Support NeoGAF

[SummitAve]

You really just don't understand what I'm saying....... Who are these people? You? A system that elected Barack Obama as the 44th President of these United States is corrupt? There are generally two ways to bow out of a nomination process. Look at the GOP candidates like a Ted Cruz, for example. He could have kept fighting and clawing for every last delegate till the very end. He could have kept going. But he didn't. Because he knew he had no real path to the nomination and keeping up the fight would just be wounding his party's nominee heading into the general.

And then you also have Hillary herself in 08 during that CLOSER and highly contested primary. She fought until the very end because she was super close, but she never threatened to burn down the party because she didn't win. She immediately threw her support behind Obama and in the end, ultimately became the biggest support of his policies.

Bernie isn't doing ANY of that. By going hard at Hillary and the DNC even with zero path to the nomination, he's actively burning the whole thing down, poisoning the well among many of his supporters and threatening the very real progress that many worked hard to achieve. THAT is what's helping Trump. And that's 1000% truth.

You straight up don't know what you're talking about. He's not burning everything down by going hard at Hillary or the DNC. He is not threatening the very real progress that has been made and he's not helping Trump. None of that is true or even close to what's happening.

This is total fear mongering, and that attitude is the only thing actually hurting the party.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

How many people posting here now do you think were posting here 8 years ago?

I think plenty of people in PoliGAF were.

 

[TyrantII]

Im from Canada and didn't really bother with the US election. Why is Sanders so hated here on Gaf? My facebook newsfeed like him.

Instead of building a progressive movement within the Democratic party, hes insinuating they're corrupt and just as bad as the right.

The US only has two viable choices because of our system of government. Always has, always will be. Tearing down Democrats, a party hes running in, just insures the GOP will an easier time in November.

 

[Meier]

No doubt. But if I'm being honest I thought he was fucked after NY. Surprised he's come this far in this first place.

He is fucked. He's wasting everyone's time and sadly, his base's money. And a lot of them don't have a ton of money to waste. He's in the same situation as Cruz was -- no actual path to victory or even possibility, but he just refuses to budge because he's stubborn. The only thing he's doing is increasing negativity at this point.

 

[HylianTom]

Stop.

It would be way easier for tgem is she didnt insult their intelegence.

And of course, its hard for a Bernie supporter to be in threads like these because of the treatment they get.

Maybe try helping Bernie supporters understand why thats important instead of hitting them with snark, passive aggressive, and condescending comments?

I want to make something crystal clear:

"Why that's important" has been laid-out repeatedly.
Clearly.
Loudly.
In many threads.

Maybe you've overlooked the many, many times that the case has been made. It happens. A lot.

 

[Kthulhu]

Im from Canada and didn't really bother with the US election. Why is Sanders so hated here on Gaf? My facebook newsfeed like him.

Hillery supporters here don't like that Bernie is still running despite the odds. Some just don't like the man. Some think he's hurting the party.

I personally see no reason to hate either candidate to the level I've seen here. Both would be great choices for president.

 

[Milchjon]

Im from Canada and didn't really bother with the US election. Why is Sanders so hated here on Gaf? My facebook newsfeed like him.

His policies are appealing to left leaning people, for instance Euros like me.

Problem is, he is now actively hurting the only candidate standing between a Trump presidency.

That changes my opinion of him and especially some of his supporters.

Hillary may not be perfect. But Trump is baaaaaaaaaaad.

 

[legacyzero]

The issue is, he seems to have convinced all of his supporters that people who support Hillary support oppressive, rigged, and inherently corrupt politics.

So how exactly are we supposed to do that? You show up in every thread with some kind of persecution complex... Yet, there are plenty of people explaining exactly why voting for Hillary is exactly what you should do if you support any of the bullet points of his campaign. You simply choose to ignore it, as unfortunately most Sanders supporters will. And he is responsible for creating the rift in the Democratic party with the divisive bullshit he's been spewing the entire campaign.

Wrong.

Point 1: Hilary has shown many behaviors that scream corruption. The evidence is plain to see. Her donors, her speeches, her conflicts of interests, etc.

Point 2: there is no persecution complex. The long line of responses in this thread is pure evidence to how Sanders supporters are treated here.

