You mean Bernie?

But Heath Mello hasn't supported pro-choice bills?? That's sort of the problem. He hasn't taken the Kerry/Biden/Kaine/etc approach to this issue - he's very much anti-choice.

I understand that, I think i do. But should the Dems support a person like Mello then?

 

[FyreWulff]

Also due to the way Omaha's primary system works, it could have been Dem vs Dem for the final general election. It's officially nonpartisan so endorsing a more progressive Dem could have actually made it Dem vs Dem and then Mello would have been forced to court Mello progressive voters for the general and have shut out the Republicans entirely from the race.

Once again, our current GOP mayor succeeds a Dem mayor, who succeed another Dem mayor who was so popular he was mayor for almost 10 years and has a street named after him in the city while he's still alive (traditionally, you have to be dead first to get a street named after you here). Acting like this is "the guy we had to go with" like there was a gun to Bernie's head over the fucking Omaha mayor seat is goddamn hilarious.

 

[Zyae]

Sanders is the most wishy washy, spineless Democrat to ever get a movement of people following him. Never stands up for what's difficult, always finds ways to sell out the weak.

how?

Hes 100% right.

 

[kirblar]

If people are criticizing Sanders and the DNC on abortion because they genuinely, sincerely want him and the DNC to do better on reproductive rights, that's great.

If people are criticizing Sanders on abortion because they despise him and want him to shut up and/or go away forever and are thus latching onto any argument that can be used to attack him, that's bad faith even if their criticism is correct on the actual merits.

I don't need to name names, but I think it's fairly obvious that plenty of Sanders' most ardent critics fall into the latter column.

The DNC doesn't need to "do better" on reproductive rights. The status quo is really good! That is why groups like PP and NARAL immediately went in on this in order to defend the current position.

And yes, I do despise Sanders. Because he pulls stunts like this all the goddamn time and doesn't learn. Which is why I criticize him for them! In the hopes that maybe, someday, Tyrion will slap him enough for him to get it!

 

[Maxim726X]

But Heath Mello hasn't supported pro-choice bills?? That's sort of the problem. He hasn't taken the Kerry/Biden/Kaine/etc approach to this issue - he's very much anti-choice.

*Was*, unless you think he's foolish enough to vote against his own party if elected.

A rather important caveat.

 

[HStallion]

Sometimes, I don't get PoliGAF.

Im pro-choice, but I don't see anything wrong with supporting a pro-life candidate as long as Im personally still supporting pro-choice bills.

Well if that pro life candidate put into action a series of laws that negates any form of choice or severely limits it then perhaps you'll realize why that wasn't the smartest move.

 

[Emerson]

If we have to compromise our values slightly it is, unfortunately, a small price to pay for removing Trump from office, who is an existential threat to the entire globe. There is literally nothing more important in politics right now than making sure a Democrat wins in 2020.

 

[kirblar]

Sometimes, I don't get PoliGAF.

Im pro-choice, but I don't see anything wrong with supporting a pro-life candidate as long as Im personally still supporting pro-choice bills.

see: B

a) Because that has not been Mello's position, historically. This isn't a Birden/Kaine/Kerry/etc situation.

b) Because Bernie made it an issue when he full-throatedly endorsed Mello and another anti-abortion Dem but said "he didn't know" if Ossoff was a progressive. The juxtaposition of the two things immediately sent up red flags. He tried to fix the Ossoff stuff w/ a statement but lots of people had already noticed and were pretty pissed.

 

[fantomena]

Well if that pro life candidate put into action a series of laws that negates any form of choice or severely limits it then perhaps you'll realize why that wasn't the smartest move.

Yeah, I see now this is more difficulty than I thought.

So Heath Mello is a Nebraska candidate? Is he running for governor or something? I don't have a clear image of what's happening.

 

[Armaros]

You mean Bernie?

The person he endorsed instead of ossoff

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

*Was*, unless you think he's foolish enough to vote against his own party if elected.

A rather important caveat.

Sorry that I trust actions over words. If Mello wins, we can reevaluate his views on women's reproductive rights in a couple years.

I understand that, I think i do. But should the Dems support a person like Mello then?

