Support NeoGAF

[Kangi]

It's taking so long for people to accept that Bernie's lost.

It's going to take much longer for people to accept that was because people didn't vote for him.

Bernie's not losing because of super delegates. Bernie's not losing because of the "establishment". Bernie's not losing because Bill Clinton is body-blocking voters at polls. Bernie's not losing because of coin tosses. Bernie's not losing because of voter disenfranchisement that Hillary is totally behind. Bernie's not losing because of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Bernie's not losing because "southern" people are "low-information" voters. Bernie's not losing because "high-information" voters got blindsided by voter registration/party affiliation deadlines.

Bernie is losing because Facebook likes are not real-life votes. Bernie is losing because it's far easier to scream about political revolutions and drown out discussion on the internet than it is to convince actual voters why they should vote for him. Bernie is losing because college-aged kids are not a reliable voting bloc. Bernie is losing because he never expanded his support beyond that voting bloc. Bernie is losing because his campaign practically ceded delegate-rich states like Texas. Bernie is losing because low-turnout caucus states aren't the majority of state primaries. Bernie is losing because people want Hillary instead.

But maybe that last one is the real issue here? Maybe people just can't understand why Hillary is winning? It can't be because voters are actually voting for her. It's because she's stealing delegates! It's because the corrupt establishment is behind her! It's because... it's because...

It's because people like her, want her to be president, and are voting for her. And their votes count just as much as anyone else's, whether or not they're "from the south". If you take issue with that, or just plain can't believe it, get over yourself.

 

[kirblar]

The faux outrage will subside when this election is over and the hipsters hop on the next "fad".

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that many of Bernie's "supporters" don't actually give a fuck about Bernie, the political system, or his (or any) actual platform (Clinton supporters to an extent as well, Trump supporters too). They're basically just on the bandwagon because Bernie and all the memes are all over social media. Once this election is over they'll go back to being the apathetic moderate they really are in their ivory tower of privilege.

Fun data anecdote: Bernie is winning Democrats who think Obama isn't liberal enough. Which makes sense.

But he's also winning Democrats who think Obama is "too liberal." The implications of that seem pretty apparent.

 

[Bel Marduk]

That's ok don't try to campaign for getting rid of a republican incumbent where possible, that would be too effective.

We are! Rubio's not running for reelection and his seat in the senate would be a prime pickup chance for the Democrats

 

[ahoyhoy]

Is this like a Dem Tea Party thing? The 'Revolution'? Good grief.

That's ok don't try to campaign for getting rid of a republican incumbent where possible, that would be too effective.

Or, you know, maybe focus on the 26th Congressional district instead?

Ya'll jumping on him for trying to primary someone out? Just because someone is an incumbent does not make them a good representative of the people or the party. In the place of term limits it's the best way to keep politicians from becoming too complacent and cozy in office. They should be made beholden to the people and actually challenged every once and a while.

 

[TyrantII]

One thing is for sure, for all the snark Obama's youth vote and supporters got, they put it up and got it done. The Obama campaign and his supports were much better organized than the Sanders campaign, and its why he took the lead early and never looked back.

It'll be telling what happens after this election for both Bernie and his supporters. Do they take their ball and go home and pout, or do they have a reality based debriefing and figure out how to build on their success?

 

[Bear Force One]

Regardless, my other question is how is this a race and not a total blowout?
That kind of gap isn't even close, I mean when you have a 2side election where the gap is 53/46/1(null/void/magin/whatever) it's considered a clear endorsement of a candidate and a clear rejection of the other.
This race ain't close at all.

Bernie supporters really REALLY want it. That's all I can figure.

 

[Mr. RPG]

This thread is really depressing.

 

[Slayven]

The faux outrage will subside when this election is over and the hipsters hop on the next "fad".

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that many of Bernie's "supporters" don't actually give a fuck about Bernie, the political system, or his (or any) actual platform (Clinton supporters to an extent as well, Trump supporters too). They're basically just on the bandwagon because Bernie and all the memes are all over social media. Once this election is over they'll go back to being the apathetic moderate they really are in their ivory tower of privilege.

