Bullish on Bernie: The Bernie Sanders 2016 Thread II

TragicMonkey said:
How do you interpret the statement "how embarrassing"? If it's not a compliment, it's not an insult, it's not neutral...what is it? A flirtation? What else is there? I'm interested in what options there are besides positive, negative, and neutral.
Click to expand...
Are you now agreeing that your position is that any criticism is trashing, at least when aimed at Sanders (pbuh)?

It was a criticism, but a very mild one.
 
wareyin said:
Are you now agreeing that your position is that any criticism is trashing, at least when aimed at Sanders (pbuh)?
Click to expand...

No, I am not. A criticism couched in terms of "you ought to be embarrassed" does fit my definition of "trashing". It was an appeal to what the poster imagines to be a emotionally critical issue to people here, i.e. science. It implied Sanders supporters ought to feel shame because of it.

As for your ridiculous "pbuh", you are attempting to portray me as a blind worshipper of Sanders. That is not the case and it is dishonest of you, as well as childish, to keep suggesting I am.

It was a criticism, but a very mild one.
Click to expand...

I didn't realize one could respond only to severe criticisms.
 
TragicMonkey said:
No, I am not. A criticism couched in terms of "you ought to be embarrassed" does fit my definition of "trashing". It was an appeal to what the poster imagines to be a emotionally critical issue to people here, i.e. science. It implied Sanders supporters ought to feel shame because of it.
Click to expand...

It appears your definition of "trashing" is far, far milder than mine.

TragicMonkey said:
As for your ridiculous "pbuh", you are attempting to portray me as a blind worshipper of Sanders. That is not the case and it is dishonest of you, as well as childish, to keep suggesting I am.
Click to expand...

Your constant portrayals of everyone else as "us vs them", or "trashing" your favored candidate by stating any honest and accurate criticism of his positions says otherwise.

TragicMonkey said:
I didn't realize one could respond only to severe criticisms.
Click to expand...

Well, let me know if anyone ever bothers to give a severe criticism against Sanders, and we will see.
 
How protesters are preparing for the DNC

"Cops will do and can do whatever they want" - but be prepared anyway.

That was the message Saturday afternoon - not at a protest, but at training to prepare for one. It was the first of four training sessions in preparation for the Democratic National Convention.

Brianna Jones, 31, is the director of the Democratic National Convention Action Committee, a coalition that plans to support demonstrators. She said she attended Saturday's training in order to express her committee's solidarity with "more militant" protesters.

"We expect the numbers will be larger than any Facebook event implies," Jones said.

Read more:
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20160710_How_to_prepare_for_a_protest.html (July 10, 2016)
Click to expand...


"The democratic party has pushed Bernie out more and more and more but HE is the will of the people. HE is the honesty, character, democracy, and voice for all of us we thought would never happen. He is here now. WE WILL NEVER EVER give up Bernie. We need EVERYONE to come to Philly in ‪#‎s‬ so high they learn to NEVER EVER underestimate us again. We can't be ignored. Our voices matter!

"IMPORTANT: While in Philly we will have events to raise $150,000 - $200,000 to help us enroll 20 million young disenfranchised voters for Bernie all over this country by Oct 2016 and THIS will allow him to WIN in November no matter what ticket he is on!!!!"

-- Occupy DNC founder Laurie Cestnick (July 10, 2016)
 
Slings and Arrows said:
"The democratic party has pushed Bernie out more and more and more but HE is the will of the people. HE is the honesty, character, democracy, and voice for all of us we thought would never happen. He is here now. WE WILL NEVER EVER give up Bernie. We need EVERYONE to come to Philly in ‪#‎s‬ so high they learn to NEVER EVER underestimate us again. We can't be ignored. Our voices matter!

"IMPORTANT: While in Philly we will have events to raise $150,000 - $200,000 to help us enroll 20 million young disenfranchised voters for Bernie all over this country by Oct 2016 and THIS will allow him to WIN in November no matter what ticket he is on!!!!"

-- Occupy DNC founder Laurie Cestnick (July 10, 2016)
Click to expand...

And yet Bernie is stumping for her Sunday I believe. Hmmmm....
 
Foolmewunz said:
No one's questioning any of this. It was a discussion with Trakar about how brutal the attacks were on Bernie. Those were powder puff attacks. Nothing compared to what the GOP would have attacked him with. It's been a repeated point that many of us have been trying to get through to some of the more stubborn and, to their credit, loyal Bernie supporters. Clinton's people hyping her own selling points or downplaying his is certainly not a "rabid" attack. The Dems went very easy on him and so did the GOP. But the GOP wouldn't have continued to do so if he actually took the nomination.
Click to expand...

Please link to where I used or implied anything amounting to the adjective "brutal."

Strong - having the power to move heavy weights or perform other physically demanding tasks.
synonyms: powerful, muscular, brawny, powerfully built, strapping, sturdy, burly, heavily built, meaty, robust, athletic, tough, rugged, lusty, strong as an ox/horse; More​

Rabid - having or proceeding from an extreme or fanatical support of or belief in something.
synonyms: extreme, fanatical, overzealous, extremist, maniacal, passionate, fervent, overkeen, diehard, uncompromising, illiberal;​

whereas

Brutal - savagely violent.
synonyms: savage, cruel, vicious, ferocious, brutish, barbaric, barbarous, wicked, murderous, bloodthirsty, cold-blooded, callous, heartless, ruthless, merciless, sadistic;​


Though, now I think I may understand your accusation of hyperbole better, people are often prone to accuse others of that which they tend to habitually engage.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Good heavens! Well, let's all support Hillary instead. Sure, she was all about invading Iraq, but she apparently has the correct approved position on labelling potato chips so that's just fine.

