Sanders "reopens Dem primary wounds" - Polidicks

Also Ellison's Nation of Islam history getting highlighted on probably won't resonate well with the White working class well.

[QUOTE]“It is very concerning that Bernie Sanders is so intent on taking over a party that he’s not even a member of that he’d insult the beloved vice president — and really the president — about a failed status quo approach,” said Texas Democratic chairman Gilberto Hinojosa, a Perez supporter and one of 447 DNC members who will vote in late February to elect the next chairman. “This is coming from a man who is not even a member of our party,” Hinojosa continued. “We lost an election and all of a sudden we’re all a part of a failed status quo? When he puts Joe Biden and Tom Perez in this category and paints with a broad brush he insults all of us. This is an election between loyal, qualified Democrats who love our party and the country. There’s no need for him to lower himself to that level.”[/QUOTE] Holy shit, all of this is just the worst. Reading this makes me feel embarrassed that Democrat is even on my voter registration. [QUOTE=Tudd;51776847]Also Ellison's Nation of Islam history getting highlighted on probably won't resonate well with the White working class well.[/QUOTE] Who do you think should be chairman of the DNC?

[QUOTE=Tudd;51776847]Also Ellison's Nation of Islam history getting highlighted on probably won't resonate well with the White working class well.[/QUOTE] Sure only people care *cough*Alt-right/SJWs*cough* about identity politics within two party system like United States will care about that. And Ellison apologize that long go.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51776847]Also Ellison's Nation of Islam history getting highlighted on probably won't resonate well with the White working class well.[/QUOTE] we elected a fucking black guy whos middle name is "hussein" [i]twice[/i]

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51776962]Holy shit, all of this is just the worst. Reading this makes me feel embarrassed that Democrat is even on my voter registration.[/QUOTE] It's almost verbatim for what we heard during the primaries. It's just sad. [editline]4th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;51776847]Also Ellison's Nation of Islam history getting highlighted on probably won't resonate well with the White working class well.[/QUOTE] But he denounced them ages ago?

Lots of establishment are starting to accept Keith and the passionate left, even Obama told the party when he was leaving to go where the grassroots energy is at. It's the Clintonites who are so cocky and believe it's only their party that is completely fucking everything. I just don't understand why it's so hard for them to accept that it's time for the DNC to go back to its New Deal roots.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51776847]Also Ellison's Nation of Islam history getting highlighted on probably won't resonate well with the White working class well.[/QUOTE] That's been debunked though, it's just a boogieman that his detractors rely on. He wrote some articles in college, helped organize a loosely related march (the real focus was on black socio-economic issues), and has since publicly denounced the group.

[QUOTE=HappyCompy;51776730]Far-left (economic) populism is the future of the American Left. The DNC and their corporate-friendly, neoliberal policies have failed us, and their bullshit and failure to embrace change has saddled us with one of the biggest turds ever as our President. It's obvious, seems pretty obvious, I'm honestly not sure why the DNC has such a hard time figuring out that they're on the wrong side of history here.[/QUOTE] This on so many levels. Neoliberalism is a dead ideology that has destroyed the left in America. Sanders was just the tip of the iceberg for what far left populisists are to come, we need actual radicals who care about workers rights and are willing to actually challenge the system. The problem is how long the rats in charge of the dnc will hold onto their power before someone knocks them down. I would of thought the failures of this election would awake liberals from the identity based corporate politics, but it seems they are entrenching themselves in their ideology even further. Its going to be a mess.

[QUOTE=LTJGPliskin;51776680]Oh boy, an Anti-Sanders subreddit pushing an Anti-Sanders agenda using skewed and vague misrepresented articles. The saddest part is the essays they post with out of context quotes from them without understanding the meanings or purposes of the essays.[/QUOTE] That's the POINT. They take it out of context and they KNOW they're taking it out of context. You didn't even bother reading the disclaimer. They understand the meaning and purpose of the essay. What they're doing is judging it behind the idea of what your average voter would take it and how the GOP and republicans would present it. The author even says that they understand a lot of these are taken out of context and addresses that many of them serve a purpose, it's just how it'd be presented to someone who didn't know Bernie that well. Not everyone shares your level of knowledge on Bernie and something like that is important to keep in mind when you're pushing a political candidate.

