Sanders Campaign staying in til DC

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

When do losers in a race get to overrun the party?

What does 'taking his message seriously' and changing the party' mean? In concrete terms?

He doesn't have the right to demand the party change or adhere to his message. He has the right to be part of the conversation to advocate for it. Which is a lot more positive in the long-run.

What's the difference?

It's kind of everything, it's about tactic, tone and subtlety. You can use the DNC as a platform to positively advocate your message, as opposed to a negative and angry tone. I would love to see how the Sanders people who were behind Obama in 08 would have reacted to Clinton demanding massive concessions and having the right to demand "whatever she wants"

She did demand Secretary of State and having her campaign debts bailed out. They didn't have much to disagree on policy wise, so *shruggie *.

Divided on my affections for the President other than the obvious respect he's due ex officio (Ex: I actually liked Clinton on guns better in '08) but substituting 'opposite side'  yeah it would suck.

But it sucks because it's necessity. That's politics, that's life.

See, the problem with Bernie is that he wants changes to the system, yesterday. And it ain't gonna happen that way. He already has pounded his message into the ground....we get it already. But it's not up to only him how the cookie crumbles and he needs to get that.

Again, great. Take that attitude into November and see where it gets you. I provide 1968 as a roadmap.

[RaphaelDLG]

When do losers in a race get to overrun the party?

What does 'taking his message seriously' and changing the party' mean? In concrete terms?

He doesn't have the right to demand the party change or adhere to his message. He has the right to be part of the conversation to advocate for it. Which is a lot more positive in the long-run.

What's the difference?

It's kind of everything, it's about tactic, tone and subtlety. You can use the DNC as a platform to positively advocate your message, as opposed to a negative and angry tone. I would love to see how the Sanders people who were behind Obama in 08 would have reacted to Clinton demanding massive concessions and having the right to demand "whatever she wants"

Probably like hypocrites.

 I don't really think tone should matter.  What matters is is the criticism legitimate and fair.  Obviously, the DNC is in no way morally close to this situation, so don't read too much into this comparison, but should MLK have adjusted his "tone?"

[Virginiá]

See, the problem with Bernie is that he wants changes to the system, yesterday. And it ain't gonna happen that way. He already has pounded his message into the ground....we get it already. But it's not up to only him how the cookie crumbles and he needs to get that.

He has an activist streak in him (quite literally actually). From my experience, a lot (not nearly all, though!) have a tendency to demand immediate change and are resistant to compromise. Some think if they push hard enough, they'll get what they want. It would be nice if that were true, but it isn't. Not in realistic terms.

Bernie is pushing legitimate issues, and changes to the party/primaries themselves. The problem I think is that he thinks he has to go to convention for some reason. I don't even know why. The party platform really isn't worth all this, and primary rules have to be changed by the state legislature, no? So why is he doing this? Why can't he just go around the country giving speeches? What good does it do for his cause to disrupt the Democratic convention? If anything, it hurts it, not helps.

I'd love to hear Bernie explain exactly what he thinks this will accomplish. Does he even know? Sometimes I think he's just gotten caught up in the success he has had and really has no idea what he is doing anymore.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Where is the report that she demanded SoS? Everything I've read suggests she had to have to her arm twisted. The Obama people didn't pay off her debts.

But we agree on the whole "it's politics" stuff, so we'll let it go.

When do losers in a race get to overrun the party?

What does 'taking his message seriously' and changing the party' mean? In concrete terms?

He doesn't have the right to demand the party change or adhere to his message. He has the right to be part of the conversation to advocate for it. Which is a lot more positive in the long-run.

What's the difference?

It's kind of everything, it's about tactic, tone and subtlety. You can use the DNC as a platform to positively advocate your message, as opposed to a negative and angry tone. I would love to see how the Sanders people who were behind Obama in 08 would have reacted to Clinton demanding massive concessions and having the right to demand "whatever she wants"

Probably like hypocrites.

 I don't really think tone should matter.  What matters is is the criticism legitimate and fair.  Obviously, the DNC is in no way morally close to this situation, so don't read too much into this comparison, but should MLK have adjusted his "tone?"

Really?

Yes, tone matters. He can be strong and determined, but cannot do it at the detriment of Clinton at her nominating convention.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

See, the problem with Bernie is that he wants changes to the system, yesterday. And it ain't gonna happen that way. He already has pounded his message into the ground....we get it already. But it's not up to only him how the cookie crumbles and he needs to get that.

He has an activist streak in him (quite literally actually). From my experience, a lot (not nearly all, though!) have a tendency to demand immediate change and are resistant to compromise. Some think if they push hard enough, they'll get what they want. It would be nice if that were true, but it isn't. Not in realistic terms.