I wonder exactly when Clinton's more irritating supporters will finally feel confident enough in their candidate to stop trying to trash Sanders?
Click to expand...

Not until after we've spent another decade or two involved in Democratic party wars in the middle east costing trillions more in US taxes and millions of ME lives, not to mention the costs of liberty, property and lives in the US due to the terrorism responses to that continued insult of occupation and chaos.
 
wareyin said:
Are you certain that Sanders supporters are supposed to feel "embarrassed" because of one single position that he holds? I thought this was just one example among many previously provided.

Still, if pointing out a flawed understanding by Sanders amounts to "trashing" him, this may explain why Sanders supporters seem to think he was "attacked" (see Trakar at the top of the page for an example).
Click to expand...

I am not a Sanders supporter, and have already stated that I will not vote for him or support his election, because of the very anti-science positions you mention. But I never supported sanders as much as I support many of the public policy proposals that he supported. I still support those policies and would support Hillary, if she adopted and could prove that she would expend political capital in the pursuit of such even if it hurt her politically.
 
acbytesla said:
And Bernie knows all this and that is why he wouldn't do it. He remembers that that election resulted in George W. Bush becoming President. And unlike Nader, Bernie is a United State's Senator. A Senator that caucuses with the Democrats.
Click to expand...

More than that, he has joined, and is a major leader within, the Democratic Party.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
So you would have Sanders split the Democratic vote assuring a Trump win?

Sounds more of a sellout than your version.
Click to expand...

Only to those who are more worried short-term gains and the letter after a candidate's name than the public policies they promote
 
Trakar said:
That's the price you pay when you sellout your beliefs in order to join the establishment.
Click to expand...

I don't think Bernie is "selling out". In fact, you have no idea who Bernie is if you think that is what he is doing. Bernie is not nor ever has been motivated by money.He cares about people and understands that sometimes requires compromise. Compromise is not selling out. It's not a dirty word.

I've been involved in Democratic party politics for 40 years and idealogical purists annoy the hell out of me. Something is better than nothing. What did voting for Nader and the Greens get them in 2000? George W. Bush, anti environment, anti labor, no minimum wage hikes, a mortgage meltdown, two wars, a hundred billion dollar surplus that became a multi-trillion dollar deficit...etc..etc.
 
TragicMonkey said:
...Personally, I think it's because they fear Trump will win...
Click to expand...

Yes.

TragicMonkey said:
...Personally, I think it's because they fear Trump will win, and they experience mental relief from that by continuing to maul Sanders' corpse. And no doubt that if Trump does win, they'll blame Sanders for it...
Click to expand...


I believe it's due more to the Bernie supporters declaring that they will not vote for anyone even if it means Trump wins.

That and the "You Hillary supporters aren't ideological pure enough", thing.

If it means anything, the Dems won't blame Bernie if Trump wins they'll blame his supporters. And I ain't talking about the athletic kind ...
 
Elagabalus said:
I believe it's due more to the Bernie supporters declaring that they will not vote for anyone even if it means Trump wins.
Click to expand...

I believe the number of Sanders supporters who will abstain from voting will be quite small, much smaller than the number of Sanders supporters who will vote, however reluctantly, for Clinton. Clinton's own supporters will still vote for her, presumably.

However, my concern is that Trump votes will outweigh the Clinton votes, even if 100% of the former Sanders supporters vote for Clinton.
 
Trakar said:
Please link to where I used or implied anything amounting to the adjective "brutal."

Strong - having the power to move heavy weights or perform other physically demanding tasks.
synonyms: powerful, muscular, brawny, powerfully built, strapping, sturdy, burly, heavily built, meaty, robust, athletic, tough, rugged, lusty, strong as an ox/horse; More​

Rabid - having or proceeding from an extreme or fanatical support of or belief in something.
synonyms: extreme, fanatical, overzealous, extremist, maniacal, passionate, fervent, overkeen, diehard, uncompromising, illiberal;​

whereas

Brutal - savagely violent.
synonyms: savage, cruel, vicious, ferocious, brutish, barbaric, barbarous, wicked, murderous, bloodthirsty, cold-blooded, callous, heartless, ruthless, merciless, sadistic;​


Though, now I think I may understand your accusation of hyperbole better, people are often prone to accuse others of that which they tend to habitually engage.
Click to expand...

Nitpicking is fun. I used "brutal" instead of "rabid". Big deal. It doesn't change the fact that you are wrong and gave examples of rather typical in-fighting among party politicians.

For all intents and purposes, it's a synonym. You think gaslighting is cool? I guess that's not part of your litmus tests for what makes a candidate politically correct. "Rabid" has major connotations of "insane".

And you totally missed the point. Had Bernie won the nomination, "brutal" was coming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom