Support NeoGAF

[benicillin]

Love or hate Bernie Sanders, at least he's been out there holding Trump to the fire about shit that he says post-election. Just look at his Twitter:

"Tell the American people you were lying or appoint an HHS secretary who will protect Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid."

"We owe Native Americans so much. It's time for a new approach to the Native American people, not to run a pipeline through their land."

"A president of the United States should not have a racist at his side."

We need more politicians, especially on the democratic side, who are willing to just call things as they are without dancing around them.

 

[kirblar]

I mean, it was pretty clear that the DNC wanted her. The degree in which that affected anything is up for debate but its pretty clear...

Of course no one in the Democratic party leadership actually wanted Sanders! He was an outsider! That doesn't mean it was rigged against him- if he actually had enough support, he would have won!

 

[Muppet of a Man]

ugh we were so close to having this guy as our president. ;(

This is the saddest thing. This man is an actual genuine advocate of the common man. Hardly any politicians, outside maybe Elizabeth Warren, share his sentiment without at least being somewhat compromised by having their grubby fingers in some billionaire's pockets.

 

[Father_Brain]

im thinking that kirblar is actually kurt eichenwald

I can't help but think that on some level, people like them wanted Hillary to lose just so they could blame Sanders and the left for it.

 

[Moofers]

No. He was not right to do so. He did it because he is not a team player. He did it because he's an opportunistic ideologue who doesn't believe he's ever wrong, that electoral defeats are ever his own fault, that he's superman and the only way he loses is because everyone else keeps using Kyptonite.

This kind of post is what makes me feel like some people just aren't able to be reached.

So you don't believe he should have run in the primary at all then? That Clinton's coronation was owed and should have gone unchallenged? And are you unaware of the dirty tricks that came to light near the end of the election that showed Clinton's camp and the DNC clearly weren't playing fairly with Bernie, or do you just refuse to acknowledge it? What do you think Bernie's ambitions are for running in the first place? You think he's just in it for glory? Do you know anything at all about his long history in politics and the things he's fought for?

There is a large group of Americans who are mocked on the regular for watching Fox News and believing everything they see there. We wonder how they can be so blind to facts and we wonder how to retrieve those people from the depths of the bubble they choose to reside in. I see very little difference between that audience and the people who believe Clinton was dealt some kind of dirty hand this election.

 

[Zyae]

Of course no one in the Democratic party leadership actually wanted Sanders! He was an outsider! That doesn't mean it was rigged against him- if he actually had enough support, he would have won!

Maybe they should have, you know not meddled in the process and let the people decide without any influence? I mean it worked out great for her since She won.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Love or hate Bernie Sanders, at least he's been out there holding Trump to the fire about shit that he says post-election. Just look at his Twitter:

"Tell the American people you were lying or appoint an HHS secretary who will protect Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid."

"We owe Native Americans so much. It's time for a new approach to the Native American people, not to run a pipeline through their land."

"A president of the United States should not have a racist at his side."

We need more politicians, especially on the democratic side, who are willing to just call things as they are without dancing around them.

Agreed 100%. None of this wishy washy stuff anymore.

 

[kirblar]

Maybe they should have, you know not meddled in the process and let the people decide without any influence? I mean it worked out great for her since She won.

They didn't rig it for her. This is the lie. This is exactly the problem.

I supported Obama in '08 because I thought Clinton was a weak candidate.

I still thought Clinton was a weak candidate in '16 but she was the best available option. The deck wasn't clear because it was rigged, it was because she had the administration's implicit support and it wasn't worth it for anyone else in the party except Baltimore Littlefinger to waste their one shot at running for Pres on this cycle.

This kind of post is what makes me feel like some people just aren't able to be reached.

So you don't believe he should have run in the primary at all then? That Clinton's coronation was owed and should have gone unchallenged? And are you unaware of the dirty tricks that came to light near the end of the election that showed Clinton's camp and the DNC clearly weren't playing fairly with Bernie, or do you just refuse to acknowledge it? What do you think Bernie's ambitions are for running in the first place? You think he's just in it for glory? Do you know anything at all about his long history in politics and the things he's fought for?

There is a large group of Americans who are mocked on the regular for watching Fox News and believing everything they see there. We wonder how they can be so blind to facts and we wonder how to retrieve those people from the depths of the bubble they choose to reside in. I see very little difference between that audience and the people who believe Clinton was dealt some kind of dirty hand this election.

It's not that Clinton's "coronation was owed.", it's that Sanders cannot ever admit defeat. And that leads him to incredibly destructive behaviors.

 

[Father_Brain]

Maybe they should have, you know not meddled in the process and let the people decide without any influence? I mean it worked out great for her since She won.