Point 3:Ignore? Thats just false. If anything, the receipts that Bernie supporters post ibthese threads are dismissed, laughed at, and the supporter is basically shamed for even using/reading/watching that source. Most know the facts. Thats why #BernieorBust (unfortunately) exists.

Point 4: Maybe a bit of divisveness is needed. Thats Bernie's whole point. Im sure he dorsnt condone harassment and anybody that does is an asshole. But we also shouldnt condone corruption in the system. Nevada was a shit show, plain and simple, and raises a lot of questions.

 

[Eidan]

How many people posting here now do you think were posting here 8 years ago?

Hm, off the top of my head, I'm pretty sure Diabolos and GhaleonEB. PhoenixDark as well if he weren't currently banned.

 

[JP_]

Some Hillary supporters here are off the rails. They've convinced themselves sanders and his supporters are all closet racists because of the voting demographics. They go read the most fringe elements of his support and pretend it reflects the entire 40% of primary voters that have voted for him. They think he's as bad as trump and accuse him of literally trying to destroy the party. The level of delusion is just flat out insane.

Why make a stink over the "Bernie or bust" stuff?

• Clinton dropped out in June 2008, but the month after that in July 2008, a whopping 54% of Clinton supporters said they wouldn't support Obama in the GE even after he was the presumptive nominee.
• Sanders is still in the race, yet a poll from earlier this month found that Sanders supporters would support Clinton over Trump by a 86-to-10 margin.
• Bernie or bust is already small compared to the anti-Obama hillary movement and Bernie or bust has longer to come around.

Relax

...a poll out from CNN on Wednesday finds [Sanders supporters] prefer Clinton to Trump by an 86-to-10 margin.

That's about the same ratio of Clinton supporters who voted for John McCain over Barack Obama in 2008, according to Emory political scientist Alan Abramowitz. And it's still early: As we move to the general election, Abramowitz says, Democrats are even more likely to swing behind their nominee.

...

In July 2008, 54 percent of Clinton voters said they wouldn't support Barack Obama in a general election. (They even had a nickname, "PUMAs" — "party unity my ass," the 2008 analog to today's "Bernie or bust-ers.")

http://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11593434/bernie-sanders-poll-trump-clinton

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?p=203972755#post203972755

 

[BitStyle]

While his statement is ludicrous in the broad brush that it paints, what I'm assuming he means is that there isn't a need to "court" Bernie supporters.

The ones that would vote for Hillary have enough information that they should already know what they're doing in November. They want a progressive Supreme Court Justice, and they don't want Trump to burn everything to the ground. There's not much for them to decide, and forum posts on a video game message board shouldn't be doing much to change their political opinions.

Those that want people to "be nice to them" or they'll turn to Trump aren't worth stressing over, because they will either vote for Trump anyway or have no intention of voting at all. The idea that the tone of a thread on NeoGaf is going to sway their political opinions isn't one that should be taken seriously.

This is where I stand at this point as well.

 

[Brinbe]

You straight up don't know what you're talking about. He's not burning everything down by going hard at Hillary or the DNC. He is not threatening the very real progress that has been made and he's not helping Trump. None of that is true or even close to what's happening. This is fear mongering.

WTF are you living under a rock? Did you not watch his speech in Oregon last night with the Bernie or Bust chants? Did you not read the very article this thread is about!? Do you not follow the news at all?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/us/politics/bernie-sanders-supporters-nevada.html
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/17/politics/bernie-sanders-nevada-democrats/
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn-pane...ay-supporters-traffic-in-conspiracy-theories/

This isn't just a one time thing, this has been an ongoing pattern over the past few months and even Sanders' career. And again, I'm not talking about ANY OF HIS SUPPORTERS on here, online or in real life. Some of my best friends love Bernie and have come around to Clinton to stop Trump. Jesus, my beef isn't with them. It's with Bernie.

 

[Kthulhu]

Some Hillary supporters here are off the rails. They've convinced themselves sanders and his supporters are all closet racists because of the voting demographics. They go read the most fringe elements of his support and pretend it reflects the entire 40% of primary voters that have voted for him. They think he's as bad as trump and accuse him of literally trying to destroy the party. The level of delusion is just flat out insane.



http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?p=203972755#post203972755

I've seen Sanders supporters called sexist and gamergaters here on GAF multiple times. I think it was by the same person too.