No lies detected

 

[B-Dubs]

Ya'll jumping on him for trying to primary someone out? Just because someone is an incumbent does not make them a good representative of the people or the party. In the place of term limits it's the best way to keep politicians from becoming too complacent and cozy in office. They should be made beholden to the people and actually challenged every once and a while.

There's nothing wrong with the people of her district pushing for someone to primary her, but it's not really coming from her district. Yea someone's running against her, but from the looks of it all the money he's raising is coming from out of state. Also, she's not even that poster's representative.

 

[BlastProcessing]

You can't change the rules in the middle of a contest unfortunately -- however after the primary season is over we should not let our outrage over this subside

As for me -- I'll be traveling a few hours and doing everything I can to support Tim Canova and defeat Debbie Wasserman-Schultz -- she's in a deep-blue district and I believe there is enough outrage against her and the DNC to assure that she loses her seat

Don't worry about Debbie though -- If she loses she'll be able to land a cushy job as a lobbyist

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz isn't some arcane math wizard. Take a step back and try to look at this primary in the larger context of history.

Do you understand the reasons the current system exists? What rules would you like to see changed? Specifically.

 

[Piecake]

Ya'll jumping on him for trying to primary someone out? Just because someone is an incumbent does not make them a good representative of the people or the party. In the place of term limits it's the best way to keep politicians from becoming too complacent and cozy in office. They should be made beholden to the people and actually challenged every once and a while.

The problem with primarying politicians is that only people who vote in those elections are super motivated voters. It isn't representative of the people at all. It is only representative of the most committed base/voters.

This is a huge problem when you add in gerrymandering. There are a lot of safe districts out there where the politicians only real chance of losing is the primary. If that politician only has to fear getting primaried from his/her radical base then that is what the politician is going to pay attention to.

Primaries and Gerrymandering are the reasons why Republicans have become so obstructionist lately. They don't want to be seen compromising or working with democrats at all because their base cares far more about purity than anything else. Our political system is built on compromise and it will simply not work if we have a bunch of politicians in office who are mostly concerned with appeasing their purist base.

 

[Damaniel]

The faux outrage will subside when this election is over and the hipsters hop on the next "fad".

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that many of Bernie's "supporters" don't actually give a fuck about Bernie, the political system, or his (or any) actual platform (Clinton supporters to an extent as well, Trump supporters too). They're basically just on the bandwagon because Bernie and all the memes are all over social media. Once this election is over they'll go back to being the apathetic moderate they really are in their ivory tower of privilege.

Bernie has a lot of legit offline support (I know many, most of whom aren't the stereotypical 'Bernie Bros'), but among those who hang out in the Reddit echo chamber, I bet the overlap between Ron Paul supporters and Bernie supporters is much higher than it should be when considering their policy platforms. I've considered those people to be voting hipsters since way back in 2008 - it's not about the policies, it's about the icon.

 

[User 463088]

Ya'll jumping on him for trying to primary someone out? Just because someone is an incumbent does not make them a good representative of the people or the party. In the place of term limits it's the best way to keep politicians from becoming too complacent and cozy in office. They should be made beholden to the people and actually challenged every once and a while.

I mean, sure, if we Democrats had a super safe majority everywhere, primary anyone you want. (Still can, actually). But, if you're trying to make an actual difference, I'd work on getting the Republicans out first.

DWS is a terrible, terrible DNC Chair. You'll get no complaints from me. But the reason people want to oust her is because she's DNC Chair....a position she can hold regardless of her being in the House or not. Some on the far left have made her into this villainous she-witch who is subverting Bernie at every turn.

She's not. She's not that smart.

 

[Kin5290]

It's taking so long for people to accept that Bernie's lost.

It's going to take much longer for people to accept that was because people didn't vote for him.

Bernie's not losing because of super delegates. Bernie's not losing because of the "establishment". Bernie's not losing because Bill Clinton is body-blocking voters at polls. Bernie's not losing because of coin tosses. Bernie's not losing because of voter disenfranchisement that Hillary is totally behind. Bernie's not losing because of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Bernie's not losing because "southern" people are "low-information" voters. Bernie's not losing because "high-information" voters got blindsided by voter registration/party affiliation deadlines.

