Jane Sanders' Tweet on GE Day.. "How We Voted is Not as Important as that we voted"

[Cha]

Last edited Sat Mar 21, 2020, 07:18 PM - Edit history (2)

Wrong.

* EDITED TITLE to Highlight Jane's tweet..*]

Link to tweet

[ucrdem]

1. Disturbing.

Because it does not bode well for Nov. 2020. And we really, really need to do better this time.

[Cha]

3. No it doesn't.. And, I think it's important to highlight

how BS is conducting his business.. he's busy smearing Joe Biden now with trump's name and it's only July 2019.

I like it when Dems show they are all in for beating trump not just for themselves. I'm sure if another candidate gets to be in 1st place besides Biden that they will get the same treatment.

I want a candidate who thinks about the importance of our country and our Planet.

One of those candidates would be Joe Biden..

The former vice president told the audience, “I hope you’ll vote for me,” but also highlighted that if he doesn’t win the nomination, “whoever our nominee is, I’m going to break my neck to make sure they get elected.”

Mahalo, ucr!

Oh yeah, and Biden is kind hearted and generous, too!

Link to tweet

Goth! https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=208389

[Gothmog]

250. I am also a little worried

[Cha]

271. Who wouldn't be after

these years of the monster in the wh?

It's wise to be worried and take action!

[NurseJackie]

317. Thank you!

[Cha]

446. Aloha, Jackie..

I just update the OP title to highlight jane's tweet.. Mahalo for the reminder to kick it up!

Now more Relevant than Ever.

[NurseJackie]

452. It was unforgivable.

[Cha]

453. It reminded me about

karma yesterday.

[Cha]

457. I UPDATED the title..

Mahalo, ucr

[NurseJackie]

463. Thank you.

We should never forget.

[Cha]

464. Thank You, Jackie, for helping..

JS tweeted it.. she owns it.

It's wrong.. It's ultimately Important who you Vote FOR.. Elections Can Have Dire Consequences.

[Cha]

4. It most Certainly is the General

Election we're talking about, Vegas.. Thank You!

This Tweet didn't age well for Sanders.

[Cha]

238. No it didn't! Oooops, Wrong

place!

[SunSeeker]

5. Wow.

[Cha]

84. Yeah..

the Sanders' tweets.

[SunSeeker]

85. I have never seen these before. I was immersed in phone banking for Hillary at the time.

Last edited Tue Jul 23, 2019, 02:50 AM - Edit history (1)

I really am shocked by these tweets, especially that Sanders' tweet came just 3 days before the general election, and after that God awful Comey letter all but derailed Hillary's campaign. Her campaign was hanging by a thread. Who knows how many crucial swing state votes Sanders' tweet may have cost Hillary, or given Trump. All while I tediously dialed numbers hoping to get out just one Democratic voter who might not have bothered to go out and vote for Hillary.

I'm angry, but it is also excruciatingly painful. These are supposed to be our allies.

[Cha]

103. I want to Thank You So Much,

SunSeeker, for the Important Phone Banking you did for Hillary and a heartfelt Thanks, also, to every single person who GOTV for our Democratic Candidate Against the Monster trump.. 66 Million People knew it was important to vote for Hillary.

I'd like to know why he was doing this 3 days before the General Election? What was his point?

And, the 2nd tweet.. why didn't she know how mportant it was to vote for the Democratic Candidate against trump?

[Hortensis]

165. +100, SunSeeker. We'll never know how many nonvoters would

voted if he wasn't making many criticisms from the left similar to the Republicans' from the right, all augmented by Russia and crooked biased media, of course. A perfect storm gusting from all directions.

He already had a decades-long history of being what he is, though, and I'm sure our party leaders hoped, rather than expected, that he'd be less oppositional while running on the Democratic ticket than from outside.

[Cha]

235. Precisely, Hortensis.. Thank you!

[Gothmog]

199. I missed these tweets also

I was in the voter protection war room protecting the vote

[Cha]

221. Thank you for what you were doing, Goth!

:patrot:

[Cha]

343. Thank you for doing that.. we need all

the help we can get.

Not giving excuses to trump voters.

[Dream Girl]

329. He was giving his blessing to vote third party.

Despicable.

[Cha]

344. Thank you!

[Cha]

468. It sure wasn't helping the Democratic Candidate.

and yes.

[Hekate]

340. There are deep reasons some of us are not big fans of his...

He (and Jane) gave permission to their followers to vote for anybody but Hillary if their "heart" told them to.

As an Independent, he caucuses with the Dems in the Senate, but he also reserves his most ardent criticisms for Dems, because somehow they (we) never measure up his standards. Party unity is something that does not apply to him.

I am not relitigating the 2016 election, only stating that past is prologue. I will vote for whoever becomes our nominee -- because my head tells me to.

[SunSeeker]

342. Yep. nt

[Cha]

347. Exactly, Hekate.. Mahalo nui loa!

[Cha]

449. And, still very much

relevant.

Thank you, SunSeeker.

[SunSeeker]

450. Indeed. Even more so. nt

[Cha]

241. Aloha, SunSeeker..

I hope you don't mind.. I want to keep this kicked for those who may not have seen this yet.

[SunSeeker]

243. Be my guest!

[Cha]

244. Mahalo!

My goal is to keep it kicked until the GE2020.

[SunSeeker]

245. Works for me. nt

[Cha]

247. ...

It's that time again.

Mahalo

[SunSeeker]

249. ...

[Cha]

363. ..

[SunSeeker]

365. I imagine Biden will be scooping up a chunk of Kamala's supporters. nt

[Cha]

366. We'll see.. he's been very eloquent

about her departure today.

Mahalo, SunSeeker!

[Cha]

381. It's that time again..

[SunSeeker]

382. Yep. nt

[betsuni]

7. How can one's own words be an attack?

[Cha]

8. JHC! Can you believe it?!

smh Thank You, betsuni!

[betsuni]

9. I haven't figured out how that works.

Maybe we're supposed to think FAKE NEWS.

[Cha]

13. Maybe we're suppose to just..

and stfu? lol

[Cha]

358. Get this OP on the Front Page where

it belongs!

[betsuni]

361. +1

[betsuni]

14. What negative connotations?

Bernie Sanders' own Twitter account and Jane Sanders' own Twitter account are not right-wing sources nor are they fake news.

[Cha]

422. I think he means the negativity is coming from the

actual tweets themselves. lol

[Cha]

20. You think the Sanders' tweets are "negative"?

[NurseJackie]

35. Oh brother!

Quoting a BS and JS tweet (their own words, full and complete) is now considered "attacking"? GMAFB!

[Cha]

120. lol.. I guess he felt

he had to try.

[Cha]

115. No, you're wrong.

[Cha]

131. That tweet is

indefensible.

[Cha]

206. The Tweets speak for themselves.

[Cha]

239. It's called "vetting".

[NastyRiffraff]

252. And it's about time Sanders was vetted

Many of us knew exactly who he was in 2016. The media ignored his misogyny and dog whistled bigotry. They're doing better this time, other than a few die-hards (Looking at you, Chris Hayes).

[Cha]

254. Thank you!

[Cha]

259. Again.. the tweets speak for themselves.

[Cha]

424. Kicking these pertinent tweets..

Thank you!

[SunSeeker]

10. How is posting a candidate's and their spouse's own tweets "attacking"?

[Hortensis]

40. The attack's in our heads for thinking who we voted for DID matter.

Trump or Hillary? Republicans or Democrats?

“We have to ask ourselves, ‘Why should we work within the Democratic Party if we don’t agree with anything the Democratic Party says?’” ~ Bernie Sanders

[SunSeeker]

50. LOL. Yes. Our thinking brains are the culprits!

Mine also insisted on thinking that everyone who voted for Trump was either racist, sexist or both--and that we should never normalize Trump & his voters by suggesting people had valid reasons for voting for him.

[Hortensis]

57. Hm. Maybe this is what the religious right takes for demonic possession.

Just occurred to me to wonder. Pew reports that 7 out of 10 Republicans say Trump's "comments" make them feel pretty good and chose descriptive terms including "entertained, hopeful, excited, respected, inspired, and—somehow—informed."

Demons are clearly involved somehow.

Whatever, it may be just my personal conceit and a massive delusion, but I believe thinking brains are always the biggest obstacle for bad leaders. Whenever I see attempts to smear and deceive, I know the appeal is NOT to my intellect and integrity. And that giant red flag on this one went up long ago.

[silentEcho]

67. Let us not forget.

I think a big proponent of 2016 was the backlash having black in the White House for 8 yrs. Awesome black, of integrity and morality and ethics and family values. Love. Many of us rejoiced, and bathed in the diversity. But, a large faction of the U.S. simmered in hate. I think that was just one of many of the obstacles Clinton adopted in 2016 or was put in front of her to hurtle.

[Hortensis]

124. Agree. The backlash, against imposed legal gay marriage also,

has been serious but also seriously augmented by enemies who've made the most, literally and figuratively, of it.

[Cha]

135. Thank you, silentEcho!

[Cha]

248. It was a wonderful 8 years!

[Cha]

260. Never forget. :(

[Cha]

266. To Remind Everyone Again.

[Cha]

305. Time to kick this classic up

Again!