Yep. You don't have to believe Sanders would have won the general election to conclude that the party was disastrously wrong to clear the field and unify behind Clinton before a single vote had been cast. Even if Clinton had won without the entire party establishment behind her (which I doubt), she'd have emerged a stronger candidate for it.

 

[davepoobond]

It's almost like his warning that Hillary would lose because of her perception as a corporatist was right or something.

And there is no guarantee sanders would have been coronated just like she was supposed to be. Not to mention the down ballot races would have probably ended up the same way we have now.

 

[Maxim726X]

Maybe they should have, you know not meddled in the process and let the people decide without any influence? I mean it worked out great for her since She won.

Okay, and this bullshit needs to die too.

Clinton *was* the Democratic party. She raised money for them/with them for years and has actually been a Democrat for her entire political career. Bernie Sanders switched parties only to get into the primary- He isn't a Democrat.

What a shocker! The party supported someone who was actually a Democrat, and who actually raised money for them, as opposed to someone who was a Democrat for 5 minutes to win a primary.

There was no rigging, and the primary win for Clinton was clear and resounding. Enough.

 

[Zyae]

They didn't rig it for her. This is the lie. This is exactly the problem.

I supported Obama in '08 because I thought Clinton was a weak candidate.

I still thought Clinton was a weak candidate in '16 but she was the best available option. The deck wasn't clear because it was rigged, it was because she had the administration's implicit support and it wasn't worth it for anyone else in the party except Baltimore Littlefinger to waste their one shot at running for Pres on this cycle.

It's not that Clinton's "coronation was owed.", it's that Sanders cannot ever admit defeat. And that leads him to incredibly destructive behaviors.

They didnt rig it, they favored her and wanted her and tried to influence the process. This is undeniable.

 

[aeolist]

The deck wasn't clear because it was rigged,

🤔

it was because she had the administration's implicit support

🤔🤔🤔

 

[Father_Brain]

Okay, and this bullshit needs to die too.

Clinton *was* the Democratic party. She raised money for them/with them for years and has actually been a Democrat for her entire political career. Bernie Sanders switched parties only to get into the primary- He isn't a Democrat.

What a shocker! The party supported someone who was actually a Democrat, and who actually raised money for them, as opposed to someone who was a Democrat for 5 minutes to win a primary.

There was no rigging, and the primary win for Clinton was clear and resounding. Enough.

The party didn't attempt to force a coronation in 2008, or 2004, or 2000, or 1992. That's the real problem, not that Sanders didn't win under those circumstances.

 

[kirblar]

They didnt rig it, they favored her and wanted her and tried to influence the process. This is undeniable.

Yes, President Obama favored her. Lets stop acting like this is some shadowy cabal. It was him. She had his support, and people fell in line.

 

[Maxim726X]

They didnt rig it, they favored her and wanted her and tried to influence the process. This is undeniable.

She won by millions of votes.

He got destroyed on Super Tuesday and could never recover. That's not Hillary or the DNC's fault.

The party didn't attempt to force a coronation in 2008, or 2004, or 2000, or 1992. That's the real problem, not that Sanders didn't win under those circumstances.

I totally agree with this. She had no real competition... And if Sanders didn't switch parties to run, it would have been her and O'Malley. Yes, she was basically given the nomination by the party.

 

[aeolist]

Okay, and this bullshit needs to die too.

Clinton *was* the Democratic party. She raised money for them/with them for years and has actually been a Democrat for her entire political career. Bernie Sanders switched parties only to get into the primary- He isn't a Democrat.

What a shocker! The party supported someone who was actually a Democrat, and who actually raised money for them, as opposed to someone who was a Democrat for 5 minutes to win a primary.

There was no rigging, and the primary win for Clinton was clear and resounding. Enough.

and now that we are at a point of self-reflection after the most resounding electoral failure in a century it's time to realize that the party itself was fundamentally wrong and flawed. sanders was an outsider because he was saying those things beforehand and has been conclusively proven right.

 

[kirblar]

The party didn't attempt to force a coronation in 2008, or 2004, or 2000, or 1992. That's the real problem, not that Sanders didn't win under those circumstances.

2000 was one as well - again, no one wants to waste their one shot on a sitting VP.

 

[Beer Monkey]

I think if there's a lesson to be learned from Trump's success, it is that timidity is no longer the path to success. The Democrats have got to start thinking big. During my campaign, that was one of our slogans: Think big, not small.

This. Bernie is a hell of a lot like Trump. Sell big ideas that actually cannot be implemented as they are totally impractical and dismissive of reality.