 

[Y2Kev]

Wrong.

Point 1: Hilary has shown many behaviors that scream corruption. The evidence is plain to see. Her donors, her speeches, her conflicts of interests, etc.

Point 2: there is no persecution complex. The long line of responses in this thread is pure evidence to how Sanders supporters are treated here.

Point 3:Ignore? Thats just false. If anything, the receipts that Bernie supporters post ibthese threads are dismissed, laughed at, and the supporter is basically shamed for even using/reading/watching that source. Most know the facts. Thats why #BernieorBust (unfortunately) exists.

Point 4: Maybe a bit of divisveness is needed. Thats Bernie's whole point. Im sure he dorsnt condone harassment and anybody that does is an asshole. But we also shouldnt condone corruption in the system. Nevada was a shit show, plain and simple, and raises a lot of questions.

Bernie or bust does not exist because people are made fun of on the Internet. It exists because there is a strong anti establishment strain in our politics that has latched onto people like trump and Bernie (and previously Ron Paul and others) before him. The idea that people are clinging to their beliefs more firmly because they are being made fun of on Reddit is one of the more questionable comments anyone has made this season.

You keep saying Nevada raises a lot of questions and yesterday you didn't explain why you thought it was voter suppression. But the delegates were awarded exactly how the population voted, so your issue has to be more with rules and procedures than with democracy honestly.

If people don't tone it down in here there will be consequences.

I've seen Sanders supporters called sexist and gamergaters here on GAF multiple times. I think it was by the same person too.

Yeah and what happened to that poster? Get the hint please.

 

[AndyD]

Wrong.

Point 1: Hilary has shown many behaviors that scream corruption. The evidence is plain to see. Her donors, her speeches, her conflicts of interests, etc.

Point 2: there is no persecution complex. The long line of responses in this thread is pure evidence to how Sanders supporters are treated here.

Point 3:Ignore? Thats just false. If anything, the receipts that Bernie supporters post ibthese threads are dismissed, laughed at, and the supporter is basically shamed for even using/reading/watching that source. Most know the facts. Thats why #BernieorBust (unfortunately) exists.

Point 4: Maybe a bit of divisveness is needed. Thats Bernie's whole point. Im sure he dorsnt condone harassment and anybody that does is an asshole. But we also shouldnt condone corruption in the system. Nevada was a shit show, plain and simple, and raises a lot of questions.

Even if all other points are correct, his failure to speak out against harassment and violence is an enormous drawback for many. Similar to how Trump failed to speak against the violence at his rallies. All he needs is a few sentences to condemn it unequivocally and disavow support from those who employ those methods. No buts, no conditions, no persecution complexes. Instead, like Trump, he tacitly endorses it. And that is something that negates many other positive points that he does have to make. Because his version of democracy by his force is not much of a democracy.

 

[Maxim726X]

Wrong.

Point 1: Hilary has shown many behaviors that scream corruption. The evidence is plain to see. Her donors, her speeches, her conflicts of interests, etc.

Point 2: there is no persecution complex. The long line of responses in this thread is pure evidence to how Sanders supporters are treated here.

Point 3:Ignore? Thats just false. If anything, the receipts that Bernie supporters post ibthese threads are dismissed, laughed at, and the supporter is basically shamed for even using/reading/watching that source. Most know the facts. Thats why #BernieorBust (unfortunately) exists.

Point 4: Maybe a bit of divisveness is needed. Thats Bernie's whole point. Im sure he dorsnt condone harassment and anybody that does is an asshole. But we also shouldnt condone corruption in the system. Nevada was a shit show, plain and simple, and raises a lot of questions.

And yet... Here we are. You again refuse to acknowledge the fact that people have pointed out, possibly hundreds of times at this point, why it makes sense to vote for Hillary Clinton if you believe in Democratic ideals at all.

And the fact that you fail to address this, yet again, is proof of the perceived persecution complex in action: 'Well, no one has given me good reason to switch my vote so why should I?!?! **

** Reasons have been posted ad nauseum.

 

[legacyzero]

I want to make something crystal clear:

"Why that's important" has been laid-out repeatedly.
Clearly.
Loudly.
In many threads.