Bernie is losing because Facebook likes are not real-life votes. Bernie is losing because it's far easier to scream about political revolutions and drown out discussion on the internet than it is to convince actual voters why they should vote for him. Bernie is losing because college-aged kids are not a reliable voting bloc. Bernie is losing because he never expanded his support beyond that voting bloc. Bernie is losing because his campaign practically ceded delegate-rich states like Texas. Bernie is losing because low-turnout caucus states aren't the majority of state primaries. Bernie is losing because people want Hillary instead.

But maybe that last one is the real issue here? Maybe people just can't understand why Hillary is winning? It can't be because voters are actually voting for her. It's because she's stealing delegates! It's because the corrupt establishment is behind her! It's because... it's because...

It's because people like her, want her to be president, and are voting for her. And their votes count just as much as anyone else's, whether or not they're "from the south". If you take issue with that, or just plain can't believe it, get over yourself.

This is gold.

I doubt that you'd see a fraction of the outrage over "THE ESTABLISHMENT!" or claims that "the system" is broken if Sanders were the one who was leading. It's just the last resort of a campaign whose supporters don't want to acknowledge the awful truth that Democrats just don't really like their candidate.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Ya'll jumping on him for trying to primary someone out? Just because someone is an incumbent does not make them a good representative of the people or the party. In the place of term limits it's the best way to keep politicians from becoming too complacent and cozy in office. They should be made beholden to the people and actually challenged every once and a while.

The Democratic Party isn't an ideologically pure party. That's one of the ways Republicans win- they take advantage of the fact that every Democrat believes in his/her own ideas and thus have a harder time unifying.

It's pretty chickenshit to go after DWS. It's hard enough for Dem leaders.

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

You can't change the rules in the middle of a contest unfortunately -- however after the primary season is over we should not let our outrage over this subside

As for me -- I'll be traveling a few hours and doing everything I can to support Tim Canova and defeat Debbie Wasserman-Schultz -- she's in a deep-blue district and I believe there is enough outrage against her and the DNC to assure that she loses her seat

Don't worry about Debbie though -- If she loses she'll be able to land a cushy job as a lobbyist

Wow... just wow.

Tea Party would be extremely proud of you.

 

[Aylinato]

The faux outrage will subside when this election is over and the hipsters hop on the next "fad".

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that many of Bernie's "supporters" don't actually give a fuck about Bernie, the political system, or his (or any) actual platform (Clinton supporters to an extent as well, Trump supporters too). They're basically just on the bandwagon because Bernie and all the memes are all over social media. Once this election is over they'll go back to being the apathetic moderate they really are in their ivory tower of privilege.

feeling the burn.

 

[Mr. RPG]

Maybe if you all shout loud enough, all of Bernie's supporters will go away and never come back to vote in the general election.

That's what you guys want right?

 

[BlastProcessing]

The party should be able to pick their nominee how they want to. Democratically or no. I don't think the primary system has given us as good of candidates as the classic smoke filled room.

But these days it would be a Vape-filled room and we should avoid that at all costs.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Bernie has a lot of legit offline support (I know many, most of whom aren't the stereotypical 'Bernie Bros'), but among those who hang out in the Reddit echo chamber, I bet the overlap between Ron Paul supporters and Bernie supporters is much higher than it should be when considering their policy platforms. I've considered those people to be voting hipsters since way back in 2008 - it's not about the policies, it's about the icon.

I always challenge people like that, who claim they'll not vote or vote for Trump, to explain what they'll do if/when Bernie asks them to vote for Hillary and throws his full support behind her.

I've gotten mixed replies ranging from "I'll lose all respect for him" to "Bernie can't tell me what to do." I generally follow up explaining that there must be some policies from Bernie they support, and that they should vote "the next best thing" to ensure it doesn't get destroyed for 30 years due to the Supreme Court. Never really get any proper answer to that follow up. Oh well.

Yea, I'm not convinced those sorts of Bernie supporters would have voted in the election. I'm not even sure they'd bother voting for Bernie once he was the candidate and became mainstream.

I have noticed a curious overlap between Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders, people who outright say that Bernie is the first person they've supported since Ron Paul, which doesn't make much sense, given their policies, but I've seen it enough to believe it makes up a decent chunk of Bernie's crazy fan club. Obviously not talking about regular people who agree with Bernie's policies, but will ultimately support whoever the Democrat is.