[Cha]

319. That and russia and stein.

[StevieM]

324. Totally disagree. 2016 was James Comey's election, from start to finish. (eom)

[Cha]

331. Disagree all you want, Stevie.. It wasn't just Comey.. it

was all these factors that have been proven.

[StevieM]

333. Comey was more important than all other factors combined IMO.

A lot more important.

But, of course, every election has multiple factors.

[Cha]

334. Yes, multiple factors.. and Comey was

definitely a huge factor in why we have trump blood on his hands, too.

[PatSeg]

403. Yeah

There were a lot more factors than just Comey. There was plenty of blame to spread around, but I seriously doubt that Comey alone could have handed the election to Trump. We were all there and saw what was happening.

The biggest share of the blame probably would go to Putin, but there is no way to measure it with certainty.

[Cha]

444. Not just comey although he hurt our Democracy exponentially.

[StevieM]

327. I don't think any of this would have prevented us from winning had it not been for Comey. (eom)

[Cha]

367. It all adds up.. and the point is.. it didn't help.

[Cha]

348. Yes, it was .. thank you!

[Cha]

357. Time for this to be front and center again.

Aloha!

[Cha]

359. ..

[Cha]

222. Exactly.. and 3 days before the Election?!

[Cha]

303. Especially 3 days before the most

important election of our lives.. at the time.

'Course that was then and now it's even More Vital.

Mahalo, SunSeeker

[SunSeeker]

304. Yes, now it is even more crucial. Otherwise, the consequences are to horrid to contemplate.

[Cha]

123. Yeah, good ol what's his name.

Thanks, Hortensis

[Hortensis]

125. "if you want to test a man's character, give him power."

Apparently any degree of power, even that of a candidate who lost months before, can be revealing. Of what, of course, can be interpreted as people wish.

[Cha]

216. Yep!

Thank you, Hortensis!

[Cha]

321. Yeah yeah..

'Cause the Democratic Party only brought us all the progressives issues to help People that are available in our ocountry!.

Thanks for the qote, Hortensis.

[Gothmog]

138. I am curious about this claim also

[Cha]

265. ..

Kick!

[Cha]

297. I'm just gonna

kick this again..!

[mr_lebowski]

12. It's his and his wife's own words not an attack, & also there's no mention of how his wife voted ...

Maybe you misunderstand the whole twitter thing?

[Cha]

121. Thanks, mr_lebowski!

[trueblue2007]

16. FALSE, FALSE!!!! most people who voted for Trump are probably not racist and sexist.

AND ..... WHAT THE SPOUSE DOES ON THE CAMPAIGN does matter ..... especially when that spouse didn't even vote for the Democrat !!!!!!!


i know what is revolting but i won't type it here.

[Cha]

201. And, why was he doing this

3 days before the General Election?!

[Cha]

18. Not sure why you're "revolted" by

Mrs Sanders' own words?

[Hav]

24. Actually, if the tweet is true, then I am disgusted by her words

And no, she doesn't deserve some special protection as the spouse if she puts herself in this situation.

[Cha]

26. They are most definitely

her own words.

And, I can see why you would be "disgusted".. Just curious what a Sanders' supporter meant by that.

It was a crucial General Election and it mattered very much HOW We VOTED! Would Have Been Helpful!

Mahalo, Hav

[Ponietz]

23. Get real, amigo.

[Cha]

78. Thank you, Ponietz.

[silentEcho]

28. You do not think these words are relevant after these last two years?

[Cha]

127. As we know.. they most

certainly are.

Thank You, silentEcho

[Cha]

225. +Millions!!!

[Cha]

237. We know better.

[Cha]

418. Super Relevant.

[George II]

39. Did you mean "revolting" or "The Revolution"?

[Cha]

224. ..

[Cha]

294. Get this up on the first page

where it belongs.. Thank you, George

[Cha]

318. Thanks, George..

Kicking this to the first page.. again!

[Cha]

346. ...

[sheshe2]

48. I am not a twitter person.

However isn't that blue dot with the white check mark next to their names signifying that they are verified accounts? If that is true then how is this an attack? Twitter is a public forum that anyone can read, retweet or copy. If she did not wish for people to know how she voted, she should not have posted in a public forum.

**edit to add...the delete was a double post**

[Cha]

97. Excellent POINTS, she!

Thank You!

[sheshe2]

98. ;)

I have no clue how someones statement on a public forum could be construed as an attack since they were that persons own words from a verified account. This isn't a misquote. It wasn't taken out of context by the evil media. It was a statement made by that person on their very own twitter feed.

[Cha]

99. They didn't like

the words.. that's too bad.

It has nothing to do with those who are making sure everyone gets to see them.. as many as possible.

[Politicub]

51. These tweets were posted without commentary. They are his words.

Is running a search on Twitter an attack? It's not like they are from a secret source.

If searching and finding past quotes is somehow an attack, color me guilty.

[Cha]

136. Mahalo, Politicub.

[Celerity]

364. +100000

[still_one]

53. If any self-identified progressive refused to vote for the Democratic nominee in 2016, you are

darn right I will hold that against them.

If nothing else, the Supreme Court was at stake

[silentEcho]

62. Right. The SC. Lives. I am with you on this. Not a little thing, for sure.

[Cha]

205. Thank you, silentEcho!

[Cha]

223. Not to mention the Whole Planet!

[Cha]

144. And, the Planet!

[lapucelle]

154. Here's another "progressive campaign strategist" who was still crowing in 2017

about how proud she is to have done her part to ensure that a Democrat would not be elected in 2016.







I'm so glad I got screen shots of EVERYTHING before the courageous progressive warrior tried to disappear her own record by scrubbing her account.




https://web.archive.org/web/20171201000000*/https://twitter.com/briebriejoy

[betsuni]

180. +1

[Cha]

310. +1x2!

Thank you!

[sheshe2]

181. Well that says it all.

SMDH

[Cha]

219. Ooooops! Did the "proud" jill stein voter want

to delete her proudness?! Did her "face fall" when she realized.. "Screen Shots"?!

Mahalo, lapucelle!

[Cha]

230. Thank you again!

This needs to Not go down the rabbit hole!

[lapucelle]

231. Thanks...

[Cha]

256. ...

Mahalo!

[Cha]

417. KICKING!

[Cha]

267. Can't be reminded of this too much!

Mahalo, lapucelle!

[Cha]

335. Yeah, they should be ASHAMED!

[Cha]

455. Yeah, and look where they are today..

not crowing.

[Cha]

234. ..

Mahalo!

[lunasun]

276. Exactly ! The SC look at it now ...

[Cha]

369. Turns out the whole Planet is at stake, too..

Stein's Lies convinced many that Hillary and trump were the same.. and she got more votes in the Swing states than the amount trump won over Hillary.

So what does BS do.. he hires those who pushed stein for his top staff.. sirotoa, BJG, & turner.

[Cha]

386. Kicking this up top where it belongs.

[trev]

77. On the contrary.

Trump's approval rating among Republicans has gone up. In the 60s if I'm not mistaken.

Sanders means well, but he's mistaken.

[Cha]

246. Yes he is.

[Cha]

370. I'm not sure he does.

[whathehell]

151. +10000

The Bernie hate is pathological.

[Cha]

202. No.. the tweets speak for themselves.

[whathehell]

203. No, like others here

I disagree.

[Cha]

204. The Tweets speak for themselves..

the distractions aren't working.

[whathehell]

207. Maybe, but what they "say"

is frequently filtered through the biases of those listening.

Have a nice one.

[Cha]

208. No.. it's perfectly clear.

[whathehell]

209. No..Personal opinion doesn't necessarily equal Indisputable Fact

and since I've no interest in playing an extended game of "Way" or "No Way", I'll leave it there. Goodbye and good luck.. :

[Cha]

210. Sorry, you're wrong. The tweets speak for

themselves. There's no defense.

[whathehell]

211. Sorry, you're wrong..The tweets speak to the predisposition of the listener

One could play this game of "Way"/"No Way" forever, but as mentioned, I'm really not interested...Buh Bye.

[Cha]

213. 3 days before the General Election. No excuse.

[emmaverybo]

285. The tweets say what they say. It's not that complicated. Sanders had influence. He knew his

words and his wife’s could have consequences. There are no multiple interpretations possible. Plain English. No ambiguities. Not Virginia Woolf exactly. Only thing up for grabs would be was what he said helpful or not to any other interest than his own? If you view what they said as “a good thing” for the election, fine. I don’t see that you get much agreement on that.

[whathehell]

287. Um, no.

and, sorry, but I:m not at all interested in revisiting this old debate.
Have a nice day.

[Cha]

288. Oh Yes.. emmaverybo is Absolutely Right ON.

[Cha]

388. Thank you, emmaverybo.. anybody can

see the problem with BS' tweet 3 days before the most Important election of our life at that point in time.. Except those who don't want to see.

2020!

[Amimnoch]

153. If you think his own words, typed out by him are an "attack"

Perhaps you are supporting the wrong candidate to begin with?

[Cha]

214. Exactly, Amimnoch!

[lunamagica]

15. Cha I still see red remembering it

His intentions were so transparent...having trump win, so he (Sanders) would be the anoited one on '20...