Bernie is pushing legitimate issues, and changes to the party/primaries themselves. The problem I think is that he thinks he has to go to convention for some reason. I don't even know why. The party platform really isn't worth all this, and primary rules have to be changed by the state legislature, no? So why is he doing this? Why can't he just go around the country giving speeches? What good does it do for his cause to disrupt the Democratic convention? If anything, it hurts it, not helps.

I'd love to hear Bernie explain exactly what he thinks this will accomplish. Does he even know? Sometimes I think he's just gotten caught up in the success he has had and really has no idea what he is doing anymore.

Jeff probably doesn't. Bernie likely has a plan, but no specifics, and wants to micromanage the whole thing himself.

[Hermit For Peace]

She did demand Secretary of State and having her campaign debts bailed out. They didn't have much to disagree on policy wise, so *shruggie *.

Divided on my affections for the President other than the obvious respect he's due ex officio (Ex: I actually liked Clinton on guns better in '08) but substituting 'opposite side'  yeah it would suck.

But it sucks because it's necessity. That's politics, that's life.

Sorry no, Hillary did not demand to be made Sec of State. In fact, Obama asked her and she declined. She had to be talked into it. And as for the campaign debts, she did nothing of the sort.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Where is the report that she demanded SoS? Everything I've read suggests she had to have to her arm twisted. The Obama people didn't pay off her debts.

But we agree on the whole "it's politics" stuff, so we'll let it go.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-01-28/obamas-parting-gift-to-hillary-clinton

4 years  later to avoid accusations of impropriety, but if it was really a 'surprise gift' from top Obama donors I'll eat the phone I read it on.

Not sure about SoS rumors, but it really does seem like the perfect trampoline to this year's run so (assuming Clinton's a savvy operator, which barring certain exceptions I'll swear to) I'd be very surprised if she didn't want it, even if she played a game of "oh twist my arm."

[RaphaelDLG]

Where is the report that she demanded SoS? Everything I've read suggests she had to have to her arm twisted. The Obama people didn't pay off her debts.

But we agree on the whole "it's politics" stuff, so we'll let it go.

When do losers in a race get to overrun the party?

What does 'taking his message seriously' and changing the party' mean? In concrete terms?

He doesn't have the right to demand the party change or adhere to his message. He has the right to be part of the conversation to advocate for it. Which is a lot more positive in the long-run.

What's the difference?

It's kind of everything, it's about tactic, tone and subtlety. You can use the DNC as a platform to positively advocate your message, as opposed to a negative and angry tone. I would love to see how the Sanders people who were behind Obama in 08 would have reacted to Clinton demanding massive concessions and having the right to demand "whatever she wants"

Probably like hypocrites.

 I don't really think tone should matter.  What matters is is the criticism legitimate and fair.  Obviously, the DNC is in no way morally close to this situation, so don't read too much into this comparison, but should MLK have adjusted his "tone?"

Really?

Yes, tone matters. He can be strong and determined, but cannot do it at the detriment of Clinton at her nominating convention.

Yeah, I guess I partially agree with you that he has to be as strong as possible while still making it very clear to his thicker supporters that they still need to put on their big boy pants in November and vote against Trump/doing so is absolutely critical.  It's a very tough gauntlet to run.

[Hermit For Peace]

See, the problem with Bernie is that he wants changes to the system, yesterday. And it ain't gonna happen that way. He already has pounded his message into the ground....we get it already. But it's not up to only him how the cookie crumbles and he needs to get that.

He has an activist streak in him (quite literally actually). From my experience, a lot (not nearly all, though!) have a tendency to demand immediate change and are resistant to compromise. Some think if they push hard enough, they'll get what they want. It would be nice if that were true, but it isn't. Not in realistic terms.

Bernie is pushing legitimate issues, and changes to the party/primaries themselves. The problem I think is that he thinks he has to go to convention for some reason. I don't even know why. The party platform really isn't worth all this, and primary rules have to be changed by the state legislature, no? So why is he doing this? Why can't he just go around the country giving speeches? What good does it do for his cause to disrupt the Democratic convention? If anything, it hurts it, not helps.

I'd love to hear Bernie explain exactly what he thinks this will accomplish. Does he even know? Sometimes I think he's just gotten caught up in the success he has had and really has no idea what he is doing anymore.

Nice insight and good questions.

[Hermit For Peace]

I thought this article was interesting.

Clinton plans unity push after Tuesday's contests

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is a true leader, in my view. Good for Hillary.

Bernie, it's time to get on board the winning train and help it to victory.

[Lyin' Steve]

Sanders, on the other hand, decided that the last 48 hours of his campaign was a good time to validate Republican conspiracy theories about the Clinton foundation.  Maybe he should spend those last donations buying a copy of Clinton Cash for everyone on his mailing list?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282261-sanders-clinton-foundation-engaged-in-conflicts-of

[Hermit For Peace]

Sanders, on the other hand, decided that the last 48 hours of his campaign was a good time to validate Republican conspiracy theories about the Clinton foundation.  Maybe he should spend those last donations buying a copy of Clinton Cash for everyone on his mailing list?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282261-sanders-clinton-foundation-engaged-in-conflicts-of

Something else that gets me about Bernie is that he spouts all his stuff, gets his crowd all riled up with his speeches, but he takes no responsibility for what he produces. He says his followers are on their own, and it's up to Hillary to bring them over to her fold. He's not going to do it, she has to do it.

Something else, when he was making that speech and the black protesters came up on stage and took over....Bernie just let them. The guy talks harsh words but doesn't seem to have much of a backbone for telling people to calm down and get in line. He's not very Presidential at all IMO.

I'm sure if Bernie was in the spotlight for as long as Hillary has been, and had been scrutinized to as tiny a detail as Hillary has been, people who think he's so great probably wouldn't be thinking that by now.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Sanders, on the other hand, decided that the last 48 hours of his campaign was a good time to validate Republican conspiracy theories about the Clinton foundation.  Maybe he should spend those last donations buying a copy of Clinton Cash for everyone on his mailing list?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282261-sanders-clinton-foundation-engaged-in-conflicts-of

Something else that gets me about Bernie is that he spouts all his stuff, gets his crowd all riled up with his speeches, but he takes no responsibility for what he produces. He says his followers are on their own, and it's up to Hillary to bring them over to her fold. He's not going to do it, she has to do it.

Something else, when he was making that speech and the black protesters came up on stage and took over....Bernie just let them. The guy talks harsh words but doesn't seem to have much of a backbone for telling people to calm down and get in line. He's not very Presidential at all IMO.

I'm sure if Bernie was in the spotlight for as long as Hillary has been, and had been scrutinized to as tiny a detail as Hillary has been, people who think he's so great probably wouldn't be thinking that by now.

He can't do it, because he has an ideological coalition. 

Clinton was able to close the distance in '08 because people voted for Clinton, not the Prog side in the Dem primary, or for the One Honest Man.

Bernie can't turn around all of a sudden and say "Oh gosh turns out there are TWO honest people in politics and the second one's last name is Clinton!" (lol.)

So yeah, Clinton needs to bring us in.

As for state dept conflicts of interest being a conspiracy theory... OK. 

[Hermit For Peace]

Sanders, on the other hand, decided that the last 48 hours of his campaign was a good time to validate Republican conspiracy theories about the Clinton foundation.  Maybe he should spend those last donations buying a copy of Clinton Cash for everyone on his mailing list?

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282261-sanders-clinton-foundation-engaged-in-conflicts-of

Something else that gets me about Bernie is that he spouts all his stuff, gets his crowd all riled up with his speeches, but he takes no responsibility for what he produces. He says his followers are on their own, and it's up to Hillary to bring them over to her fold. He's not going to do it, she has to do it.

Something else, when he was making that speech and the black protesters came up on stage and took over....Bernie just let them. The guy talks harsh words but doesn't seem to have much of a backbone for telling people to calm down and get in line. He's not very Presidential at all IMO.

I'm sure if Bernie was in the spotlight for as long as Hillary has been, and had been scrutinized to as tiny a detail as Hillary has been, people who think he's so great probably wouldn't be thinking that by now.

He can't do it, because he has an ideological coalition. 

Clinton was able to close the distance in '08 because people voted for Clinton, not the Prog side in the Dem primary, or for the One Honest Man.

Bernie can't turn around all of a sudden and say "Oh gosh turns out there are TWO honest people in politics and the second one's last name is Clinton!" (lol.)

So yeah, Clinton needs to bring us in.

As for state dept conflicts of interest being a conspiracy theory... OK. 

So she said on Wednesday she's going to start the process of uniting the Dem Party, and she expects Bernie to do the same. Let's see what she does, and what he does.

You can't expect Bernie not to say anything to help unite the party. He said he's going to do everything to stop Trump from winning. He can't do that if he doesn't back Hillary.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Another anti Bernie train-wreck thread.

[This account no longer in use.]

Another anti Bernie train-wreck thread.

1 like = 1 cry everytime