Speaking of reopening primary wounds, Sanders agreed to debate Cruz on Thursday over Obamacare. That debate between the 2nd place losers will be pointless from a policy standpoint but I would hope Sanders uses the publicity from that event to branch off from the DNC. People hate the RNC and Trump but aren't willing to associate themselves with the DNC anymore because of corruption and turbo-sjw nonsense that muddles the meaningful discussions in the left. Please start a new party Sanders, kill the DNC before it can recover

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;51777173]That's the POINT. They take it out of context and they KNOW they're taking it out of context. You didn't even bother reading the disclaimer. They understand the meaning and purpose of the essay. What they're doing is judging it behind the idea of what your average voter would take it and how the GOP and republicans would present it. The author even says that they understand a lot of these are taken out of context and addresses that many of them serve a purpose, it's just how it'd be presented to someone who didn't know Bernie that well. Not everyone shares your level of knowledge on Bernie and something like that is important to keep in mind when you're pushing a political candidate.[/QUOTE] And you act like Bernie wasn't attacked on a number of these points and others previously, yet his favorability is still higher than Biden's (And Hillary's, but we're not going into that), who hasn't been publicly smeared as Bernie was during and after the campaign, among voters in general, liberals, conservatives, independents, Hispanics, and both women and men. The only groups which Biden performs better among are Democrats and Blacks, two groups that didn't result in the Democrat's loss in the election. So quit your "Well Biden would've been had a better chance than Bernie" bullshit already.

[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;51777205]Speaking of reopening primary wounds, Sanders agreed to debate Cruz on Thursday over Obamacare. That debate between the 2nd place losers will be pointless from a policy standpoint but I would hope Sanders uses the publicity from that event to branch off from the DNC. People hate the RNC and Trump but aren't willing to associate themselves with the DNC anymore because of corruption and turbo-sjw nonsense that muddles the meaningful discussions in the left. Please start a new party Sanders, kill the DNC before it can recover[/QUOTE] Not Thursday, Tuesday.

The DNC is blaming Sanders when they should be blaming themselves, astounding really.

[QUOTE=Aldawolf;51776619][url]https://www.reddit.com/r/Enough_Sanders_Spam/comments/5os7nx/a_final_response_to_bernie_would_have_won/[/url] Completely sourced with all the info you need. I like Sanders too, but let's not be ignorant and say the GOP couldn't have found anything to dig up and smother him with. A lot of it is stuff that makes sense in context, but can be taken out of context to attack him. Hillary had the same type of stuff against her: in context it made sense, but out of context it can be twisted (e.g. her "laughing" while being defence attorney of a rapist. She was laughing because she thought his appeal was ridiculous and knew no one would take it seriously, but of course it's twisted to be "Laughing she set him free" [she didn't]) Sadly context doesn't matter a lot of the time, as long as they can factually claim something happened, and it can be painted in a negative light, it's considered good dirty attack material. I'm not saying Bernie COULDN'T have won, but I am saying Biden would've had a better chance than Bernster.[/QUOTE] Hillary almost won. Hillary who the Republicans had several years of attack campaigns running against her, Hillary who had no really strong message beyond "Trump is bad", Hillary who wasn't drawing the same crowds (and thus one would proport interest) as either Trump or Sanders, Hillary who didn't campaign in key states that she then lost by slim margins, Hillary who had some real dirt rather than made up dirt based on misconstrued statements. Moreover, it isn't that Trump won over a lot of Democrats, it's that a lot less Democrats went out to vote. Democrats who were motivated to vote by Obama weren't by Hillary. Moreover, the only key points Trump had that appealed to sane people were "Guns are a right", "TPP and similar trade deals are bad", "the US is losing jobs", and "corporate interests are too powerful" as I recall. Hillary was extremely anti-gun, flip flopped on TPP, I don't really recall anything from her about US jobs, and (at least had the appearance of, and did nothing but reinforce that view that she) was the standard bought out politician. Sanders was somewhat state's rights on gun control and primarily campaigning on those other points. Versus someone other than Trump, I think there is a lot more doubt; but with the two "oddball" candidates, I think Sanders comes out on top because of his conviction and his rather clean history.