Sure, he's the only Democrat running. But we shouldn't call him progressive as Bernie et al have done. (Especially when calling Ossoff not a progressive)

 

[Father_Brain]

The DNC doesn't need to "do better" on reproductive rights. The status quo is really good! That is why groups like PP and NARAL immediately went in on this in order to defend the current position.

And yes, I do despise Sanders. Because he pulls stunts like this all the goddamn time and doesn't learn. Which is why I criticize him for them! In the hopes that maybe, someday, Tyrion will slap him enough for him to get it!

The DNC has backed plenty of anti-choice candidates before. When was the last time doing so provoked this level of criticism?

And I already know you despise Sanders, but I at least appreciate your honesty.

 

[daman824]

Also due to the way Omaha's primary system works, it could have been Dem vs Dem for the final general election. It's officially nonpartisan so endorsing a more progressive Dem could have actually made it Dem vs Dem and then Mello would have been forced to court Mello progressive voters for the general and have shut out the Republicans entirely from the race.

Once again, our current GOP mayor succeeds a Dem mayor, who succeed another Dem mayor who was so popular he was mayor for almost 10 years and has a street named after him in the city while he's still alive (traditionally, you have to be dead first to get a street named after you here). Acting like this is "the guy we had to go with" like there was a gun to Bernie's head over the fucking Omaha mayor seat is goddamn hilarious.

i live in Omaha too. Stothert is very popular in west Omaha. No way in hell it would have been dem vs dem.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Sometimes, I don't get PoliGAF.

Im pro-choice, but I don't see anything wrong with supporting a pro-life candidate as long as Im personally still supporting pro-choice bills.

Can people just read the thread every once in a while? Very few people are actually upset about Bernie endorsing pro-life candidates, it's that he bragged about Heath Mello being a true progressive and then shat on Jon Ossoff. It's blatant hypocrisy.

 

[B-Dubs]

The DNC has backed plenty of anti-choice candidates before. When was the last time doing so provoked this level of criticism?

And I already know you despise Sanders, but I at least appreciate your honesty.

The DNC didn't call them progressive while downplaying another candidate at the same time. There's a pretty stark difference that you should be able to spot fairly easily.

 

[fantomena]

bragged about Heath Mello being a true progressive and then shat on Jon Ossoff. It's blatant hypocrisy.

Ah okay, Now I understand better. Yeah, that's probably hypocrisy. How's Mellos other views?

 

[kirblar]

The DNC has backed plenty of anti-choice candidates before. When was the last time doing so provoked this level of criticism?

And I already know you despise Sanders, but I at least appreciate your honesty.

They're not normally being propped up nationally like Sanders did w/ Mello. (also, the Ossoff Juxtaposition is something that like, almost never happens, for good reason.)

 

[Angry Chair]

What did he do for Mello? Make a speech endorsing him? He's done that for plenty of candidates.

I will gladly rescind the first part of my post if Bernie has been going cross country firmly backing fiscally centrist democrats. The part of my post you ignored is why this has become a deal in the first place.

 

[IrishNinja]

didn't bernie kinda shit on PP during the primary when they went with hiliary too?

As long as the party policy is hard Pro Choice, what ever. But it does send a weird message to women aka one of the democrats base blocks.

i feel like it's only weird if you're not used to seeing the dems quickly toss minorities/women/etc into the bushes while pandering to the center

 

[Cocaloch]

Lots of people are only pragmatic when it suits them.

This is a bizarre thing to say. Why would someone be pragmatic when it doesn't suit them? That'd be being unpragmatic about pragmatism.

 

[Blader]

The DNC has backed plenty of anti-choice candidates before. When was the last time doing so provoked this level of criticism?

Probably whenever the last time the DNC supported an anti-choice candidate and smacked down another (pro-choice) candidate as not being a true progressive at the same time.

 

[freeofgreed]

I will gladly rescind the first part of my post if Bernie has been going cross country firmly backing fiscally centrist democrats. The part of my post you ignored is why this has become a deal in the first place.

Has he been going cross country supporting pro-life candidates outside of Mello? And it's a deal because democrats want to fucking win offices...

 

[Quixzlizx]

It doesn't sound like Mello is anti-abortion in his personal views. It sounds like he actually votes against reproductive rights, unless I am misunderstanding it.