Maybe you've overlooked the many, many times that the case has been made. It happens. A lot.

Not when it matters. And when it is, its usually with some aggression, a dash of shame, etc.

 

[Bel Marduk]

Is this a "I'm a victim" card?

I do not understand your post at all. What are you trying to say?

What does internalized homophobia have to do with Bernie inciting violence?

When did I imply that I was a victim? Being accused of "internalized homophobia" was an example of the hostility that I faced being an Obama supporter in 2008. Her supporters have been very nasty then and now. I can take the abuse in stride because progressive issues are much much more important to me.

Republicans have been trying to suppress voter turnout for groups who typically vote Democratic at an alarming rate. The Clinton campaign will have to make her case to progressives on why we should vote for her -- and not just that the other guy is awful.

 

[Kthulhu]

Even if all other points are correct, his failure to speak out against harassment and violence is an enormous drawback for many. Similar to how Trump failed to speak against the violence at his rallies. All he needs is a few sentences to condemn it unequivocally and disavow support from those who employ those methods. No buts, no conditions, no persecution complexes. Instead, like Trump, he tacitly endorses it.

As I pointed out previously in this thread, he did.

 

[BajiBoxer]

I feel like part of the problem is binary thinking. The TPM tweet doesn't mean the Sanders campaign and supporters are wrong about everything, and the corruption in the Democratic party doesn't make the TPM editor wrong either. The corruption of Hillary Clinton and the DNC colluding with her campaign seems pretty obvious. The Sanders campaign can still be an ego driven counter productive mess at this point in time too. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Adaren]

Not when it matters. And when it is, its usually with some aggression, a dash of shame, etc.

Do you think those explanations of why this election matters are wrong?

I said it on the previous page, but you should vote based on the sort of future you want to see for our society / the human race. Not to stick it to some sassy GAF posters. You know that.

 

[Drek]

Im from Canada and didn't really bother with the US election. Why is Sanders so hated here on Gaf? My facebook newsfeed like him.

Because PoliGAF is full of policy wonks and Sanders' policies are dogshit, to be honest.

I'm a bit of a policy wonk and off-cycle PoliGAF is too in the weeds for me to be a regular reader of, let alone an active participant. So when a guy shows up and says "free healthcare, free college, free everything! Vote for me everybody and you get free shit!" with zero merit behind those stances you can't really be surprised when people who know better point out that he's full of shit.

That is the Political discourse on GAF in a nutshell and is a big reason why PoliGAF is Hilldawg's house. She's a bigger wonk than all of us and her proposals are backed by legitimately viable methods of implementation.

Add that many of PoliGAF are part of a social minority where the GOP is actively looking to disenfranchise them while at the same time they're well educated on the reality that political change is a long game, not something you can "revolution!" into overnight, and you have a recipe for people who look at the low information extremism that Sanders used to dog whistle and now overtly advocates for as something incredibly dangerous.

How many people posting here now do you think were posting here 8 years ago?

A lot of us are still here who bore witness to the original Diablosing.

 

[Kthulhu]

I feel like part of the problem is binary thinking. The TPM tweet doesn't mean the Sanders campaign and supporters are wrong about everything, and the corruption in the Democratic party doesn't make the TPM editor wrong either. The corruption of Hillary Clinton and the DNC colluding with her campaign seems pretty obvious. The Sanders campaign can still be an ego driven counter productive mess at this point in time too. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

You're probably right.

 

[Zornack]

As I pointed out previously in this thread, he did.

A single line that harassment is bad hidden in a rant about the establishment while your delegates are doxxing and threatening state officials is not speaking out against harassment.

 

[Maxim726X]

Not when it matters. And when it is, its usually with some aggression, a dash of shame, etc.

You are literally proving my point right now, but you've moved the goalposts a little. So now you're saying that people have given good reasons, but you choose to ignore them because of a perceived slight against you or other Bernie supporters.

I have no idea what 'not when it matters' means, though.

 

[HylianTom]

Hillery supporters here don't like that Bernie is still running despite the odds. Some just don't like the man. Some think he's hurting the party.

I personally see no reason to hate either candidate to the level I've seen here. Both would be great choices for president.