 

[B-Dubs]

But these days it would be a Vape-filled room and we should avoid that at all costs.

Considering DC's got that legal weed, it ain't gonna be a vape filled room.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

What do you guys think? Is this voter disenfranchisement? Is the system rigged?

Political parties aren't written into our constitution; they're essentially private entities that politicians have decided to rally around. As far as I'm concerned--for better or worse--regular people don't have any right to a "fair" primary system.

I want to go on "that said, the primary system is dumb," but I'm not sure that's true either. Look at the republican side. Donald Trump is almost certainly going to get the most votes, but the primary system means that he may well not become the republican candidate. Why? Because in this case, Republican voters have chosen a candidate who is unlikely to do well in the general election, and the party leaders have a system in place to (try to, sometimes) stop that from happening.

I think it's the job of primary voters to vote for the person they want, and the job of the party leaders--the super delegates--to choose the person they think is most likely to win the general. The winner is chosen via a combination of those two forces, and as a democrat I think that's a good thing! We want to get a candidate who both represents our needs AND is likely to win the general.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Ya'll jumping on him for trying to primary someone out? Just because someone is an incumbent does not make them a good representative of the people or the party. In the place of term limits it's the best way to keep politicians from becoming too complacent and cozy in office. They should be made beholden to the people and actually challenged every once and a while.

Well the poster said that they were travelling, implying that DWS doesn't even represent them. So instead of engaging in their own areas primaries they are travelling to tilt at windmills.

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

I always challenge people like that, who claim they'll not vote or vote for Trump, to explain what they'll do if/when Bernie asks them to vote for Hillary and throws his full support behind her.

I've gotten mixed replies ranging from "I'll lose all respect for him" to "Bernie can't tell me what to do." I generally follow up explaining that there must be some policies from Bernie they support, and that they should vote "the next best thing" to ensure it doesn't get destroyed for 30 years due to the Supreme Court. Never really get any proper answer to that follow up. Oh well.

Yea, I'm not convinced those sorts of Bernie supporters would have voted in the election. I'm not even sure they'd bother voting for Bernie once he was the main candidate and became main stream.

I have noticed a curious overlap between Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders, people who outright say that Bernie is the first person they've supported since Ron Paul, which doesn't make much sense, given their policies, but I've seen it enough to believe it makes up a decent chunk of Bernie's crazy fan club. Obviously not talking about regular people who agree with Bernie's policies, but will ultimately support whoever the Democrat is.

You mirror my exact feelings on the subject. Every single Bernie supporter that is ready to piss away Supreme Court appointments because their man didn't get the nomination doesn't really give a damn about the movement to begin with. Fuck future progressiveness or liberalism as it dies once it gets challenged. It is mind boggling.

 

[Tesseract]

The faux outrage will subside when this election is over and the hipsters hop on the next "fad".

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that many of Bernie's "supporters" don't actually give a fuck about Bernie, the political system, or his (or any) actual platform (Clinton supporters to an extent as well, Trump supporters too). They're basically just on the bandwagon because Bernie and all the memes are all over social media. Once this election is over they'll go back to being the apathetic moderate they really are in their ivory tower of privilege.

hateful disposition, this. what factors lead to this conclusion?

 

[Veritigo_X]

Considering DC's got that legal weed, it ain't gonna be a vape filled room.

Weed vapor dude. Those Pax vapes are pretty inconspicuous.

 

[M-PG71C]

It's taking so long for people to accept that Bernie's lost.

It's going to take much longer for people to accept that was because people didn't vote for him.

Bernie's not losing because of super delegates. Bernie's not losing because of the "establishment". Bernie's not losing because Bill Clinton is body-blocking voters at polls. Bernie's not losing because of coin tosses. Bernie's not losing because of voter disenfranchisement that Hillary is totally behind. Bernie's not losing because of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz. Bernie's not losing because "southern" people are "low-information" voters. Bernie's not losing because "high-information" voters got blindsided by voter registration/party affiliation deadlines.

Bernie is losing because Facebook likes are not real-life votes. Bernie is losing because it's far easier to scream about political revolutions and drown out discussion on the internet than it is to convince actual voters why they should vote for him. Bernie is losing because college-aged kids are not a reliable voting bloc. Bernie is losing because he never expanded his support beyond that voting bloc. Bernie is losing because his campaign practically ceded delegate-rich states like Texas. Bernie is losing because low-turnout caucus states aren't the majority of state primaries. Bernie is losing because people want Hillary instead.