[QUOTE=Psychokitten;51776818]I missed that lol my bad[/QUOTE] Flagdog is inaccurate as fuck anyway, for example I'm Danish, I don't live anywhere near the German border, and I'm pretty sure I didn't miss another invasion.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;51777545]Hillary almost won. Hillary who the Republicans had several years of attack campaigns running against her, Hillary who had no really strong message beyond "Trump is bad", Hillary who wasn't drawing the same crowds (and thus one would proport interest) as either Trump or Sanders, Hillary who didn't campaign in key states that she then lost by slim margins, Hillary who had some real dirt rather than made up dirt based on misconstrued statements. Moreover, it isn't that Trump won over a lot of Democrats, it's that a lot less Democrats went out to vote. Democrats who were motivated to vote by Obama weren't by Hillary. Moreover, the only key points Trump had that appealed to sane people were "Guns are a right", "TPP and similar trade deals are bad", "the US is losing jobs", and "corporate interests are too powerful" as I recall. Hillary was extremely anti-gun, flip flopped on TPP, I don't really recall anything from her about US jobs, and (at least had the appearance of, and did nothing but reinforce that view that she) was the standard bought out politician. Sanders was somewhat state's rights on gun control and primarily campaigning on those other points. Versus someone other than Trump, I think there is a lot more doubt; but with the two "oddball" candidates, I think Sanders comes out on top because of his conviction and his rather clean history.[/QUOTE] Hillary campaigned hard on affordable college and job retraining programs, as well as raising the minimum wage. She absolutely made efforts to appeal to US jobs. It just isn't as easy to understand as "We're gonna bring back manufacturing jobs by giving corporations more money!" that republicans lie their teeth off saying, and "raising minimum wage would reduce corporation jobs in the US!" Stuff that makes sense if you're uneducated on the topic. Those key points you said are all lies that he cared about the issue, or the solutions are lies on Trump's part. Hillary offered realistic solutions for this, but sadly saying sound policy as talking points and that's it isn't going to garner you votes. And yeah, it was a lack of democrat motivation that did turn into a loss. I also think "BUT HER EMAILS" played a part, as I saw on 538 her 5-6 point lead drop like a rock once fucking Comey said "EMAILS" for the last time.That was more the straw that broke the camels back though. DNC's incompetence was also important, fake news is important, lack of motivation from a candidate is important, lack of wide demographic appeal is important, but those fucking emails was the final nail in the coffin at Hillary's chances of victory.

Also it might have helped if the Republicans didn't try and suppress voter turnout and not have gerrymandered the districts in their favor back in 2010.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51776736]Holy fuck that reddits comments read like cancer. American democrats are fucked. You guys are never going to get your act together to oppose Trump. If that's the level of thoughtful discourse, it's just a joke. It's like a "Right vs Left" fight but worse and just "Left vs left"[/QUOTE] What you are observing is classical narcissistic behavior. As in the disorder. This is the problem within the democrats and neo liberalism and associated ideas. It creates a pathological mindset and its installed on purpose within their followers. They dont own up to jack shit. They blame others. The double down on the behavior that got them in trouble. Then everyone in the movement become political cannabils. This is the end result. People turning on each other. Watch as the more zealotous and thus more insane factions take over and push solutions that do not solve any thing and will make things worse for every one involved. Which will not address why they lost in the first place. I'm not picking just the left. Various movements and ideals suffer from this malady.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51776736]Holy fuck that reddits comments read like cancer. American democrats are fucked. You guys are never going to get your act together to oppose Trump. If that's the level of thoughtful discourse, it's just a joke. It's like a "Right vs Left" fight but worse and just "Left vs left"[/QUOTE] To be fair to the US public and even Democrats at large, these are [I]pro-establishment Democrats[/I] on [I]Reddit[/I]. That said, Reddit's broken (comment) vote system and the US's broken elections encourage uniformity in polarisation in much the same way, so you may be right that it's exemplary of the state of that country's democracy in an age of near-instant and vastly inaccurate viral news cycles.

Honestly, politics in the Western world needs a left-swing. The US more than most. You still have to reach the rest on a number of issues. So the Democrats need Bernie and his supporters.