My main qualm is that he promised an issue-based campaign, and has strayed from that stated goal, instead opting for character smears. When asked to back-up those smears with actual evidence or voting instances, he whiffs. Repeatedly. It'd be one thing to make his smears and also produce or cite evidence, but he just continues with rhetoric.

I wouldn't have minded one iota had he stayed in and stuck purely to the issues. He would've brought great awareness to "unsexy" items that, to be honest, don't get enough media attention. But at this point, Hillary will be the nominee. If you're a progressive in this country, if you want a progressive court, if you don't want to kneecap any future Bernielike Presidents we may elect in future cycles, she is now the one viable entity carrying those hopes forward, for better or worse. Which means that when Bernie damages her, he damages the prospects of all of those things happening. He damages the chances for eventual realization of his stated goals.

That he and others don't understand this is something I find remarkable. She's not beyond criticism - I think she has glaring, critical weaknesses (both politically & positionally) and that she's daaaamn lucky to have the GE opponent she'll have - but I'm not about to chuck the future away in a fit of anger or self-righteousness. We can hold her feet to the fire in other, less electorally destructive ways. Above all, I want this issue fight to continue beyond this one cycle; the Democrats and youth vote are clearly moving in Bernie's direction, and I would hate to see future electoral successes hindered by foolish choices made back in 2016.

 

[JP_]

Bernie or bust does not exist because people are made fun of on the Internet. It exists because there is a strong anti establishment strain in our politics that has latched onto people like trump and Bernie (and previously Ron Paul and others) before him. The idea that people are clinging to their beliefs more firmly because they are being made fun of on Reddit is one of the more questionable comments anyone has made this season.

Bernie or bust is not new or unique.

In July 2008, 54 percent of Clinton voters said they wouldn't support Barack Obama in a general election. (They even had a nickname, "PUMAs" — "party unity my ass,"

Were they also anti establishment Ron Paul and Trump types? Of course not. This is just part of how primaries work.

How big of an impact internet communities have on people is questionable, but it's not unreasonable to suggest hostility can push people away.

 

[Alucrid]

Wrong.

Point 1: Hilary has shown many behaviors that scream corruption. The evidence is plain to see. Her donors, her speeches, her conflicts of interests, etc.

Point 2: there is no persecution complex. The long line of responses in this thread is pure evidence to how Sanders supporters are treated here.

Point 3:Ignore? Thats just false. If anything, the receipts that Bernie supporters post ibthese threads are dismissed, laughed at, and the supporter is basically shamed for even using/reading/watching that source. Most know the facts. Thats why #BernieorBust (unfortunately) exists.

Point 4: Maybe a bit of divisveness is needed. Thats Bernie's whole point. Im sure he dorsnt condone harassment and anybody that does is an asshole. But we also shouldnt condone corruption in the system. Nevada was a shit show, plain and simple, and raises a lot of questions.

you just bernied your entire point

 

[Dash_Riprock]

If comments from anonymous people on an internet gaming forum is enough to get Bernie supporters to change their minds on voting for Hillary than they weren't really planning on voting in the first place.

All this "I would've voted for Hillary but anonymous people on the internet were mean to me so now I won't!" just comes across as looking for any and every excuse NOT to do so. If you truly believe in your convictions and political stances, and do NOT want to see things you believe in taken away by an opposing candidate, you vote regardless of what others think or say. Not voting purely to spite people you've never met or seen is some of the most self-defeating behavior I can imagine.

 

[Kthulhu]

A single line that harassment is bad hidden in a rant about the establishment while your delegates are doxxing and threatening state officials is not speaking out against harassment.

Try a paragraph.

What the hell is he supposed to do? Take away computers from his supporters?

 

[Chococat]

This attitude comes across as crazily counterproductive to me, you want to get them behind the party in the election, not write them off now.

I don't want them to "get behind the party" because they have never been part of the party to begin with. They should want to join us, not destroy us.

Bernie movement as it stands now isn't a European style socialist movement. Wanting to Bern everything down if they don't get their way is template of the various communist revolution- society must be destroyed before it can rise. If a Bernie supporter is threatening to vote Trump, they are not worth courting. They were never an allies to begin with. Arsonist are not friends.