Well, well well, it isn't exactly working out the way he hope, huh?

[Cha]

19. I know, Luna..

So good to see you!

[Cha]

261. Keeping this kicked.

Luna.. like it's "pinned".

Gracias!

[NYMinute]

17. This is extremely and gravely concerning

Why is the Democratic party allowing this candidate to run as a Democrat? He has no loyalty to the Democratic party whatsoever.

Epic mistake.

[Hortensis]

41. The less damaging of two bad options.

Our pros aren't stupid, and they've always known what he is and very likely to do, far better than people who don't have their information about and personal experiences with him.

Sander hasn't changed his mind about what the liberal-dominated Democratic Party is in 50 years, literally the same attitudes now as when he first ran for local office on a very hostile anti-Democratic platform. His current campaign is full of almost daily claims that there's little difference between Republicans and Democrats. After over 40 years of documented statements, I think it's reasonable to accept that he truly believes it, strange as that is.

POLITICO: “I am not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal Democrat,” he said in a profile in New England Monthly." ...

He started as a politician in the 1970s as a perennial protest candidate with the anti-Vietnam War Liberty Union Party, offering voters an alternative to the two major parties, which he considered ineffective and equally beholden to corporate lords... (ME: Sanders couldn't possibly win, but he was able to siphon off a few thousand Democratic votes, helping throw the election to the Republican challenger.)

In ’86, he decided to run for governor, against Madeleine Kunin, which bothered her—Sanders’ “daily diet consisted of vitriol,” she would write in her memoir—and worried many Vermont Democrats, who thought he might peel away enough votes to foil the reelection bid of the state’s first female governor. Democrats, Welch recalled, were “extremely upset.”

Sanders responded by intensifying his invective. ...

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181

[Thekaspervote]

226. And here in lies the truth of it

And again!! Same thing different cycle. Telling reporters that he may not support the nominee, talking about how the press is not fair to him, attacking the other candidates when he said he wouldn’t

[Cha]

300. Hopefully Democracy will Win OUT!

Mahalo, Kasper!

[qazplm135]

58. Because the alternative is an independent run

guaranteeing Trump's election.

[Cha]

387. Yeah, BS didn't do any favors texting

this 3 days before the General Election.. nor did his wife.

[Cha]

443. These tweets are more relevant than ever.

[Cha]

145. Thank you.

[Cha]

217. Thank You, NYMinute.

[Cha]

360. Yes it is.. and so many aren't even aware.

[emmaverybo]

428. This explains Hillary trying to warn us. A reckless lack of judgement, loose grip on reality,

and a near spiteful divisiveness borne of a punishing and revengeful attitude are what strike me as I read over these. I was not aware. Thanks for posting, Cha. This vital documentation should
not be dismissed.

[Cha]

431. Thank you.

[Cha]

432. Too late now

[betsuni]

21. Speaking of Bernie tweets, I saw this one from a few years ago:

"The thing is, the insurance companies and the drug companies are bribing the United States Congress."

If Bernie has proof that any member of Congress has or is receiving bribes, a crime, he should tell us! He should expose such corruption. Why doesn't he?

[lunamagica]

22. Right! By not exposing the corruption he becomes an accomplice

[Cha]

423. Aloha, lunamagica!

[thesquanderer]

60. This is what someone means when they say things like that...

Insurance companies and drug companies give members of congress a lot of money.

These members of congress tend to support legislation that is favorable to the insurance and drug companies.

Most of us in the world recognize this as a kind of bribe, even though the quid pro quo can not be legally proven.

That's our system, and Bernie's not wrong.

[silentEcho]

63. Sanders' vote on waste, F-35, denying Amber, crime bill, guns,

Sanders' dismissing/ignoring/rejecting gay marriage until 2009.

Yes, our politicians represent the people of their state, and also those that donate. We all recognize this. Sanders is not a genius speaking about this. He knows. He experiences it himself, being in the role of a politician. It is there for us to see. The issue with Sanders' is he points the finger at others, and excuses his own.

That is the hypocrisy I see in Sanders career and his campaign.

[thesquanderer]

65. Whataboutism is not a great defense against the corrupt influence of drug and insurance companies.

And voting for the interests of the people who elected you to represent them is different from voting for the interests of the companies who give you the most money.

[silentEcho]

66. It is realty. A statement of fact. I do not get what you are talking with "Whataboutism"

I responded to a post stating Sanders' was right. Ya, ok. So? Nothing new here. Not rocket science. What the true hypocrisy is, not calling your own, while accusing others in the party.

[thesquanderer]

70. I thought you were equating these things, which I do not see as equivalent. (n/t)

[silentEcho]

74. I still do not know what you are talking about. I think I was pretty clear on what I am stating.

[Cha]

146. Yes, it was.. Thank You!

[Cha]

448. Not surprising.

[Thekaspervote]

227. This!

[Cha]

264. Mahalo, kasper!

[Cha]

112. That's not "whataboutism".

[Cha]

390. The OP is about BS' tweet 3 days before

the General Election.

[thesquanderer]

391. But my post was not in reply to the OP, it was in reply to something another poster said.

But if you want to discuss the OP, I find Bernie's tweet to be fine. Not so happy with Jane's "head and heart" thing, though.

[Cha]

393. Yeah, I'm sure you do "find it to be fine".. most

see it for what it is.. why is he doing this 3 days before the most important election of our life up until then.

Why isn't he tweeting to GOTV for Hillary? And, why is his wife tweeting that it's not important who you vote for as long as you vote.

Riddle me that one.

[thesquanderer]

394. re: "why is he doing this 3 days before the most important election of our life"

Because demonizing voters is a damn stupid thing to do. As Hillary learned with her "basket of deplorables" comment. It would be even MORE stupid a mere 3 days before election day.

BTW, even Hillary's comments didn't say ALL Trump voters were in that basket, she said some are and some aren't (there were two baskets). But while her statement and Bernie's statements were to some extent similar (both saying essentially that some are deplorable and some are not), Hillary's colorful phrase emphasized that some (perhaps "half" ) indeed were, while Bernie's less provocative statement emphasized that some--in fact most--were not. Such positivity is more unifying, more inclusive, more appealing to the middle, even more "presidential," less inflammatory. Very importantly, it's less likely to turn off people who may have still been on the fence.

You know how some people right here on DU have made comments along the lines of never supporting candidate X because of how unpleasant they find supporters of candidate X? Think about how some people could react if HRC surrogates (which is what Sanders was at that point, as he had been out campaigning for her) were out there saying "if you vote for Trump, you're a sexist or racist." You're stoking responses like "Who do these self-righteous Dems think they are, telling me that if I vote for Trump, I must be sexist or racist? F*** that, I'm voting for Trump." You do catch more flies with honey.

Here, in fact, is Bernie's full statement, of which you only quoted a portion, so as to provide context:

I do not believe that most of the people who are thinking about voting for Mr. Trump are racist or sexist. Some are, but I think most are people who are hurting, they’re worried about their kids, they’re working longer hours for lower wages. Our job is to reach out to Trump voters to tell them that we’re going to create an economy that works for all of us, not just a few.

So yes, I find Sanders' tweet to be fine. Quite good, actually.

re: "Why isn't he tweeting to GOTV for Hillary?" -- That statement WAS a GOTV for Hillary. You took your piece of it out of context.

re: "why is his wife tweeting that it's not important who you vote for as long as you vote."

First, people often say that (even if they don't mean it). It is a way of appearing magnanimous and unifying, even noble, to say that the most important thing is to participate in the democratic process, because partisanship aside, above all, you believe in your country.

Again, to provide context, her statement was not out of the blue, she was responding to someone who said they had voted for Jill Stein. So okay, what *should* she have said, called her an a**hole?

Even what I considered the more bothersome part of the quote, the head-and-heart part, didn't seem quite as bad once I realized that she was talking to someone who voted for Jill Stein (rather than talking about a possible Trump voter). She was saying "I understand, your head said Hillary, but your heart said Stein" (Stein being the no-chance candidate, who represented a certain kind of idealism). That's not nearly as bad as conceding any possible head OR heart advantage to Trump over Hillary. So in context, it was not as troubling. Still, it's a bit gray, since the choice of the word "many" could possibly imply some deficit on Hillary's part, so I can see being critical there. She could have put it better (maybe "head and heart sometimes at odds" ). But I see no problem at all with Bernie's statement.

Your riddle has been answered!

[Cha]

405. No.. BS didn't need to say anything about

"trump voters" 3 days before the critical election.

He should have been concentrating on Democratic Voters

[thesquanderer]

406. One needs to GOTV for your base, but it's *ALSO* good to persuade fence sitters.

You may disagree. But it is a reasonable perspective.

[Cha]

414. NOPE.. 3 days before the most important election of our

lives at that point.. BS had no business tweeting that nor did his wife the day of the election.

[Cha]

233. So many of us do..

Mahalo, SilentEcho

[betsuni]

76. I thought it's illegal for corporations to give elected officials money directly.

Isn't it? How are members of Congress getting a lot of money from corporations?

[betsuni]

114. I never get an answer to this question.

[thesquanderer]

116. See: "superpacs", "dark money", and "citizens united" (n/t)

[betsuni]

117. I'd like to know which Democrats have been helped by pacs and dark money and

changed their votes because of it. And Karl Rove can set up a pac to help one Democrat over another in the primaries, the candidate has no control over that.