... At this rate we're going to have a second helping of MAGA in 4 years aren't we?

[QUOTE=The Rifleman;51776580]How are these leaders SO FUCKING DENSE.[/QUOTE] They don't live on the ground floor. They haven't for decades. [editline]5th February 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Aldawolf;51777606]Hillary campaigned hard on affordable college and job retraining programs, as well as raising the minimum wage. She absolutely made efforts to appeal to US jobs. It just isn't as easy to understand as "We're gonna bring back manufacturing jobs by giving corporations more money!" that republicans lie their teeth off saying, and "raising minimum wage would reduce corporation jobs in the US!" Stuff that makes sense if you're uneducated on the topic. Those key points you said are all lies that he cared about the issue, or the solutions are lies on Trump's part. Hillary offered realistic solutions for this, but sadly saying sound policy as talking points and that's it isn't going to garner you votes. And yeah, it was a lack of democrat motivation that did turn into a loss. I also think "BUT HER EMAILS" played a part, as I saw on 538 her 5-6 point lead drop like a rock once fucking Comey said "EMAILS" for the last time.That was more the straw that broke the camels back though. DNC's incompetence was also important, fake news is important, lack of motivation from a candidate is important, lack of wide demographic appeal is important, but those fucking emails was the final nail in the coffin at Hillary's chances of victory.[/QUOTE] I would repeat no she didn't about fifteen times but then I realized before I'm talking to someone who thinks only people with ovaries can be born intelligent and the last eight thousand years of civilization are a complete random accident brought about by the invention of the internet. Also the liar inflagrante here wasn't Trump by and large, until after the election. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Terrible arguing" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=The Rifleman;51776580]How are these leaders SO FUCKING DENSE.[/QUOTE] I don't know if there dense so much as afraid of losing their power and influence to an anti-establishment base. They'll appear as dense because they won't say it aloud and instead throw every excuse they can to hold on to what they have hoping people will buy it. Participate in your primaries and local caucuses, let them know what you want and think when the next cycle comes around.

[video=youtube;MR65ZhO6LGA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR65ZhO6LGA[/video] This is the shit I'm talking about, the kid asks a really good and relevant question. Her answer screams tone-deaf and does not make me feel warm and cozy about the DNC learning from 2016.

I don't think it really matters as a Minority Leader's job is essentially to maintain party unity within the House of Representatives. 4 years is a long way away, a hell of a lot can change in that time, as I'm certain everyone who lived through the 2016 election has learned.

[QUOTE=27X;51778504] I would repeat no she didn't about fifteen times but then I realized before I'm talking to someone who thinks only people with ovaries can be born intelligent and the last eight thousand years of civilization are a complete random accident brought about by the invention of the internet. Also the liar inflagrante here wasn't Trump by and large, until after the election.[/QUOTE] wtf is this strawman lol. Do you for real think this? [url]https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-29/job-retraining-classes-are-offered-rust-belt-workers-many-don-t-want-them[/url] [url]http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-free-college-tuition-plan-details-2016-9[/url] [url]http://www.attn.com/stories/11192/hillary-clintons-stance-on-minimum-wage[/url] a few google searches and you can see it was part of her platform.

Trump definitely didn't lie throughout the campaign if you completely ignore the many many times that he did lie.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;51778628]Trump definitely didn't lie throughout the campaign if you completely ignore the many many times that he did lie.[/QUOTE] Basically this. I was amazed that Trump supporters called Hillary out for lying when almost everything to come out of Trump's mouth was a lie or half-truth.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51778664]Basically this. I was amazed that Trump supporters called Hillary out for lying when almost everything to come out of Trump's mouth was a lie or half-truth.[/QUOTE] That's the thing. Trump told so many damn lies that people came to expect it from him, and the lies became business as usual. People got worn out by scandal after outrage after scandal. Hillary was a fairly normal (albeit mediocre and uninspiring) politician, which meant lies, mistakes and contradictions all retained their capacity to hurt her. If she'd had enough humility to own her mistakes and show some genuine character, we might not be having this conversation.

When someone claims the moral high ground, people start evaluating them in their capacity to be a good person. Trump is a shitty person and [I]proud of it[/I]. His followers don't judge him by that metric.