 

[kirblar]

It doesn't sound like Mello is anti-abortion in his personal views. It sounds like he actually votes against reproductive rights, unless I am misunderstanding it.

You are not misunderstanding it.

 

[FyreWulff]

i live in Omaha too. Stothert is very popular in west Omaha. No way in hell it would have been dem vs dem.

Oh, for sure, but it's still a possibility since this wasn't separate primaries. Nobody really had a chance of knocking Stothert out, and Mello was already in, so putting gas behind him doesn't really mean much until the general. But backing Mikale would have made Stothert and Mello go after more progressive voters that voted for him. Like I said above, Mikale got Stothert to walk around South O on foot asking for votes.

So the worst case scenario was still Stothert vs Mello. The base case is Mikale getting a rocket under him makes Mello vs Mikale or pushes Mello more progressive. The political calculus says Mikale was the better one for Bernie to back if he wants progressivism, ego says Mello because he was already the machine bet.

 

[soul creator]

What's even weirder about this "controversy" is that Ossoff himself apparently doesn't even want to be labeled "progressive" anyway.

So the controversy is ultimately over Sanders calling a guy who doesn't want to be called a progressive (or any other label) "not a progressive".

(I still get the underlying critique, I just think it adds a funny wrinkle to this whole thing)

 

[guek]

The DNC has backed plenty of anti-choice candidates before. When was the last time doing so provoked this level of criticism?

And I already know you despise Sanders, but I at least appreciate your honesty.

There's a bit of goal post moving going on, but the complaints of Sanders capitulating instantly to Mello while refraining from endorsing Ossoff are legitimate. The level of outrage though seems directly correlated to what someone thought of Sanders before this. A lot of people think Bernie is weak on social issues because he would rather focus on economic inequality, and this reinforces that criticism. Personally though, I don't think conflating the two endorsements is very wise. Ossoff himself doesn't identify as a progressive, and it seems that Mello does for most issues aside from abortion. And in the end, Bernie endorsed Ossoff anyway.

A lot of posters come across like the only way Bernie could possibly appeal to them is if he abandoned all his economic inequality crusades and stuck solely to emphasizing the importance of social issues...which is just nonsensical. But then again, so is the way Bernie is so one note. The idea, however, that Bernie doesn't engage in social or civil liberty fights is complete hogwash.

This is a bizarre thing to say. Why would someone be pragmatic when it doesn't suit them? That'd be being unpragmatic about pragmatism.

I was trying to be cute. The point I was making is that pragmatism is often used as a code word to tell people with differing views to shut up.

 

[Battlezone]

.. are you trying to tell someone that actually lives in Omaha how one can be successful in Omaha? The city regularly trades back and forth between Republican and Democrat mayors. It isn't a grand achievement to elect a Democrat to office in Omaha.

This happened in the Ossoff thread, too. It's irritating.

 

[Suikoguy]

Can people just read the thread every once in a while? Very few people are actually upset about Bernie endorsing pro-life candidates, it's that he bragged about Heath Mello being a true progressive and then shat on Jon Ossoff. It's blatant hypocrisy.

Yep, i'm of the opinion that in many races in moderate districts or right leaning districts we should be willing to make some compromises on issues the people there care about. As long as they agree with the majority of the Dem platform we can count on them to help pass legislation the majority of the time.

In all probability, those issues compromised on won't be 100% the same, meaning you won't need 100% agreement all the time. The bottom line is, you want someone who votes with you, say for example 80% of the time, as opposed to a republican who would vote with you probably never.

With the way the Senate is proportioned, it's likely the only way to get a 60+ vote majority.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

It doesn't sound like Mello is anti-abortion in his personal views. It sounds like he actually votes against reproductive rights, unless I am misunderstanding it.

a starter: http://feministing.com/2017/04/23/no-bernie-theres-no-economic-justice-without-abortion-access/

 

[fantomena]

What's even weirder about this "controversy" is that Ossoff himself apparently doesn't even want to be labeled "progressive" anyway.

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

What's even weirder about this "controversy" is that Ossoff himself apparently doesn't even want to be labeled "progressive" anyway.