But maybe that last one is the real issue here? Maybe people just can't understand why Hillary is winning? It can't be because voters are actually voting for her. It's because she's stealing delegates! It's because the corrupt establishment is behind her! It's because... it's because...

It's because people like her, want her to be president, and are voting for her. And their votes count just as much as anyone else's, whether or not they're "from the south". If you take issue with that, or just plain can't believe it, get over yourself.

Post of the day. Well said.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Damn, that Scarborough rant is scathing. It seems like he has a damn good point, though.

 

[B-Dubs]

Weed vapor dude. Those Pax vapes are pretty inconspicuous.

Nah man, Uncle Joe only slings "the dankest nugs in town."

 

[darkstar0155]

I always challenge people like that, who claim they'll not vote or vote for Trump, to explain what they'll do if/when Bernie asks them to vote for Hillary and throws his full support behind her.

I've gotten mixed replies ranging from "I'll lose all respect for him" to "Bernie can't tell me what to do." I generally follow up explaining that there must be some policies from Bernie they support, and that they should vote "the next best thing" to ensure it doesn't get destroyed for 30 years due to the Supreme Court. Never really get any proper answer to that follow up. Oh well.

Yea, I'm not convinced those sorts of Bernie supporters would have voted in the election. I'm not even sure they'd bother voting for Bernie once he was the candidate and became mainstream.

I have noticed a curious overlap between Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders, people who outright say that Bernie is the first person they've supported since Ron Paul, which doesn't make much sense, given their policies, but I've seen it enough to believe it makes up a decent chunk of Bernie's crazy fan club. Obviously not talking about regular people who agree with Bernie's policies, but will ultimately support whoever the Democrat is.

to expand on this, I know numerous people that just want to vote against the "establishment" because its the "establishment" regardless of politics (see the voters that say if Bernie loses they're voting for trump, ignoring that Bernie and Hillary are 90% the same).

Also, I have noticed a lot of Bernie voters have fallen for the badmouthing of Hillary from the right, even though they wont admit that's what happened. And on top of that, a lot of dems saying "the system is broken"... even though its really not.

Some people just feel that since they don't get what they want 100% then the system is corrupt/broken/etc.

 

[SFenton]

Maybe if you all shout loud enough, all of Bernie's supporters will go away and never come back to vote in the general election.

That's what you guys want right?

Nah, that's not what I want. I have a good friend who's a Bernie supporter, and I don't want Bernie at all. I'm totally fine with people who support him, campaign for him, and as I've let my friend know, don't continue to nag/pester/attempt to persuade me to support him. I'm a capable adult who can make my own decisions.

What annoys me is that, as another poster mentioned, a lot of support seems to (at least online) come from the fact that he's the social media darling. And that doesn't really just annoy me, it rather scares me that some people are going to vote simply because he's popular on Reddit.

I don't want those people to go away and never vote; I want them to be better informed on policies and what could change in the future rather than just "Scumbag Hillary" and "Free college!!!". If they continue to support Bernie, go for it! That's how this works. But I don't want to see a large swath of uneducated voters (granted, this is a problem for every candidate) go all in because he's on the front page every day.

 

[BlastProcessing]

Damn, that Scarborough rant is scathing. It seems like he has a damn good point, though.

What motivations do you think Joe Scarborough could have for taking this stance? I mean, why would someone who was in the Republican Congress in the 90's want to make Hillary Clinton look bad? It's truly a mystery why someone who understands the primary system as well as he does would intentionally misrepresent the numbers.

 

[noshten]

One thing is for sure, for all the snark Obama's youth vote and supporters got, they put it up and got it done. The Obama campaign and his supports were much better organized than the Sanders campaign, and its why he took the lead early and never looked back.

It'll be telling what happens after this election for both Bernie and his supporters. Do they take their ball and go home and pout, or do they have a reality based debriefing and figure out how to build on their success?

In certain ways Sanders with no party backing has done so much yet people feel the need to belittle what people have been able to achieve. Comparing him to Obama who ran after 8 YEARS OF BUSH, during the biggest financial meltdown in generations, in a time where everyone was furious at Bush administration for the Iraq war - is apples to oranges.
If Sanders had a similar amount of backing from the party to what Obama received or similar amount of coverage from the media - he might have very well be in front right now.

 

[Diablos]

Bernie supporters having it both ways is really just beyond stale and getting on my nerves. You hate superdelegates (well, sometimes) but you love caucuses. Understand that you are losing and show up in November or you'll be yearning for Hillary if the GOP wins. If they do, I can almost see the headlines with people admitting they were too caught up in their own Bernie bubble to see outside of it and what's really worth getting upset over (it's not Hillary). But of course it would be too late.

 

[Butts-a-plenty]

300 000 liberal party members voted online or by mail nationwide over a span of a week.

There is the point. Bernie is getting killed among actual Democratic party members. It's only because of non party members that he even has a chance.

 

[darkstar0155]

Where did all this "the system is broken we need a political revolution" on the left come from to begin with? Yeah, the right has been obstructing, but that's going to happen regardless of if Bernie wins or not. The system works, slowly, as it should be and as it was designed. The US government wasn't really designed to turn on a dime or at the quick whim form what I understand. Its a slow barge that takes awhile to change course.

Plus, if Bernie's "revolution" cant even get him the dem nominee, or somehow he pulls it out in some freak way, its obvious there isn't enough support to get the "political revolution" he preaches about and would need to push his ideas through. I fully think he will be another Jimmy Carter. An idea man who cant really get anything accomplished and will become a hugely failed presidency.

Plus the dude has yet to be fully vetted by the press. The few times he gets hard questions and cant just throw out populist talking points he falls apart. Really, his supporters are similar to trumps imo (not all though), they are following the "flash" not the substance.

Oh and finally, if he did get the nominee, once the attack ads on the right started up, his campaign would fall apart imo. And a debate with trump? Bernie would get crushed, not because he knows less about the issues, but trump would make him look weak from a purely visual standpoint and would talk over him etc etc. I could see Clinton pushing back much better against trump then Bernie. Ok end rant lol.

 

[Puppen]

Damn, that Scarborough rant is scathing. It seems like he has a damn good point, though.

Not really. He's just pretending to not understand the primary process.

 

[Diablos]

Where did all this "the system is broken we need a political revolution" on the left come from to begin with? Yeah, the right has been obstructing, but that's going to happen regardless of if Bernie wins or not. The system works, slowly, as it should be and as it was designed. The US government wasn't really designed to turn on a dime or at the quick whim form what I understand. Its a slow barge that takes awhile to change course.

Plus, if Bernie's "revolution" cant even get him the dem nominee, or somehow he pulls it out in some freak way, its obvious there isn't enough support to get the "political revolution" he preaches about and would need to push his ideas through. I fully think he will be another Jimmy Carter. An idea man who cant really get anything accomplished and will become a hugely failed presidency.

Plus the dude has yet to be fully vetted by the press. The few times he gets hard questions and cant just throw out populist talking points he falls apart. Really, his supporters are similar to trumps imo (not all though), they are following the "flash" not the substance.

Oh and finally, if he did get the nominee, once the attack ads on the right started up, his campaign would fall apart imo. And a debate with trump? Bernie would get crushed, not because he knows less about the issues, but trump would make him look weak from a purely visual standpoint and would talk over him etc etc. I could see Clinton pushing back much better against trump then Bernie. Ok end rant lol.

Well stated.

 

[Mr. RPG]

Nah, that's not what I want. I have a good friend who's a Bernie supporter, and I don't want Bernie at all. I'm totally fine with people who support him, campaign for him, and as I've let my friend know, don't continue to nag/pester/attempt to persuade me to support him. I'm a capable adult who can make my own decisions.

What annoys me is that, as another poster mentioned, a lot of support seems to (at least online) come from the fact that he's the social media darling. And that doesn't really just annoy me, it rather scares me that some people are going to vote simply because he's popular on Reddit.

I don't want those people to go away and never vote; I want them to be better informed on policies and what could change in the future rather than just "Scumbag Hillary" and "Free college!!!". If they continue to support Bernie, go for it! That's how this works. But I don't want to see a large swath of uneducated voters (granted, this is a problem for every candidate) go all in because he's on the front page every day.