[thesquanderer]

118. Here's where you can look it up

2018 top 20 recipients of money from the pharmaceutical industry, 7 are Dems:

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?cycle=2018&ind=H04

Insurance industry (also 7 of the 20 are Dems):

https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=F09++

and you can look up whatever other sector you want.

Of course proving that someone voted the way they did because they got a big contribution from someone who would benefit from it is pretty much impossible. But common sense says that these industries would not be frittering away millions of dollars on campaign contributions if they didn't think there was some benefit to be had. Even if it's only "so they'll pick up the phone and listen if we call," getting their ears is half the battle, and more than half if the call is from someone in a position to control big chunks of money that can contine to flow into their campaigns, or not.

[Cha]

133. Yeah.. ".. the thing is.. " Where's

the proof, BS?

[Cha]

232. yeah, we'll need proof, BS.

Thanks, betsuni.

[lunamagica]

25. One thing I agree with Jane...We'll work toward a better future together

One in which her husband NEVER becomes POTUS, or the Democratic Nominee!

[spooky3]

27. Shocking and appalling. Thanks for posting, Cha.

[Cha]

111. Mahalo to you, Spooky,

for helping this get exposure. I don't want this to be forgotten.. some didn't even know about it.

Aloha!

[Hav]

29. This is what those who whine

that some candidates just have more supporters within the party and its groups have to understand. There are those like the Clintons who contributed for decades, built friendships and networks and did their best to support every general election candidate. Others say, “Ehh, voting for the Greens is just fine“ and then expect to be treated the same.

[comradebillyboy]

44. There it is...

[Cha]

147. Mahalo, Hav!

[silentEcho]

30. This and so much more is exactly why I and many who are Democratic base would never even consider

Sanders.

[BlueMTexpat]

31. + a million or so! eom

[uponit7771]

128. +1,

[totodeinhere]

411. If he gets the nomination you need to vote for him.

I should not presume to tell you what do to but the alternative is unthinkable. Now if you meant that you would never consider him for the nomination but would vote for him in the GE then that's a different matter.

[BlueMTexpat]

32. Unfortunately, those tweets

remind me just how much I despise SBS & the Bros.

I will never forgive.

[MBS]

37. Ditto n/t

[stonecutter357]

33. K&R

[NurseJackie]

34. Wow! Those two tweets reveal much. And...

Wow! Those two tweets reveal much. And their very own words confirm what I've always believed.

Thank you for sharing them with us. It provides great insight.

[thesquanderer]

64. One of the things I like about Buttigieg...

...is that he is super critical of Trump but does not demonize the people who voted for him. I think that's the right way to go. I think we learned that there is nothing to be gained by calling them deplorable. So I'm not seeing what's so revealing about these tweets.

[NurseJackie]

68. Look harder.

So I'm not seeing what's so revealing about these tweets.

Look harder.

[thesquanderer]

69. Tell me. I'm not getting any younger. (n/t)

[NurseJackie]

73. I think the answer you seek can be gleaned from the overall content of the various replies.

9. Tell me. I'm not getting any younger. (n/t)

I wish I could. I think the answer you seek can be gleaned from the overall content of the various replies. Look at the entirety and the image becomes clearer than simply focusing on one puzzle piece. (That's all I dare say.)

[Cha]

197. Amazing how some just don't

see it, eh Jackie?

We know.. most of the thread knows.. so I Thank you for replying and helping to keep this particular thread kicked for those who do get it.. without having to ask for explanations.

:candle

[Gothmog]

200. I agree

[Cha]

320. Gracias, Goth!

[Thekaspervote]

228. Me too!

And thank you Cha for putting this in the forefront

[MBS]

36. Revealing tweets, and a timely reminder.n/t

[Cha]

196. Thank you, MBS.. for

that important PSA!

[George II]

38. "Head and heart at odds for many"? Not for many Democrats, that's for sure....

....who was she referring to? Nina Turner, Briahna Gray, David Sirota, Killer Mike, Susan Sarandon? Any more?

[Cha]

143. Yeah.

Thanks, George

[Gothmog]

42. It has become very clear that sanders was wrong in this assessment

trump supporters are clearly racists

[lapucelle]

43. "How we voted is not as important as that we voted."

Anyone who cast any vote for any presidential candidate other than the Democrat on November 6, 2016 shares responsibility for anything and everything that flows from the Trump presidency.

History will not exonerate them. They need to take responsibility and apologize.

[NurseJackie]

71. Exactly. If someone's vote (or non vote) doesn't DIRECTLY benefit the Democrat...

Exactly. If someone's vote (or non vote) doesn't DIRECTLY benefit the Democrat, then it benefited Trump.

Fact of the matter is, it DOES matter who you vote for. The winner of the presidential election will come from only ONE of TWO parties. The winner will be either the Democrat or the Republican.

The "Independent" will not win. The "Libertarian" will not win. The "Socialist" will not win. The "Green" will not win.

In our defacto two-party system, ONLY the Democrat or the Republican will win.

[spooky3]

45. The MSNBC Ari Melber special on the Mueller report

spelled out multiple examples of how trolls manipulated Trump and Sanders supporters. Definitely worth a watch if repeated.

[highplainsdem]

46. K&R! Thanks, Cha! Very important reminder...

[Cha]

80. Yes it is.. And,

there's going to be a constant reminder of this.. if I have anything to say about it.

Mahalo, highplainsdem!

[sheshe2]

49. Thanks, Cha.

Good reminder.

[SouthernProgressive]

52. Wow. NT

[Cha]

215. Yeah.

[Cha]

258. I miss you!

[SHRED]

54. Susan Sarandon would be proud ...nt

[Cha]

100. No doubt.

[Cha]

456. I miss you!

[pandr32]

55. Good find, Cha!

Aloha, and it is important that we remember how B and J Sanders conducted themselves in the not-so-long-ago past and look at how they conduct themselves now.

There is no doubt that tRump IS both racist and sexist--as are most supporters. It is wide open for all to witness on a daily basis. To give cover to those considering voting for him is shocking. We need to ask why.

[Farmer-Rick]

56. Wow, a lot of people just didn't understand Trump

They didn't realize this psychopath was far more evil and destructive than he and the FBI let on.

Thanks Comey, you useless tool.

[aikoaiko]

59. Even Hillary only thought half were deplorables.

[Quixote1818]

148. They are just looking for a reason to be upset with BS. nt

[Gothmog]

155. There are good reasons why sanders polling numbers have crashed

[Quixote1818]

306. The same people who are upset with this had no problem with this

I am really getting tired of the double standard with so many lately.


https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/02/politics/elizabeth-warren-dnc-rigged/index.html

[Cha]

447. i'm tried of jane sanders' tweet.

[DesertRat]

61. "How we voted not as important as that we voted"

Jane could not be more wrong about that. Both of these tweets were breathtakingly wrong.

[Cha]

356. & 3 days before the most important election

of our lives at that time! What was he thinking?!

[corbettkroehler]

72. The Sanders Were Correct In 2016 - The Same Facts Won't Hold In 2020

Last edited Mon Feb 24, 2020, 09:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Because voters have had ample opportunity to see through the lies.

[Gothmog]

75. How was sanders correct?

Every study that I have seen show that trump won due to racial resentment and racist voters. It is clear that sanders was totally and completely wrong in this claim

Link to tweet

[SunSeeker]

86. Thank you Gothmog.

Every Trump voter is racist, sexist, or both. EVERY FUCKING ONE OF THEM.

[corbettkroehler]

87. All We Have To Do Is Look At The Trump Voters Sanders Currently Pursues In The Primary

He just finished a swing through multiple tiny burgs in Iowa. There were voters wearing MAGA hats still request Sanders' autographs. Further, he has reported them as decent, hardworking people. Would bigots truly turn out to hear a speech by, and request selfies with, a Jewish candidate for the White House? What would other Nazis think of that.

The bottom line is that, for sure, SOME Trump voters in 2016 cast their ballot for him because they hate Mexicans, et al. However, exit polling and downstream research has concluded that many others voted for Trump because they couldn't vote for Bernie in the general. That proves beyond any doubt that, in 2016, many Trump voters weren't racists.

[Gothmog]

89. There is no polling to support this claim

trump voters are all racists and for sanders to win the support of these voters means that sanders will lose the support of African American voters. As is, sanders is not doing well with African American voters and so it is very unlikely that sanders will be the nominee

[corbettkroehler]

90. Would Newsweek Pique Your Interest? (Located Within 2 Seconds Via Google)

Bernie Sanders Voters Helped Trump Win and Here's Proof

http://newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

[Gothmog]

92. Yes sanders supporters also helped to elect trump

[corbettkroehler]

105. And The Point Was That Only A Portion Of Those 2016 Trump Voters Were Racist

Last edited Wed Jul 24, 2019, 11:53 AM - Edit history (1)

That was Bernie's tweet and he was right.

[Cha]

106. No, BS was wrong to tweet that out.

[corbettkroehler]

107. What Amount Of Hard And Fast Proof Would Steer You Right? (n/t)

[Cha]

108. Forget it.. I'm dead on..

It was 3 days before the Vital Election.. Comey had come out.. Why was BS concerning himself about trump voters in any way, shape, or form?

[corbettkroehler]

109. Sen. And Mrs. Sanders Sent That Tweet In Response To Critics

They tried to repel guilt by association. Even though Bernie had campaigned hard for Hillary in the general, it was known that many Sanders voters would cast their ballot for Trump because the early voting returns indicated such. The accusation that all Trump voters were racist meant, by extension, that, had Sanders secured the nomination, some people who would have voted for him in the general were racist. Given that he would have become the first Jewish-American president with that victory, it was counterintuitive to accept that a majority of 2016 Trump voters were racist. Many were, but far from all.

[Cha]

362. Uh No..

[Cha]

441. That does not compute.. they voted for a racist.

[silentEcho]

93. 1 in 10 Sanders supporter voted for Trump.

[MineralMan]

198. And that was enough.

[Cha]

81. They were absolutely not correct.

[Cha]

371. NO they were NOT.. they were WRONG WRONG WRONG.

[Cha]

445. Did you read her tweet? "It's not important who

you vote for"?

[nini]

79. I still think there's something very suspicious going on with them

*adjusts tinfoil hat*

I expect to be fully vindicated on that too when this country gets corrected again. Though I may not see this in my lifetime things are so bad.

[ecstatic]

83. +1000. Starts with a C and ends with a d. nt

[JI7]

94. deblasio and gabbard are part of it

it's different from the other infighting which is more like there usual primary fights and candidates trying to get ahead.

[nini]

95. I agree... especially Gabbard

I have a friend who has fallen for her nonsense. He's lost his mind.

[silentEcho]

96. I have one too. I do not get it. He also is whining that he as a white man is being discriminated

against. I do not understand this thinking.

[R B Garr]

82. Wow! JS looks to be admitting they didn't vote for

the Democrat...? Thanks for showing these tweets, Cha. This is shameful. Maybe someone could ask them to explain.

[dalton99a]

88. Great timing.

[Cha]

91. Thanks, dalton..

I thought so.

[oasis]

101. "How we voted not as important as that we voted."

[Cha]

102. Somebody didn't

think it was important to vote for the Democratic Candidate in one of the most Important Elections of our Life.

Now as it happens the one in 2020 is the most Important Life and Death one.. and as Joe Biden says..

The former vice president told the audience, “I hope you’ll vote for me,” but also highlighted that if he doesn’t win the nomination, “whoever our nominee is, I’m going to break my neck to make sure they get elected.”

Mahalo, ucr!

Oh yeah, and Biden is kind hearted and generous, too!

Link to tweet

Goth! https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=208389

[oasis]

104. So many times Bernie spoke with passion about keeping Trump

out of the White House. Jane's aloof statement doesn't square with any of that, especially coming days before such an "important" election.

[NurseJackie]

110. Still disturbing to read that.

It's a good reminder of things that I already know. And a good lesson for people who may not have been paying attention.

[yardwork]

113. Wrong again, Bernie.

[NurseJackie]

122. True. Thank you.

[rufus dog]

119. I am shocked with the Stein vote

It was obvious at the time that JS was tied to Russia. The picture with Flynn and Putin in Moscow was well circulated.

How could any true liberal support anyone who was getting support from Russia?!!!!

[Gothmog]

139. A vote for Jill Stein was a vote for trump

[oasis]

126. Kick for pre-debate review. nt

[Cha]

130. Mahalo, oasis..

I'm going to try to keep this Kicked until the primaries are over!

[uponit7771]

129. In 16 Wasn't Sanders also helped ... By the? Tia

[LiberalFighter]

132. He should had been supporting the Democratic nominee 100%.

Those tweets were not. He gave them an excuse to vote for Trump.

[Go Vols]

142. Equal support?

PHILADELPHIA —Democrats arrived at their nominating convention on Sunday under a cloud of discord as Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, abruptly said she was resigning after a trove of leaked emails showed

party officials conspiring to sabotage the campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/25/us/politics/debbie-wasserman-schultz-dnc-wikileaks-emails.html

[Cha]

220. The tweets speak for themselves.

No excuses.

[Cha]

385. Exactly!

[Lordquinton]

134. Why do you call that tweet BS?

I get what Sanders is saying, even though I don't 100% agree with it. It was a different time and he was doing what everyone was trying to do, reach out to more voters.

And Jane is right, more involvement is better, and works out for the Dems in the end, and sinks republicans, it's fact. I mean, people keep pushing the meme that third party voters cost us, but the facts dont' support that line of thinking.

[NurseJackie]

137. Oh brother.

That's not reaching out. And what Jane was doing was providing cover and justification... giving permission to not vote for the Democrat.

people keep pushing the meme that third party voters cost us, but the facts dont' support that line of thinking.

It's no "meme" and it's no "myth" ... the facts do support that "line of thinking". GMAFB!

[Cha]

141. Exactly, Jackie!

Do you even believe that? "GMAFB" is right!

[Voltaire2]

159. So Clinton apologizing for her deplorables remark, what was that?

[StevieM]

326. A minor moment.

The Basket of Deplorables was turned into a much bigger deal after the election was over than it ever was during the campaign.

During the election it never rose to the level of Mitt Romney's 47 percent gaffe, or even Barack Obama saying they get bitter and cling to their gun or their religion. People were more troubled by the fact that she fell down on 9/11.

Besides, as you said, she retracted the statement. Trump said much more horrible things, and never withdrew them or apologized. If this type of stuff was what the election was about, we would have won easily.

2016 was all about James Comey and the fake email scandal.

[Cha]

140. No.. Jane Sanders is Wrong.. it

was very important who we voted for.. she should know that.

That tweet is a BS tweet for Bernie Sanders.. his initials.. now do get it?

BS wasn't ".. reaching out to more voters.."

[Quixote1818]

149. Looks like your great response got under their skin by the angry responses LOL

Nice job!

[betsuni]

150. "They" are Democrats.

[Gothmog]

156. There are a large number of real Democrats who have long memories

These real Democrats will not forgive or forget

[betsuni]

179. Yes.

Will not forgive or forget.

[DaDeacon]

152. Brothers and sisters ...you are being played!

First off this post is completely inflammatory and has one Purpose to manipulate people who feel Sanders is somehow not loyal enough to the Democratic Party. The post implies a connection to Jane Sanders comment on her vote (a private choice btw) and sanders saying the majority of Trumps voters were not racist.
We need to address both implications and why the juxtaposition is unnecessary.
Many studies have concluded that there was a connection between American racial concerns and the motivations of Trumps 2016 voter base however this correlation does not mean the majority of his base were racist at the time of the last election. Honestly if you have been misinformed about black lives matter and you believe it might be a radical group (Fox news viewers) you might support a president who does not support them. Your ignorance there doesn’t make you a racist however it creates a composite of the racial motivation when you voted. The examples of this could get really long but the reality is that having racial concerns and being a racist aren’t the same thing, with many headline grabbing studies reflecting this once you read them Beyond the headlines.
Secondly it wasn’t too long ago who you voted for was a private choice. Exercising your franchise was between you and the voting booth and while you may support a party who are you voted for was more or less a private affair. Honestly for all we know Jane voted for her husband as a write in. At the end of the day Vermont went for Hillary so who cares.
These two issues alone are non-starters However when you mash them together And look at them out of context they look way more nefarious than they are. It was that grey area this post created and that was the point wasn’t it? To make people make a connection that was never there. Shame on you!

[Voltaire2]

158. Ty.

[lapucelle]

162. I don't think that we "are being played" by an OP that

"has one Purpose to manipulate people"

That's a terrible thing to say about a long time member of our community with a valid point to share.

[DaDeacon]

187. Regardless of what you think.

That's my OP and you don't have to agree with it however it's odd that you ignored my thought on the context of the two "tweets" and defends your relationship with the poster ( BTW I've been a member since 2004).

[lapucelle]

189. Regardless of what you think, there is no requirement

that members address anyone's purported "reasons" for launching baseless personal accusations against other members.

[DaDeacon]

190. baseless?!?

OK. I explained what I saw as the context of the post sorry you see it as an attack as I stated nothing about the person who posted it. Oh well, have a good day.

[lapucelle]

191. A baseless personal attack.

Brothers and sisters ...you are being played!

First off this post is completely inflammatory and has one Purpose to manipulate people who feel Sanders is somehow not loyal enough to the Democratic Party

snip==================================================================

It was that grey area this post created and that was the point wasn’t it? To make people make a connection that was never there. Shame on you!

The only thing the OP did was to quote the public statements of one of the current candidates and of his chief advisor in the crucial GOTV period of the 2016 general election.

[DaDeacon]

192. "This Post"

"First off this post"... not this poster THIS POST.

please understand "the post" and "the poster" are different things. There is an argument in my post to get to the "shame on the you" for the post for making readers to make a false connection. Sorry if you don't understand that decision or rather I fear you have chosen to ignore it.

[lapucelle]

194. What does "This Post First off this post... not this poster THIS POST" even mean?

My response was to someone who "thanked you" for the post in which you said:

Brothers and sisters ...you are being played!

First off this post is completely inflammatory and has one Purpose to manipulate people who feel Sanders is somehow not loyal enough to the Democratic Party

[Cha]

433. "Inflamatory"? BS' own words and that of his

wife's own words? Inflammatory?

[DaDeacon]

434. Yes, Correct just like YOU typed Inflammatory!

See what I did there. I used your words out of context and created an endorsement of my own argument with them. Context matters. Cha if you don't see it it's fine just remember that ALL of the candidates of this party can BEAT Trump if we unite and work behind whoever that winner is.

[Cha]

435. Too bad.. maybe BS and his wife shouldn't have

tweeted that if they're so "inflammatory".

[DaDeacon]

436. Whoever has ears, let them hear...

Guess you really can't be reasoned with or even allowed space to support others as your candidate falls further behind in the polls and delegate count. Betting the farm on S.C. may work out ...may not. He's lost 5 times 1,2,3,4,5!!!! Trying to win the nomination. He's behind again and you are so blinded by blame that the idea of supporting the winner WHOEVER it seems unthinkable. I hope Sanders wins BUT if he doesn't I plan to work! I hope you plan the same. It's not about what someone else said it's what YOU are going to. if you need the last word on this you can have it ... I will be phone banking this evening. I hope you are volunteering as much as you are posting on DU.

[Cha]

437. Backatcha

[Cha]

438. Mahalo, lapucelle!!!

".. post inflammatory.. " lol I wonder why?

[lapucelle]

160. Shame on the OP for examining the 2016 GE public statements of one of the current candidates

and the public statements of the person the Burlington Free Press has confirmed is his chief advisor?

Jane Sanders, who also serves as a chief adviser to her husband's presidential campaign, is not compensated for her role at the institute. Her son, David Driscoll, is paid $100,000 a year as co-founder and executive director. Driscoll previously was an executive for Nike and the Vermont snowboarding firm Burton, but had no previous nonprofit experience, according to his LinkedIn profile.

https://bit.ly/33AV0rM


Actually the shame belongs to those who seek to shut down discussions by making baseless accusations against other people with valid points to share.

[Cha]

171. Yep! No "Shame" from me! Quite the Opposite!

Mahalo, lapucelle! :pattriot:

[Cha]

170. Haha! Those are BS' and his wife's OWN WORDS.

[Cha]

174. P.S. DaDeacon.. Thanks for Kicking the OP so

more can see it.

There's no "manipulation" going on per your ridiculous accusation.. Each member can see for themselves what they think of BS' tweet 3 days before the General Election. And, of course, Jane's tweet the day of the General Election.

[DaDeacon]

188. *SMH

If I put a picture of a person with a gun next to a picture of a body on the ground many people will think the two pictures are related. That's how the human mind works. We create relationships and patterns between things when they are presented together. Present each one alone and you got next to nothing.

[Cha]

193. I give DU members more credit than

you do.. the Tweets speak for themselves.

Again.. thanks for the kick.

[DaDeacon]

195. As do I it seems.

[Cha]

419. Yeah.. by BS,

[Voltaire2]

157. Clinton apologizes for calling half of Trump's supporters 'deplorables

The Republican criticism prompted a quick, but partial, apology from Clinton, who said in a statement released early Saturday: “Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that’s never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ -- that was wrong.”

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-clinton-deplorables-20160910-snap-story.html

By the way I think she was wrong to apologize and that Sanders was also wrong to make that claim. But hindsight is 20/20, and at the time is seemed the politically expedient thing to do.

[lapucelle]

161. All sorts of folks (including the press) kept demanding that HRC "take responsibility and apologize"

both during the 2016 GE campaign and after Trump's election. Often it was for short pieces of text taken out of the context broader statements, yielding misleading soundbites that were amplified over and over to serve various agendas

I wish the press would take responsibility and apologize for missing the most important story in a generation -- systematic Russian interference in our election -- because they were too focused on revenue and ratings generating gossip and story lines to pay attention.

I also wish that anyone who touted their support of third party candidates in 2016 or excused others for abrogating their responsibility to keep Trump out of the White House would acknowledge their ownership of Trump's culture of cruelty, his administration's domestic and foreign policies, the bankrupting of our country in the service of making millionaires richer, and the current Supreme Court.

History will not absolve them.

They need to take responsibility and apologize.

[Voltaire2]

163. Both Sanders and Clinton thought that they needed to not alienate "Trump voters".

They were wrong, in hindsight. The OP is nonsense.

[lapucelle]

164. HRC worked hard not to alienate any voters. Her slogan was "Stronger Together".

For some, keeping Trump out of the White House was not an important enough goal. They had scores to settle. They worked their hardest to deliver Trump the presidency, and they did it with pride and glee.

[MustLoveBeagles]

166. Never forget

I won't.

[lapucelle]

167. Anyone who, either by overt action or "benign" inaction, helped Trump in any way

is responsible for this presidency. They knew what was at stake, and they didn't care. History will hold them accountable. I hold them in contempt.

[MustLoveBeagles]

168. I supported Sanders in 2016

I was disappointed when he didn't get the nomination, but I put on my big girl pants and supported Hillary. There was no conspiracy against Bernie. Hillary won fair and square. Other than the convention tantrums by the Bernie Bros, I was largely in the dark (by choice) about what his more extreme supporters where up to. I'm not making that mistake again.

[lapucelle]

169. I worked the PA general election ground game with several people who voted for

Bernie in the primaries. They were great Democrats and true patriots!

The NY campaign sent us down in buses to help out in the swing states. We traveled every weekend from September through the first weekend in November.

[Cha]

420. Hey Aloha, Beagles.. haven't

seen you in awhile.

[Cha]

173. STING!!

More OWN WORDS!

Mahalo, lapucelle!

[betsuni]

178. +1

[StevieM]

325. Since the election ended, the media has erased "Stronger Together" from the historical record.

It doesn't fit with the narrative that they are determined to cultivate.

[Cha]

172. The OP.. BS' and his wife's own words.

[Voltaire2]

175. Yes and do you think we should encourage people to vote?

And celebrate our democratic traditions? Do you disagree with Clinton’s efforts in 2016 to not alienate Trump voters?

[Cha]

176. It was actually important who

we voted for in the General Election 2016.

[lapucelle]

184. On any campaign I've ever worked with, it's a two-pronged approach.

Task 1: Ask people if they are registered and, if not, help unregistered voters to register to the extent that state election law allows you. (For example, in NY you can hand out forms, answer general questions about the forms, and offer to mail them. In PA, you can help people fill out the forms and offer to mail them, but you can't fill out any part of the form for them.)

Task 2: Advocate for Democratic candidates by talking about their achievements, platforms, and policy positions and by highlighting key differences between the Democratic candidate and candidates from other parties.

During the GOTV period, volunteers do everything possible to get Democrats to the polls, be it helping them to find their polling places, giving them mass transit information, arranging for transportation, or even personally driving them to the polls.

Here in NY where polls close at 9:00 pm, on the day of a presidential election, volunteers frequently work well past 10:00 pm.

The chief advisor to the BS campaign stopped far short of what every Democratic GOTV volunteer is trained to do.

This wasn't the chief advisor's first GE campaign. I wonder why she failed to do what every volunteer works so hard to accomplish?

[Me.]

177. And There-In Id The Entire Story

and a reveal of the truth...Finally

[R B Garr]

182. This is disqualifying. Could they even post on this board?

“Whatever result...”. WOW, that’s a BAD thing to say about putting Republicans in power.

[lapucelle]

183. THat is a Democratic candidate's chief advisor speaking.

[R B Garr]

185. Yes! It is very disturbing. They should be required to give

a confirmation of whether they voted third party. Seems only fair to us Democrats.

[Cha]

186. Yes, RB.. the tweets speak

for themselves.

No one is being "manipulated" as one poster tried to insult me by claiming that.

Mahalo!

[gulliver]

218. Yep, disqualifying...that could have helped Trump a lot.

[NurseJackie]

268. You're correct about that.

Jane was (is) bitter. She doesn't think much of Democrats. (She'd get along well with Sarandon.)

[Cha]

384. Good question, RB.

[Cha]

415. No.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

FALSE!

Link to tweet

[NYMinute]

212. kick nt

[Cha]

251. Thank you for kicking

this important PSA, NYMinute!

[andym]

229. At best if they voted for Trump they do not care about or do not recognize racism and sexism

nor do they care about or recognize the absence of civility that Trump brings. Or if they do understand Trump's racism, sexism, and incivility, they value other things more. For example, an anti-abortion evangelical might value Trump's promise to end abortion as decisive and dismiss any other Trump characteristic no matter how ugly.

[Politicub]

236. These make me so angry at BS

[Cha]

263. I know what you mean,

Politicub

[betsuni]

240. kick

[Cha]

269. Thank you!

[NurseJackie]

242. Still disgusting. I'll never forget...

... nor forgive.

[NYMinute]

255. No real Democrat should ever forget this. nt

[betsuni]

257. Kick

[BannonsLiver]

262. Kick

This is disqualifying

[PhoenixDem]

270. kick

[Cha]

272. KICK!

[DrFunkenstein]

273. Less Disturbed By This Tweet Than Biden's Iraq Hearings in 2002

Biden was a strong proponent of regime change, even declaring in July 2002 (some 9 months before the invasion) that "“Dialogue with Saddam is useless.”

Insisting that Saddam was a national security threat, Biden as the leading Democratic voice in Congress held hearings in October that did not carry a single person who thought that Hussein had WMDs at his disposal despite serious misgivings by diplomats and weapons experts in the region, including former inspector Scott Ritter. No opposition voices, including those in the intelligence community and Pentagon, were allowed to speak at the hearings.

Biden on the Iraq War: 2003 vs. 2019 - The Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/biden-on-the-iraq-war-2003-vs-2019/2019/09/08/52f3f6a6-f54d-42c5-9cda-6b133062eb67_video.html

Meanwhile, here's Bernie before the $1.7 TRILLION keys were handed to George W. Bush:

[Cha]

274. Your attempt to distract from the OP is NOT working.

[DrFunkenstein]

275. That Is Heartfelt - Iraq Is Not Something Easily Forgotten

It is hardly a distraction to me. Thousands of American lives, tens of thousands of Iraqis - for what? That's people's brothers and mothers and sisters and fathers. Gone and nothing we can do or say will bring them back.

Biden was in a unique position to do something. He led the Senate Committee hearings and could have brought in expert witnesses to question the bullshit narrative of Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and the other lying bastards.

But instead he refused to give a platform to voices of dissent. Instead he promoted the imminent danger of Hussein, the immediate necessity of regime change.

For some, that might seem a lifetime ago. For others, it seems like yesterday and always will.

[Cha]

298. NOPE.. Sorry.. your WHATABOUT DOES NOT

DISTRACT FROM THE OP.

Got Anything to say about That? I'll wait..

[ehrnst]

296. Whataboutery:

what·a·bout-er·y

the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue.

[Cha]

299. Sorry.. your whatabout still not working. What is

it you find "disturbing" about the OP?

[Hoyt]

277. It's hard to forget what Sanders' supporters did, and there was at least one other

lurking candidate/supporter who was bashing Obama’s TPP at least as late as September 2016 that contributed to our current President’s election.

[Celerity]

281. being against TPP (a shit deal) was not at all the reason for Rump's victory

TPP was a bad deal, and not just because of the horrid ISDS and patent evergreening provisions.

I refuse to be gaslit on this. It also is disingenuous at best to see opposition to TPP equated or insinuated or linked in any way to posit a form of (or actual) support for Trump and Sanders, or to say it helped Rump get elected. You can absolutely not be for either (Sanders or Rump) and still think the TTP was a bad thing.

Support for deals like this is partially (the percentage is up for debate but it is not a small percentage) why we have such discontent here in our nation, discontent that just further adds to the latent and overt sexism, racism, misogyny, and hate that monsters like Trump tapped into. It just gave him another arrow in his quiver of poison for his mob.

The TPP also would have been a fundamental driver for further wealth inequality, here and globally, and wealth inequality is the number one interlocked statistic when it comes to the well-being of a society on basically all levels of measurement.


Why TPP Is a Bad Deal for America and American Workers

BY JOSEPH STIGLITZ

http://rooseveltinstitute.org/why-tpp-bad-deal-america-and-american-workers/


the whole series

Tricks of the Trade Deal: Six Big Problems with the Trans-Pacific Partnership

http://rooseveltinstitute.org/tricks-trade-deal-six-big-problems-trans-pacific-partnership/



How to Tell TPP Is a Bad Deal

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/how-to-tell-tpp-is-a-bad_b_8914388



9 Ways the TPP Is Bad for Developing Countries

https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/07/07/9-ways-the-tpp-is-bad-for-developing-countries/



The Trans-Pacific Partnership Is Unlikely to Be a Good Deal for American Workers

https://www.epi.org/publication/tpp-unlikely-to-be-good-deal-for-american-workers/



The TPP has the potential for real harm

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-16/verrender-the-tpp-has-the-potential-for-real-harm/6321538


Ending the corporate power grab of Investor-State Dispute Settlement

https://www.citizen.org/topic/globalization-trade/corporate-power-expanded-isds/



How trade deals like TPP fail the global poor

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/11/6/9680538/tpp-development-trade-poverty



Robert Reich takes on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

How economic inequality harms societies | Richard Wilkinson

My Rep, Ted Lieu, and a large, large number of our Democratic Caucus are/were 100% against these flawed, tainted deals.


https://lieu.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congressman-lieu-statement-trans-pacific-partnership

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Washington - Today, Congressman Ted W. Lieu (D | Los Angeles County) issued the following statement regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

“Last year, I voted against Trade Promotion Authority because I did not believe a trade agreement with questionable environmental and labor provisions should be fast tracked for ratification. As I review the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership today, my concerns have only worsened.

I will not support an unfair trade deal that lacks enforceable environmental and labor standards. Specifically, I believe trade agreements must uphold President Obama’s and other landmark climate regulations. They must ensure the protection of the environment, fish, and wildlife. Moreover, any agreement must put American workers first and strengthen, not weaken, labor protections.

It is unclear whether or not TPP will receive a vote in Congress this year, but in the meantime I will continue to listen to the deep concerns of my constituents.”

Link to tweet

https://projects.propublica.org/represent/votes/114/house/1/374


https://lieu.house.gov/media-center/in-the-news/lieu-we-entrust

Trade policy

Lieu also listed his concerns to me about proposed secretive Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) 12-nation trade agreement, which has been kept from the American public, while large corporations have been at the TPP negotiating table for years.

On July 12, Lieu was one of over two hundred House members who cast historic ‘no’ votes that at least for now, prevent President Obama from receiving Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) to negotiate the TPP. Also known as ‘Fast Track’ authority, TPA would prevent the Congress from amending the TPP, and instead would only allow for a single up/down vote on it, once presented to them by the President.

Lieu’s concerns went beyond transparency, to concerns about the TPP’s lack of a currency provision, which he argued “means all enforcement mechanisms are ineffective, because countries can engage in mass cheating by manipulating their currency.” He also cited experience with other trade agreements, that had the effect of “hollowing out the middle class and leading to greater wage inequality by shipping jobs overseas and hurting the American worker.”

But perhaps most insidiously he cited the TPP’s “Investor-State Dispute Settlement,” or ISDS provision, that would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. Laws — and to potentially pick up huge payouts from taxpayers -without ever stepping foot in a U.S. court.

The ISDS would allow foreign companies to challenge any U.S. Law that protects public health, safety, the environment or workers, by arguing it unreasonably limited their profits — from, say, Santa Monica’s Sustainability Rights of Nature ordinance, to water rationing on farm land owned by foreign investors here in drought-stricken California. If a company wins, the ruling can’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and secret arbitration panels can require American taxpayers to cough up millions — even billions — of dollars in damages, which would then also have a chilling effect on passing such future legislation.




Senate Democrats gang up to delay fast-track trade bill

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade/senate-democrats-gang-up-to-delay-fast-track-trade-bill-idUSKBN0NX0B320150512

snip

The vote marked a victory for Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, an outspoken opponent of fast-track, after weeks of speculation that the toughest fight would be in the House of Representatives and not the Senate.

snip

Only one Democrat, Senator Tom Carper of Delaware, backed the measure, despite a White House campaign blitz to win Democratic support.

snip

Failure sends a worrying signal about the level of support for fast track, which is opposed by unions, environmental and consumer groups but backed by businesses, which reacted with disappointment.

snip

[Hoyt]

283. Bull. Treating poor foreign workers like scabs is trumpian and portends continued wars.

In any event, trump reneged. Is that OK with you?

[Celerity]

284. Rump lies and reneges on everything, he is scum

That has nothing to do with TPP and TTIP being shit deals.

[Hekate]

290. Pity that more people don't understand the intent of the TPP was to control CHINA...

...and its incursions in the Pacific.

[Celerity]

291. it certainly did not need all the other rot in it to achieve that nt

[Cha]

282. I agree, Hoyt. Presdident Obama was absolutely

right on TPP.. I don't care who tries to say otherwise.

[lunasun]

278. Hmmm doesn't think an obvious racist sexist candidate would attract a lot of racist sexist voters

You got me

[c-rational]

279. Thank you Cha, I was not aware of this. K&R!

[jrthin]

280. Thank you Cha.

[Cha]

286. You're Welcome, jrthin!

[Maru Kitteh]

289. Just WOW Cha! What a STRANGE THING to say anytime, let alone 3 days before any election.

It's hard to wrap one's head around a Democrat saying such exculpatory things, that, in my opinion, dance the line between sympathy and encouragement in respect to ballots cast for the opposing party.

I sincerely hope to see Sanders genuinely, actively, thoughtfully and consistently support our nominee in this election. His support is valuable, and what he does and says matters.

[Cha]

292. You got it, Maru!

Unfortunately.

Yes, it would be extremely important if your "hope" comes true.

[NurseJackie]

293. It was completely bizarre.

Jane was basically giving "permission" to not vote for our party's nominee.

[Cha]

308. Yeah.. and here we are.

[ehrnst]

295. Yep. (nt)

[emmaverybo]

301. Chilling.

[Cha]

302. It is.. especially when

he tweeted it.

Mahalo, emma

[Quixote1818]

307. Why did you leave out the tweets that followed that give a completely different impression?

It's baffling that these kind of attacks on Democratic candidates are allowed here when they clearly break DU rules?