So the controversy is ultimately over Sanders calling a guy who doesn't want to be called a progressive (or any other label) "not a progressive". Implying that Ossoff isn't a progressive is harmful. He just needs to say "Ossoff is a great man and candidate and we need to get him elected in June to start taking back the House."

(I still get the underlying critique, I just think it adds a funny wrinkle to this whole thing)

Well, yeah, but Bernie should just say something harmless like he eventually did end up saying.

I imagine Ossoff doesn't want Bernie's support in the district he's running in.

 

[Abelard]

There's a bit of goal post moving going on, but the complaints of Sanders capitulating instantly to Mello while refraining from endorsing Ossoff are legitimate. The level of outrage though seems directly correlated to what someone thought of Sanders before this. A lot of people think Bernie is weak on social issues because he would rather focus on economic inequality, and this reinforces that criticism. Personally though, I don't think conflating the two endorsements is very wise. Ossoff himself doesn't identify as a progressive, and it seems that Mello does for most issues aside from abortion. And in the end, Bernie endorsed Ossoff anyway.

A lot of posters come across like the only way Bernie could possibly appeal to them is if he abandoned all his economic inequality crusades and stuck solely to emphasizing the importance of social issues...which is just nonsensical. But then again, so is the way Bernie is so one note. The idea, however, that Bernie doesn't engage in social or civil liberty fights is complete hogwash.

Hit the nail on the head there, that I think is the real problem here. I mean sure its a valid complaint, but the level of outrage is only is huge as it is because of the individual in question. I mean, we have a guy here claiming Le Pen is the logical conclusion of a Bernie Sanders' style politics.

 

[Quixzlizx]

You are not misunderstanding it.

a starter: http://feministing.com/2017/04/23/no-bernie-theres-no-economic-justice-without-abortion-access/

So all of this "it doesn't matter what your personal views are as long as you support the party platform" sentiment is a red herring in this case.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

What's even weirder about this "controversy" is that Ossoff himself apparently doesn't even want to be labeled "progressive" anyway.

So the controversy is ultimately over Sanders calling a guy who doesn't want to be called a progressive (or any other label) "not a progressive".

(I still get the underlying critique, I just think it adds a funny wrinkle to this whole thing)

Bernie didn't give a shit about the Ossoff race because he wasn't a progressive. So much for the that 50-state strategy, no?

 

[Cocaloch]

The funny part is that he misread the direction I choose on my post.

I was slamming Bernie Bros for their double-standards on purity

Conversely though he was right that it could be read the way he read it.

 

[kirblar]

So all of this "it doesn't matter what your personal views are as long as you support the party platform" sentiment is a red herring in this case.

Correct, there are plenty of Dems like that. Mello hasn't been one.

 

[benicillin]

Bernie didn't give a shit about the Ossoff race because he wasn't a progressive. So much for the that 50-state strategy, no?

I'm pretty sure no one in GA wants Bernie Sanders campaigning there.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

I'm pretty sure no one in GA wants Bernie Sanders campaigning there.

That's not the point. It's about wanting a 50 state strategy, but not giving a shit about a Dem's race because they apparently don't align 1:1 to what Bernie considers the greatest issue.

 

[kirblar]

That's not the point. It's about wanting a 50 state strategy, but not giving a shit about a Dem's race because they don't apparently align 1:1 to what Bernie considers the greatest issue.

This is also drawing fire because our best house pickup opportunities are in districts that Clinton won that also elected R reps. And those districts like a LOT like Ossoff's district.

 

[aeolist]

i would like to point out that the specific bill heath mello cosponsored did not in fact force women to get ultrasounds: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/4/20/1654741/-David-Nir-is-wrong

In 2009 anti-abortion forces were pressuring states to pass laws requiring women to undergo ultrasounds. Many states passed such laws. In Nebraska Heath Mello co-sponsored a bill regarding ultrasound which deliberately did not require women to undergo ultrasounds.

...it requires the doctor to give the woman a list of places where ultrasounds can be done (including, and clearly specifying, places which will do it for free), but the choice of whether to have one or not is left to the woman.

The law also states that, if the doctor needs to do an ultrasound prior to the abortion for medical reasons then the doctor must inform the woman an ultrasound is being done and offer her the choice of viewing the screen, but the choice of whether to view or not is hers.