 

[Maxim726X]

and now that we are at a point of self-reflection after the most resounding electoral failure in a century it's time to realize that the party itself was fundamentally wrong and flawed. sanders was an outsider because he was saying those things beforehand and has been conclusively proven right.

I don't argue with this- The party needs to fundamentally change.

But again, even without the DNC's preference for Clinton... He still would have lost the south.

Is this the part where we blame low information voters or something?

 

[btrboyev]

The only reason it became a line of attack was because of Bernie Sanders. One which Trump and the right were all too happy to disingenuously parrot.

Clinton narrowly loses an election, and it has to be taken as a "repudiation" of democrats? When she won the popular vote by 2%+? Bullshit.

Sanders is a guy who helps burn the house down and then comes around with a fire hose.

She didn't narrowly lose the election, popular vote aside, she got killed in the electoral. She lost states that haven't gone 30 in over two decades. She did absolutely dreadful.

 

[shintoki]

I don't argue with this- The party needs to fundamentally change.

But again, even without the DNC's preference for Clinton... He still would have lost the south.

Is this the part where we blame low information voters or something?

Just like Clinton. All of it.

 

[aeolist]

This. Bernie is a hell of a lot like Trump. Sell big ideas that actually cannot be implemented as they are totally impractical and dismissive of reality.

people understand that some things are impossible in a world with political opposition. what's important is convincing people that you really want what's good for them and will fight for it, and compromising all of your positions before you even get elected to office is not the way to do that. tell voters you will fight for $15 and do just that when you're elected, don't spend your campaign trying to lower expectations to $12.50 and then act surprised when your base is apathetic.

 

[kirblar]

and now that we are at a point of self-reflection after the most resounding electoral failure in a century it's time to realize that the party itself was fundamentally wrong and flawed. sanders was an outsider because he was saying those things beforehand and has been conclusively proven right.

It wasn't "the most resounding electoral failure in a century". It was tiny margins in a few states.

She didn't narrowly lose the election, popular vote aside, she got killed in the electoral. She lost states that haven't gone 30 in over two decades. She did absolutely dreadful.

Her margins of loss in those states are tiny. Even with the fucked up campaign they were that close. That's why it's a bunch of marginal factors dogpiling - Sanders, the campaign issues, Comey's letter. Remove any one of them, she likely wins.

 

[Dr_LucienSanchez]

im thinking that kirblar is actually kurt eichenwald

Hah, I've actually had that same thought.

Looks just like Kirby also.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Love or hate Bernie Sanders, at least he's been out there holding Trump to the fire about shit that he says post-election. Just look at his Twitter:

"Tell the American people you were lying or appoint an HHS secretary who will protect Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid."

"We owe Native Americans so much. It's time for a new approach to the Native American people, not to run a pipeline through their land."

"A president of the United States should not have a racist at his side."

We need more politicians, especially on the democratic side, who are willing to just call things as they are without dancing around them.

I remember one politician who called things out without dancing around it.

A type of comment on a specific type of people grouped in an instrument used to hold a gathering of things.

 

[QuantumBro]

I don't argue with this- The party needs to fundamentally change.

But again, even without the DNC's preference for Clinton... He still would have lost the south.

Is this the part where we blame low information voters or something?

The south didn't decide this election.

 

[Red]

And there is no guarantee sanders would have been coronated just like she was supposed to be. Not to mention the down ballot races would have probably ended up the same way we have now.

I'm not saying Sanders would have won. History played out only one way. We can still recognize his warnings proved true.

 

[aeolist]

I don't argue with this- The party needs to fundamentally change.

But again, even without the DNC's preference for Clinton... He still would have lost the south.

Is this the part where we blame low information voters or something?

no, because the point isn't about the 2016 primary specifically. rehashing every single aspect of what came before is not productive, but we need to understand the fundamentals of what went wrong and how to fix them.

sanders himself says in the interview that he doesn't want to speculate about whether he would have won in the general because it's impossible to know.

 

[Father_Brain]

2000 was one as well - again, no one wants to waste their one shot on a sitting VP.

Bradley still got far more endorsements than any of Clinton's challengers did.

 

[kirblar]

The south didn't decide this election.

It effectively ended the primary.

 

[Maxim726X]

The south didn't decide this election.

I'm referring to the primary.

Where he got his ass handed to him. I thought this didn't require clarification.

no, because the point isn't about the 2016 primary specifically. rehashing every single aspect of what came before is not productive, but we need to understand the fundamentals of what went wrong and how to fix them.

sanders himself says in the interview that he doesn't want to speculate about whether he would have won in the general because it's impossible to know.