Bernie's approach of demonizing the party and supporters that he is supposedly in league with is pure Maoist bullshit. Only Mao could lead the Chinese with his grand socialist vision. He attacked friend and foe alike, making everyone the enemy. In the process, he got the youth to be his attack dogs and had them teared down country in his revolution. Smearing team, physically attacking them, fueling conspiracy theories and demonizing the intellectual and proletariat.Countrymen verse countrymen. Neighbor verse neighbor. Family against family. If it didn't come from Mao, it was a pack of lies. The righteous youth should rise up beat everyone into compliance for their own good.

Funny part of the story is once the youth served Mao's purpose, they were sent out to the countryside to die. And because they made themselves enemy of everyone, no one cared.

 

[Zornack]

Try a paragraph.

What the hell is he supposed to do? Take away computers from his supporters?

Mention what actually happened for a start? Acknowledge that his delegates are sending violent threats?

Trump did a better job at denouncing his violent supporters than Sanders has. Think about that for a moment.

 

[Y2Kev]

Bernie or bust is not new or unique.


Were they also anti establishment Ron Paul and Trump types? Of course not. This is just part of how primaries work.

How big of an impact internet communities have on people is questionable, but it's not unreasonable to suggest hostility can push people away.

I agree it's not new, but PUMA people were anti establishment, yes. They dismiss the idea of political party unity in their very name.

And sorry, I just don't buy it. If someone being mean to you gets you to change all of your principles or not vote at all, either you are in a supervillain origin story movie or you are a moron. I'm not saying you won't have hurt feelings or you won't feel excluded or even resentful, but stand up for what you believe in and stop being a baby.

 

[Maxim726X]

Try a paragraph.

What the hell is he supposed to do? Take away computers from his supporters?

Donald Trump did the same thing... Basically told his supporters that he didn't personally condone violence, buuuut you know things happen.

So Trump was justified then, in your view?

 

[Netherscourge]

Bernie is the Liberal Trump.

And I have a bad feeling his crazies will flip over to Donald and make this election a lot closer than we will be comfortable with.

 

[Justin]

I think Bernies biggest failure has been that he has the hearts of all these new young voters who will follow him to the end of the earth and instead of using that influence to bring them into the system he has turned the most vocal of them into angry, cynical, conspiracy theorists. These young progressives should be the ones being seeded into city and state positions to push progressive agendas but insted they have been told the world is against them.

 

[Kthulhu]

Mention what actually happened for a start? Acknowledge that his delegates are sending violent threats?

Trump did a better job at denouncing his violent supporters than Sanders has. Think about that for a moment.

Did you not read what he said? He did condem his supporters who were harassing people.

I don't recall doing jack about his supporters.

 

[Drek]

Try a paragraph.

What the hell is he supposed to do? Take away computers from his supporters?

Not staple a whataboutism on the end of that brief paragraph?

Stop breeding this "the establishment is corrupt" sentiment within the party that saw Barack Obama upset Hillary Clinton in the same process with the same rules the immediately previous time this process occurred.

Acknowledge that a segment of his base has turned to harassment and calls of violence and that such sentiment is not permissible within his campaign or support group.

Basic decent shit really.

 

[Adaren]

Try a paragraph.

What the hell is he supposed to do? Take away computers from his supporters?

I would have liked to see:

- Sympathy for the victims (instead of implications that they deserved it)
- Disavow the supporters who engaged in harassing and threatening behavior (instead of an anti-establishment fraud-implicating stump speech to get them riled up)

His apology had all of the sincerity of Trump's similar condemnation. It might have even been less sincere, but you're really splitting hairs at that point.

There's plenty more on what people wanted him to say (including lots from Bernie supporters) in the thread from yesterday about the topic.

 

[Kthulhu]

Bernie is the Liberal Trump.

And I have a bad feeling his crazies will flip over to Donald and make this election a lot closer than we realize.

Nice bait

Donald Trump did the same thing... Basically told his supporters that he didn't personally condone violence, buuuut you know things happen.

So Trump was justified then, in your view?

There was no "these things happened". Where is this coming from?

 

[AndyD]

Try a paragraph.

What the hell is he supposed to do? Take away computers from his supporters?