So you think that Bernie supporters are uneducated and aren't capable of making their own decisions?

Which is it? Do you want them to vote for Hillary in the general election or not? Insulting them isn't going to encourage them to vote for Hillary.

 

[Tesseract]

Where did all this "the system is broken we need a political revolution" on the left come from to begin with? Yeah, the right has been obstructing, but that's going to happen regardless of if Bernie wins or not. The system works, slowly, as it should be and as it was designed. The US government wasn't really designed to turn on a dime or at the quick whim form what I understand. Its a slow barge that takes awhile to change course.

Plus, if Bernie's "revolution" cant even get him the dem nominee, or somehow he pulls it out in some freak way, its obvious there isn't enough support to get the "political revolution" he preaches about and would need to push his ideas through. I fully think he will be another Jimmy Carter. An idea man who cant really get anything accomplished and will become a hugely failed presidency.

Plus the dude has yet to be fully vetted by the press. The few times he gets hard questions and cant just throw out populist talking points he falls apart. Really, his supporters are similar to trumps imo (not all though), they are following the "flash" not the substance.

Oh and finally, if he did get the nominee, once the attack ads on the right started up, his campaign would fall apart imo. And a debate with trump? Bernie would get crushed, not because he knows less about the issues, but trump would make him look weak from a purely visual standpoint and would talk over him etc etc. I could see Clinton pushing back much better against trump then Bernie. Ok end rant lol.

I thought it came in 2012 when we decided that superpacs were really fucked up. Occupy and Romney, if I had to keep it simple.

 

[BlastProcessing]

In certain ways Sanders with no party backing has done so much yet people feel the need to belittle what people have been able to achieve. Comparing him to Obama who ran after 8 YEARS OF BUSH, during the biggest financial meltdown in generations, in a time where everyone was furious at Bush administration for the Iraq war - is apples to oranges.
If Sanders had a similar amount of backing from the party to what Obama received or similar amount of coverage from the media - he might have very well be in front right now.

I'm just spitballing here, but maybe he would be able to get more party backing if he hadn't spent most of his political career actively running against Democrats and saying stuff like

“You don’t change the system from within the Democratic Party.”

“My own feeling is that the Democratic Party is ideologically bankrupt.”

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

Quotes that he has never directly walked back BTW, even after he jumped over to the party the exact second that it became politically advantageous to do so. You don't just get party backing out of the ether; you need to put in the work. 2008 Obama did that and Hillary Clinton has sure as hell done that.

 

[darkstar0155]

In certain ways Sanders with no party backing has done so much yet people feel the need to belittle what people have been able to achieve. Comparing him to Obama who ran after 8 YEARS OF BUSH, during the biggest financial meltdown in generations, in a time where everyone was furious at Bush administration for the Iraq war - is apples to oranges.
If Sanders had a similar amount of backing from the party to what Obama received or similar amount of coverage from the media - he might have very well be in front right now.

The financial crash didn't start until after Obama had gotten the dem. nomination though from my memory. that didn't have much play in the Obama v Clinton scenario. It really didn't affect the election until what, the last month or two? Although your correct about the hate of bush and the Iraq war.

 

[Diablos]

So you think that Bernie supporters are uneducated and aren't capable of making their own decisions?

Which is it? Do you want them to vote for Hillary in the general election or not? Insulting them isn't going to encourage them to vote for Hillary.

I think he's calling them sheep in a very polite way.

It's not that they're stupid but they can't see what's around the corner. Bernie's campaign is an inflated hype train.

 

[Box of Kittens]

Damn, that Scarborough rant is scathing. It seems like he has a damn good point, though.

He really doesn't have a point though. If you're going to award votes proportionally, you need some way to deal with candidates earning fractions of delegates, so to speak. In the case of Wyoming, it worked out that Bernie got the majority of the vote but the delegates split 7-7. In Illinois, it worked out that Hillary got the majority of the vote but the delegates split 78-78. I don't much care for the concept of superdelegates, but they have nothing to do with the caucus and their endorsements aren't binding on their votes at the convention, so including them in the total from the caucus is misleading (in fact, I don't think they should be included in any media count of delegates during primary season). Hillary is the strong favorite to win the nomination at this point because she has a strong lead in pledged delegates. She has the most pledged delegates because she has the most votes. Democracy in action.

