Will Bernie Sanders be gracious in defeat?

[Averroës Nix]

Of course Bernie will be gracious in defeat, and when Hillary becomes the nominee going against Trump, the electorate will be faced with the two worst choices for President in history.

I don't agree with you much, and I don't 100% agree, but we certainly have some agreement there. I'd say maybe the worst since 1924.

It will be a horrid choice, but I can't comprehend why it would be any worse than, say, 2000. Or, for that matter, any of the Clinton or Carter elections.

[Ebowed]

Sanders abruptly walked out of an interview when the reporter asked about his wife meeting with Joe Arpaio

You're making it sound like Jane Sanders and Joe Arpaio have political agreement, I'm just wondering if this deception is intentional or incidental?

Why did Sanders feel the need to abruptly leave an interview over such a simple question? That's my point.

Just to clarify, was your deception intentional or incidental?

[DrScholl]

Sanders abruptly walked out of an interview when the reporter asked about his wife meeting with Joe Arpaio

You're making it sound like Jane Sanders and Joe Arpaio have political agreement, I'm just wondering if this deception is intentional or incidental?

Why did Sanders feel the need to abruptly leave an interview over such a simple question? That's my point.

Just to clarify, was your deception intentional or incidental?

What is your problem? I wasn't being deceptive, that your misinterpretation. I was wondering why Jane Sanders was meeting with Arpaio in the first place, but for Sanders to throw a diva fit about a mere question made me question it even more. Considering that Arpaio is a right-wing nut, it's fitting that there would be questions about the meeting. I never said anyone had an agreement.

[Averroës Nix]

If you'd bothered to read anything about the meeting aside from the Clinton campaign's disingenuous  concern trolling, you would know that the encounter between Arpaio and Jane Sanders was unplanned. See here. He saw Jane Sanders when she was visiting "Tent City" and offered her a tour. She accepted the offer and used her time with Arpaio to ask him about conditions in the camp and racial profiling.

[Ebowed]

Sanders abruptly walked out of an interview when the reporter asked about his wife meeting with Joe Arpaio

You're making it sound like Jane Sanders and Joe Arpaio have political agreement, I'm just wondering if this deception is intentional or incidental?

Why did Sanders feel the need to abruptly leave an interview over such a simple question? That's my point.

Just to clarify, was your deception intentional or incidental?

What is your problem? I wasn't being deceptive, that your misinterpretation. I was wondering why Jane Sanders was meeting with Arpaio in the first place, but for Sanders to throw a diva fit about a mere question made me question it even more. Considering that Arpaio is a right-wing nut, it's fitting that there would be questions about the meeting. I never said anyone had an agreement.

My problem is that for several months I've read your posts which are among some of the worst, most misleading and dishonest talking points being used by anybody here, and I just have to ask - what purpose does it serve you to spread misleading information?

In the time that you've taken to write these posts about Jane Sanders and Joe Arpaio, you could have done some basic research and found the answers to your questions.  But those answers don't match the narrative that you are attempting to put forward here, so once again: are you writing these posts because you are attempting to intentionally deceive, or are you being genuine?  If the latter, then it's not a waste of my time to discuss the issue as you have presented it.  If it's the former, I just want to make sure so that I can put you on ignore and not further waste my time.

[Lyin' Steve]

He spent a good part of his Arizona defeat speech tonight attacking Clinton.  With that and his choice to spend the whole week going after Clinton's superdelegates and trying to convince everyone that she'll lose to Trump, it looks like all those who voted No are on track for an easy victory, just like Hillary.

[Gass3268]

He spent a good part of his Arizona defeat speech tonight attacking Clinton.  With that and his choice to spend the whole week going after Clinton's superdelegates and trying to convince everyone that she'll lose to Trump, it looks like all those who voted No are on track for an easy victory, just like Hillary.

[Landslide Lyndon]

He spent a good part of his Arizona defeat speech tonight attacking Clinton.  With that and his choice to spend the whole week going after Clinton's superdelegates and trying to convince everyone that she'll lose to Trump, it looks like all those who voted No are on track for an easy victory, just like Hillary.