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[redqueen]

311. Thanks for posting those. Nice to be able see the context. nt

[Celerity]

313. +2

[JoeOtterbein]

328. Because many Biden supporters are way too thin-skinned and hypercritical of Bernie to be...

...honest about him at the same time. Too many words.

[Cha]

339. Biden supporters are awesome.. strong, compassionate,

smart, great senses of humor.. I've made some really good cyber buddies getting to know Biden supporters.

[Gothmog]

352. I agree Cha

[Cha]

353. No kidding, Goth!

[The Valley Below]

373. I like the way you think!

[Cha]

374. Hey Aloha, The Valley Below!

How did you ever find that post?

[The Valley Below]

375. Would you believe serendipity?

[Cha]

377. Yes I would!

it happens all the time.

[The Valley Below]

378. Oh...not the answer I was expecting

[Cha]

345. The OP are BS' own Words and his wife's.. this has nothing to do

with Biden Supporters.

[Gothmog]

351. I disagree

Biden supporters are not thin skin

[Cha]

383. No, we're NOT, Goth.. Mahalo!

I think a whole lot of projection was going on there.

[SMC22307]

309. Yeah, Cha, why did you leave out the tweets in #307?

How very manipulative.

[Celerity]

312. good question nt

[crazytown]

314. :)

[Cha]

315. It's the timing! I don't care

how many tweets he tweeted.

[crazytown]

316. +!

[Cha]

408. ,,,

[myohmy2]

322. old news...

...and ancient history...

...what else you got on Bernie?

...

[Cha]

323. This news is Timeless and will

Always be Relevant.

[LongtimeAZDem]

332. The fact of the occupant of the White House makes it a current issue

Thanks for the kick, BTW.

[ForEverGlades]

336. Old indeed

Whoa, this really IS old news.
Why we're still fighting the last election I've got no idea.
Don't we have a FUTURE election to win?
Not only that, but am sure many here have friends and acquaintances that aren't racist who voted for Trump.
I do.
All but a couple are latino.
I know they're wrong...but pretty sure they're not racists.
So...

[Cha]

337. No.. these tweets from BS and his wife are Timeless..

They will always be relevant for what he was doing 3 days before the General Election.

He should have been tweeting about voting for the Democratic Candidate to beat trump.. not giving excuses for trump voters.

DU members are still REC this thread.

[MH1]

368. It would be old news if Bernie had done the right thing this time

and stayed out, and helped (really helped) from the sideline.

He could have been a statesman. Then people wouldn't need to be reminded of this shit.

But no.

The behavior in 2016 is very much relevant to 2020.

(Especially with vocal Stein supporters on his payroll even now.)

[PatSeg]

404. Good point

This is the way he will be remembered. What a shame. He really could have made a difference, but apparently winning is more important.

[TexasTowelie]

389. Yet still relevant today.

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

--George Santayana

[emmaverybo]

330. Not exactly prescient and certainly unwise. How we voted mattered. Maybe admit that now,

Bernie.

[Cha]

350. Yeah, right..

Mahalo, emmaverybo!

[The Valley Below]

338. I will never forget.

[Blue_Tires]

341. Yeah, I never forgot that

[kcr]

349. Number one reason why there's a chance we'll get 4 more years of Trump

A good reminder, much good it will do.

[betsuni]

355. +1

[Wawannabe]

372. Dude's got better weed than I do!

This is total bullshit!

[Tiggeroshii]

376. So we are attacking Democratic candidate's families now?

geez louise.

[Cha]

380. What are you even talking about?!

[TidalWave46]

379. This is disqualifying. NT

[The Valley Below]

392. Has Jane Sanders ever acknowledged voting for Jill Stein?

[Cha]

442. Aloha.. got to keep this Updated!

[Gothmog]

395. For this thread

Last edited Fri Jan 10, 2020, 06:24 PM - Edit history (1)

Link to tweet

[Cha]

396. Somebody deleted the

****** tweet, Goth.. what did it say?

[Gothmog]

397. There was a study that showed that 25% of sanders supporters either voted for trump, a third party

or did not vote

[Cha]

398. Thanks.. and just what we've read.. I

wonder why? hmmm?

We fucking Know Why.

[Gothmog]

400. Yes we do

[Cha]

402. Thanks, Goth..

[Gothmog]

399. Sanders tweet worked

Link to tweet

[Cha]

407. Mahalo.. we know it.. Retweeted

karma

[spooky3]

401. I do not believe a white male is in the best position to assess sexism or racism. nt

[helpisontheway]

409. Tells you everything you need to know about Bernie Sanders. Nt

[totodeinhere]

410. i have no problem with that comment. We need an optimist in the White House. Yes, Bernie has a love

for all of the American people including Trump voters, and his first priority will be to bring this country together.

And regarding racism, Bernie will be at the forefront of making every effort possible to root out every vestige of racism.

[Jamaal510]

412. K&R

[Cha]

413. Mahalo, Jamaal!

[Sunsky]

416. Wow. This speaks volumes nt

[Cha]

421. It most certainly does, Sunsky. :(

[Gothmog]

425. Sirota was bad earlier and is still a bad hire by sanders

Link to tweet

[lapucelle]

426. So HRC was right to warn Democrats this week that it could happen again.

Like Tulsi, there are already some who have taken the bait and revealed how much in common they have with Trump.

[lapucelle]

427. I forgot a few...

[Hekate]

429. Kicking this and SMH

[Quixote1818]

430. Why? It leaves off the next two tweets which give a completely different impression

People keep trying to keep this dishonest post kicked. I don't get it? Extremely dishonest OP.

Bernie Sanders
✔
@BernieSanders
Some are, but I think most are people who are hurting, they’re worried about their kids, they’re working longer hours for lower wages.

Bernie Sanders
✔
@BernieSanders
Our job is to reach out to Trump voters to tell them that we’re going to create an economy that works for all of us, not just a few.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=320252

[Cha]

440. Make your own OP.. this is 3 days before the GE.. How about

"It's important who you vote FOR"

[Gothmog]

439. Arggh

Link to tweet

?s=20

[emmaverybo]

451. A warning. Thanks! He will be permanently sidelined and his legacy forever tarnished if he acts the

spoiler once more. But I have little hope that he can rise above the needs and demands that drive him, his inner world.

He needs to listen to what the majority of our party feel. His speech last night— full of bitterness, all vinegar and attack—was completely out of step with the current mood of this Party,

[Cha]

454. That's what I've been saying, emma..

about the legacy. Thank you.

Jane's tweet didn't age well.

[William769]

458. Kick & recommended.

[Cha]

460. Thank you, Bill!

[Hortensis]

459. If she were to lose her children to the Republican pandemic,

or her husband, my guess is she'd still say the same and find a way to blame Democrats. People who could say and believe what she did...think differently.

[NCProgressive]

461. KnR

How many think they voted for the Democrat? Anyone?

[betsuni]

462. Never forget "lesser of two evils."

[nolawarlock]

465. Lesser?

I remember a not insignificant number of people on that JPR site trying to argue that Trump was actually the lesser of two evils compared to Hilary, due to his positions on trade and foreign policy.

[betsuni]

466. Yes. According to those types, Hillary was personally responsible for the loss of manufacturing

jobs that in reality began in the sixties long before nineties trade deals, is a horrible racist for throwing everyone in jail with the crime bill because she gave a speech about it, was solely responsible for the Iraq War, had diabolical plans to launch us into World War III immediately, has to do everything Wall Street oligarchs tell her forever because she gave a speech to a financial institution, murdered lots of people including Seth Rich because Teh Clinton Machine, was gravely ill and wore a full body brace, used Russian interference as an excuse, is Satan, etc.

Hope they're happy with Trump!

[nolawarlock]

467. +1

[Cha]

470. They're so brainwashed.. and look where it got them.

[Gothmog]

471. In 3 critical states they voted for trump in larger numbers than trump's winning margin.

Link to tweet

[ucrdem]

472. @LucyFlores speaking at a Bernie Rally

Hadn't seen that. That is a very revealing tweet.

[Cha]

474. TY Exactly, Goth! Wonder if Jane still thinks.. "How We Voted is Not as Important as that we voted"?

Mahalo.. and now look what happened to his campaign.. there's a word for that.. and it starts with a K.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

473. Something is funky in that tweet stream. ...

... George Clinton chimed in for Hillary Clinton.

[Gothmog]

475. Joe Rogan, Bernie Sander, Briahna Gray: what do they have in common?

Link to tweet

[Cha]

476. Bottom ******* Line.. only it's not going to

work.. and they will be pariahs.

TY, Goth..

[DesertRat]

477. Her tweet still makes my blood boil

Now more than ever.

[Cha]

479. Sounds like she didn't mind at all that The Voters

Voted for Joe Biden as ".. Long As They VOTED".

Karma can be so Just Desserts.

Mahalo, DesertRat~StaySafe!

[DesertRat]

480. True that!

Mahalo Cha. Be well

[Demsrule86]

478. Kicked

[Cha]

481. Mahalo, Dems.. I'm sure this tweet of Jane's is directed

at Voters today, too.. right?!

StaySafe!