Meanwhile, Scarborough's party does everything it can to restrict people's access to voting. They implement strict and, based on all empirical evidence, unnecessary voter ID laws, then make it as difficult as possible for minorities and the poor to obtain said IDs. They make it as inconvenient as possible to vote. Right now they are openly discussing how they can steal their own party's nomination at the convention from the man who is winning their primaries. And he wants to complain about the Democratic primary?

 

[SFenton]

So you think that Bernie supporters are uneducated and aren't capable of making their own decisions?

Which is it? Do you want them to vote for Hillary in the general election or not? Insulting them isn't going to encourage them to vote for Hillary.

No, I think a subset of them are. I think a subset of every candidate's are.

But I think a larger subset of Bernie's are. And I'm not insulting them. They're free to vote as they like, as I am. But I do wish that some of them were better informed.

I think he's calling them sheep in a very polite way.

It's not that they're stupid but they can't see what's around the corner. Bernie's campaign is an inflated hype train.

I don't know if I'd call them sheep- I certainly think there's some merit to them believing (and wanting) that there will be free college, tax the rich, etc.- but I agree with the bolded wholeheartedly.

 

[Tesseract]

I think he's calling them sheep in a very polite way.

It's not that they're stupid but they can't see what's around the corner. Bernie's campaign is an inflated hype train.

No, I think a subset of them are. I think a subset of every candidate's are.

But I think a larger subset of Bernie's are. And I'm not insulting them. They're free to vote as they like, as I am. But I do wish that some of them were better informed.

unbelievable.

 

[BlastProcessing]

So you think that Bernie supporters are uneducated and aren't capable of making their own decisions?

Which is it? Do you want them to vote for Hillary in the general election or not? Insulting them isn't going to encourage them to vote for Hillary.

I am not going to make blanket statements about Bernie supporters, but I will say that anyone who allows themselves to be so easily lead around by the nose by Joe fucking Scarborough needs to take a step back and re-evaluate.

 

[darkstar0155]

I thought it came in 2012 when we decided that superpacs were really fucked up. Occupy and Romney, if I had to keep it simple.

wasn't occupy mostly against pay inequality and campaign finance reform as you stated? that's not "the government is corrupt and needs a revolution" more a "we need campaign finance reform (which is completely true) and income inequality regulation"

Bernie loves to rail against wall street, but WS isn't the ones who are giving CEO's 600X the pay of the avg worker. CEO/Executive pay reform is much more important that any wall street reform (which we have already had btw, but that doesn't fit sanders narrative).

Btw, sanders LOVES to rail against the repeal of Glass-Steagall, when there is a lot of evidence that the repeal helped soften the blow of the recession. And the recession was caused by predatory lending, largely at smaller institutions that weren't effected by Glass-Steagall.

In short: Yeah, wall street could use more reforms, but its a boogey man and easy target for sanders when that's not where a lot of the issues are anymore.

 

[pigeon]

In certain ways Sanders with no party backing has done so much yet people feel the need to belittle what people have been able to achieve. Comparing him to Obama who ran after 8 YEARS OF BUSH, during the biggest financial meltdown in generations, in a time where everyone was furious at Bush administration for the Iraq war - is apples to oranges.
If Sanders had a similar amount of backing from the party to what Obama received or similar amount of coverage from the media - he might have very well be in front right now.

If Sanders had done the work to get as much support from the Democratic Party as Obama did, you wouldn't vote for him, because he'd be a Democrat.

 

[SFenton]

unbelievable.

If you could elaborate more than just a one-liner an a .gif, I'd love to engage more. I didn't come here to say "Bernie supporters are stupid", I think I've very clearly made the point that I think there are some well-informed Sanders supporters but there also happens to exist a large set of supporters that happen to support him because he appears to be the popular internet candidate.

We've seen this same thing before with Ron Paul. Extraordinarily popular online and on college campuses, where he almost certainly pulled in voters due to being seen everywhere by groups of people who go online, or were in college-aged towns. (At least my college town went for Ron Paul pretty hard.)