As long as there are gullible people to give him money and he is surrounded by sycophants like Devine who pay themselves 1 million a month from the campaign coffers, don't expect the old codger showing any signs of dignified acceptance.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

He spent a good part of his Arizona defeat speech tonight attacking Clinton.  With that and his choice to spend the whole week going after Clinton's superdelegates and trying to convince everyone that she'll lose to Trump, it looks like all those who voted No are on track for an easy victory, just like Hillary.

Um I watched the speech. Yes part of a campaign is to defeat the opponent you see people on both sides attacking each other. The sad thing is most of his speech was positive and him on the issues so your not even accurate. The hatred of Bernie is strong coming from you.

[Lyin' Steve]

Ayyyy anyone remember this thread?

70-28 Atlas.  Boy were you wrong.

[Desroko]

Ayyyy anyone remember this thread?

70-28 Atlas.  Boy were you wrong.

Guy gives one bad interview and loses his sh**t. Jesus.

[Antonio the Sixth]

So far, he's been more gracious in (virtually assured) defeat than Hillary has been in (virtually assured) victory. Which really says all you need to know about her.

[Oakvale]

It's looking increasingly likely that he'll refuse to accept defeat and try to steal the nomination somehow.

[Landslide Lyndon]

It's looking increasingly likely that he'll refuse to accept defeat and try to steal the nomination somehow.

His campaign manager is still delusionaly talking about a contested convention.
Someone should inform him that when there are only 2 candidates running one of them will eventually get a majority of delegates.

[Blair]

It's looking increasingly likely that he'll refuse to accept defeat and try to steal the nomination somehow.

[Orser67]

Things have gotten a little testier lately, but I'd still bet on him endorsing Clinton. Assuming Clinton wins and the Democrats take the Senate, Sanders would end up as the new Chairman of the Budget Committee, so they both have incentives to get along.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

You may dislike Sanders, but he's not an idiot. He knows it wouldn't benefit him at all.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

If "gracious in defeat" means putting his support behind Hillary Clinton, he would never do that.  At no point will he endorse her or call for party unity.  He has no interest in the Democratic Party at all, except as a vehicle for his own message.

[Bojack Horseman]

Here's what it will sound like: https://youtube.com/watch?v=2jDcPbSCluA

The 2016 convention will probably have a lot of Sanders signs on the delegate floor, unfortunately.

[The Other Castro]

Here's what it will sound like: https://youtube.com/watch?v=2jDcPbSCluA

The 2016 convention will probably have a lot of Sanders signs on the delegate floor, unfortunately.

Funny, even Kennedy starts his speech with "Let me say a few words".

[Xing]

I know some Hillary folks here get a hard-on whenever Sanders is critical of Clinton, since that "proves" that they're right about him being a spiteful old coot. But I still stand by my claim that when this race is actually over, i.e. when Clinton clinches a majority of delegates, he'll concede defeat and be gracious about it. I know many of you would love more evidence that Sanders is a vile human being, but sorry, he isn't.

[Oak Hills]

If "gracious in defeat" means putting his support behind Hillary Clinton, he would never do that.  At no point will he endorse her or call for party unity.  He has no interest in the Democratic Party at all, except as a vehicle for his own message.

He's endorsed every Democratic presidential nominee since Mondale. Why would that change now?

[RaphaelDLG]

If "gracious in defeat" means putting his support behind Hillary Clinton, he would never do that.  At no point will he endorse her or call for party unity.  He has no interest in the Democratic Party at all, except as a vehicle for his own message.

He's endorsed every Democratic presidential nominee since Mondale. Why would that change now?

[Lyin' Steve]

Ayyyy, remember when everyone hated on me for making this thread? 

I'm 'trying to pick a fight' because you are a mindless hack and troll who has done nothing that will leave any meaningful impact on this website.

[Gass3268]

He's being just as gracious as the Clinton campaign was at this point in 2008.