The party has a messaging problem. If Clinton did indeed focus more on working class America (yes, specifically the WWC) we wouldn't be here discussing this.

The party got their clocks cleaned and I'm sure are examining where they went wrong and how to fix it. I agree with Bernie that the party has an authenticity issue (or specifically, the big cogs of the party do) and they need to be removed from the forefront, but I don't think it's as radical a change as some are proposing.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

The south didn't decide this election.

No, the south decided the primary.

 

[thehypocrite]

Yeah. Interesting too that this past election has so clearly been a rejection of both parties. Yet both had refused to change.

That's because neither of them listen to the public and the electoral process is made to shut down the plurality of the potential voters by forcing them to select between candidates that poorly represent their views.

 

[davepoobond]

I don't argue with this- The party needs to fundamentally change.

But again, even without the DNC's preference for Clinton... He still would have lost the south.

Is this the part where we blame low information voters or something?

I think the argument was "they would have still voted for him in the general"

Except we have evidence they didn't even turn out for Clinton, and voter suppression succeeded. Sanders was going to rely on white millennials (who couldn't even turn out in the primaries) and WWC which at best would have split, but socialism.

 

[phanphare]

great article and I'm glad to see Bernie get more visibility since the election. we're going to need his voice now more than ever going forward. he's 100% right about the Democratic party as well and has been banging that gong since before Bill Clinton even when the party took a hard right turn. hopefully Trump was enough for people to realize that actual change is needed within the party.

 

[aeolist]

It wasn't "the most resounding electoral failure in a century". It was tiny margins in a few states.

Her margins of loss in those states are tiny. Even with the fucked up campaign they were that close. That's why it's a bunch of marginal factors dogpiling - Sanders, the campaign issues, Comey's letter. Remove any one of them, she likely wins.

republicans haven't controlled this much of the government since the late 1920s. spin it however you like but they have total control right now and it's because the democrats have utterly failed us.

sure, the margins were tiny, but the stakes have never been higher.

 

[kess]

The only reason it became a line of attack was because of Bernie Sanders. One which Trump and the right were all too happy to disingenuously parrot.

Clinton narrowly loses an election, and it has to be taken as a "repudiation" of democrats? When she won the popular vote by 2%+? Bullshit.

Sanders is a guy who helps burn the house down and then comes around with a fire hose.

Dems need to realize that the 1% are the deplorables, and they have to dump the Clinton camp because they just don't get it.

The biggest problem with that is that the greatest champion of workers rights as President was a rich as fuck guy from New York. The party should always have a place for wealthy people who abide by the rules, support the role of labor, and worker's rights, as small as that contingent may be.

Hell, Warren Buffett was more outspoken on some of these issues than Hillary was. And that's a problem.

 

[QuantumBro]

It effectively ended the primary.

I'm referring to the primary.

Where he got his ass handed to him. I thought this didn't require clarification.

Ah, my bad.

 

[kirblar]

republicans haven't controlled this much of the government since the late 1920s. spin it however you like but they have total control right now and it's because the democrats have utterly failed us.

sure, the margins were tiny, but the stakes have never been higher.

Correct. But the failure at state/local/congress levels is on Obama. Not her. She wasn't ignoring the DNC, forcing out Dean, abandoning the 50-state strategy in favor of their private PAC. This has been a problem for 8 years now, not 1.

 

[jackal27]

Hillary did not want to help her biggest donors. She entertained them because she had to. That said, Sanders is mostly on point here.

Doesn't matter. In the eyes of the people, entertaining them looked like selling out. Sure, it's not fair, some of her loss is because people are sexist, sure she was obviously the more qualified candidate, but the fact remains that she (and her party) misread the room. Big time. That's politics.

The Democrats have failed us, in no small part thanks to ignoring the central states and the working class in particular. It's time for a new strategy.

 

[aeolist]

Correct. But the failure at state/local/congress levels is on Obama. Not her. She wasn't ignoring the DNC, forcing out Dean, abandoning the 50-state strategy in favor of their private PAC. This has been a problem for 8 years now, not 1.

i agree that it's a systemic and widespread issue with the democratic party, in which she was an important and influential figure over the last 20 years

 

[Moofers]

It's not that Clinton's "coronation was owed.", it's that Sanders cannot ever admit defeat. And that leads him to incredibly destructive behaviors.

What the hell are you talking about here? Can you give me examples of where he has lost refused to admit defeat? He was well within his rights as a legitimate contender in the primaries to hang on as long as he did. He even came around and told his supporters to rally behind Clinton. Remember "Now is not the time for a protest vote"?