He should say in a clear manner than he does not support these actions, and disavow support from those people. Say the essence of "they do not represent my campaign, my ideals, and I encourage all my supporters to act in a civil manner". Instead, he made a general two sentence statement with a huge "but" at the end excusing it when he feels under attack which seems to be always.

The problem for him is that he seems to greatly rely on these types of vocal small guerrilas to get his message out and without them he would falter significantly faster.

 

[Eidan]

Sanders is actively pushing a narrative that he can win despite the fact that he can't, and that if he doesn't win, it's because of a diabolical cabal of party insiders who are trying to stop him from winning. Exactly what purpose does it serve? Who is it helping?

It's destructive, plain and simple.

 

[Fracas]

It's been weird to see the shift in his campaign. Maybe I'm just misremembering things but he didn't start dropping insults until something like January. The debates prior were extremely civil.

Sucks to see him be a sore loser. Dems need to unify.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Donald Trump did the same thing... Basically told his supporters that he didn't personally condone violence, buuuut you know things happen.

So Trump was justified then, in your view?

Trump specifically told his followers to assault people and that he we would even pay thier legal fee's.

Sanders specifically said he does not condone violence, period. The comparison is absurd and its hyperbole like this that causes people to not want to listen to anything that clinton supporters have to say, even when they are right.

 

[JP_]

I agree it's not new, but PUMA people were anti establishment, yes. They dismiss the idea of political party unity in their very name.

And sorry, I just don't buy it. If someone being mean to you gets you to change all of your principles or not vote at all, either you are in a supervillain origin story movie or you are a moron. I'm not saying you won't have hurt feelings or you won't feel excluded or even resentful, but stand up for what you believe in and stop being a baby.

My point is most PUMAs turned around, we want them to turn around, and being hostile to them probably won't help them turn around. Luckily Bernie or bust is a lot smaller than the PUMA movement so I'm not too worried. Just annoyed with how much of a stink it's getting as if it's some new phenomenon created by evil sanders trying to destroy the party when it's actually pretty typical and benign.

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

Try a paragraph.

What the hell is he supposed to do? Take away computers from his supporters?

"I understand there were issues with the process but I unequivocally condemn violence, threats of violence or harassment. If you think that is a proper course of action I don't want your support."

Simple not half-assed like Trump's response to violence. Though that would be at odds with message he is encouraging from his campaign.

 

[Iksenpets]

Mention what actually happened for a start? Acknowledge that his delegates are sending violent threats?

Trump did a better job at denouncing his violent supporters than Sanders has. Think about that for a moment.

I think worse than just ignoring it, releasing a statement after everything in Nevada that basically denied the problem exists and then immediately pivoted to talk about how the people want to end politics as usual and the Democrats need to accept the will of the people felt like a quasi-endorsement of it. Like hey, maybe my supporters wouldn't behave this way if you would just accept THE REVOLUTION! That's a step away from Trump excusing his supporters' antics by saying they're just so passionate about him, they can't help it.

 

[Y2Kev]

My point is most PUMAs turned around, we want them to turn around, and being hostile to them probably won't help them turn around. Luckily Bernie or bust is a lot smaller than the PUMA movement so I'm not too worried. Just annoyed with how much of a stink it's getting as if it's some new phenomenon created by evil sanders trying to destroy the party when it's actually pretty typical and benign.

Oh I agree with all of this. I already said I wish people would just stop talking about it.

 

[Maxim726X]

There was no "these things happened". Where is this coming from?

Do you always argue with people over pedantic semantics, or is this just an exception?

I'm not going to reiterate what dozens of people have already said in this thread.

Just adding a sentence of condemnation, followed by 'Look at all of the horrible things that happened to us!', and then spending the entire day avoiding the question, then never mentioning it in his endless stump speech... What more do you need? Do you really not see it?

 

[HylianTom]

Not when it matters. And when it is, its usually with some aggression, a dash of shame, etc.

You're going to have to clarify "not when it matters."

The case was made most often the topic came-up. I think that's quite appropriate timing.

And the tone of the argument - or your own emotional response - doesn't undermine its central points.

My point stands: the case has been made repeatedly and clearly. Anyone claiming otherwise is either willfully lying or hasn't been paying attention.