I don't know what your expectations are of him but it really sounds like you don't think he should have run at all. The guy went from having 95% of the country having never heard of him to nearly taking the nomination in just 12 months time. He was filling stadiums with passionate people who heard his message and felt it echoed their own. If that isn't a person who should run in the primaries then I have no idea why we even have the process. Might as well just give it to Clinton or whoever the DNC chooses and tell the country they have no say in it.

 

[davepoobond]

republicans haven't controlled this much of the government since the late 1920s. spin it however you like but they have total control right now and it's because the democrats have utterly failed us.

sure, the margins were tiny, but the stakes have never been higher.

The losses didn't happen in 2016 they started in 2010. This was the result of years of failure not just one presidential campaign

 

[aeolist]

The losses didn't happen in 2016 they started in 2010. This was the result of years of failure not just one presidential campaign

indeed, it began with the backlash against obama after he immediately proved to be yet another centrist corporatist liberal with empty promises of change.

unsurprisingly, hillary running on his record proved to be unpopular.

 

[Boney]

Amy Goodman also had a great 40 minute interview at the Philadelphia Free Library. Recommended for everyone, especially it being it video form.

https://youtu.be/2rEGCDR6wKQ

People that were making fun of "his so called 'revolution' " by losing the primaries should start to actually get their heads out of their asses and realize that Sanders is the spokesman for the party now and the strongest link between voters and the party. 50 state strategy needs to be employed inmediatly, conceding entire states has only driven the division of the country. It needs to be on the ground and talking with people. There's numerous documentaries and video reports of how campaign volunteers were able to galvanize their family and the town, to let them know someone is able to articulate their achings with a populist earnest movement.

Where the hell is the rest of the Democratic Party on Standing Rock. Not even Warren (which I'm still dissapointed she decided to stay in the sidelines to not burn any bridges) has made a peep about it.

Despite this grim defeat, the future looks bright. Younger people wanting to run for office and run for real change. Retaking back the Democratic Party from Washington elite.

 

[VendettaRed07]

It's almost like his warning that Hillary would lose because of her perception as a corporatist was right or something.

Yeah. No it's not quite fair she was judged at a different standard than Obama.. but a candidate needs to be easily likeable. There shouldn't be a need for people to have a circle jerk defense force that has to explain or contextualize everything she says and does like there was on here

I liked her and still do but she had too much baggage and terrible perception issues.

People probably should have just listened to themselves on here eight years ago. Even some ofnhillarys biggest supporters on here hated her guts in the primary against Obama. People don't think all that much when voting and perception is often everything.

 

[M0nochromatic]

Rolling Stone interviews Bernie Sanders on what needs to be done going forward. Hell, he even says at the top that there is no reason to think of what could have been, but then the entire thread is what could have been if he wasn't so mean towards Clinton's policies and character. It's absurd.

If people, you, me, us, don't move on and understand what caused Hillary to lose, we'll repeat it and lose again. Bernie is already on the right track to mitigating the harm that is coming because of her failure. I hope the democrats can correct themselves without requiring further loses to understand what's wrong.

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Bernie proved that if your message is right, tons of people will give you individual contrabutions, and you don't need to pander to mega donors.

With that said, of course she was going to "help them". There is a white spectrum in what "help them" is, but she would definitely allow them to write the bills, make policy, etc. Bernie's whole push was "help us more than they ( the corps) get helped."

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Amy Goodman also had a great 40 minute interview at the Philadelphia Free Library. Recommended for everyone, especially it being it video form.

https://youtu.be/2rEGCDR6wKQ

People that were making fun of "his so called 'revolution' " by losing the primaries should start to actually get their heads out of their asses and realize that Sanders is the spokesman for the party now and the strongest link between voters and the party. 50 state strategy needs to be employed inmediatly, conceding entire states has only driven the division of the country. It needs to be on the ground and talking with people. There's numerous documentaries and video reports of how campaign volunteers were able to galvanize their family and the town, to let them know someone is able to articulate their achings with a populist earnest movement.

Despite this grim defeat, the future looks bright. Younger people wanting to run for office and run for real change. Retaking back the Democratic Party from Washington elite.

Ok, so Sanders is the face of the party now

And we need to do a 50 state strategy.

But not all 50 states because that's what lost Clinton the election because she was too greedy.

Also we need to speak out and not sugar coat reality.

But we also can't have our candidate saying that a shit load of Trump's supporters are racists/xenophobes/sexists.

We need real solutions to the problems at hand.

We need grand idealistic solutions to problems to get people invested and excited.

The party needs to be completely destroyed and rebuilt from the ground up... by investing in the single voting bloc that doesn't actually vote