Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ScottMon

Why Aren't We Outraged?

Recommended Posts

It is time to beat Trump, not to extend the primaries by rehashing minor grievances.

 

Bill

The grievances from the Bernie camp are NOT "minor." The DNC collectively defecated all over democracy with their collusion. Up here in my neck of the woods, lifetime Democrats are un-registering from the Democratic party in droves.

 

#DemExit isn't some Bernie Bro threat. It's happening.

 

And they're not nearly as pissed at Hillary as they are the DNC itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They weren't "musing," Bill. They were discussing whether or not to use it to damage him in the media. Big difference.

 

Political parties aren't allowed to use information in an effort to damage their own candidates. They're required to be impartial when working for the party in that capacity. Why do you refuse to see/admit that?

 

I'm going to keep asking as you don't seem to want to answer:

 

Why didn't the DNC tell Bernie last November that Hillary was going to get the nomination and that he shouldn't bother running?

 

Why the 7-month long dog and pony show when the winner had already been decided?

 

And did they act on the internal discussion? No. Did they red-bait him? No. Should we be "outraged?" No.

 

He had a fair shot and had the full resources of the Democratic party, which one might argue were not fully earned, and was given great benefits by running "as a Democrat."

 

His odds were very very thin. He knew that. If you want to talk about honesty (and I'd prefer not), Bernie Sanders was not very honest with his supporters about his "path to victory." He is, as Laripu has rightly pointed out, a politician. Politics is a tough business sometimes.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And did they act on the internal discussion? No. Did they red-bait him? No. Should we be "outraged?" No.

 

He had a fair shot and had the full resources of the Democratic party, which one might argue were not fully earned, and was given great benefits by running "as a Democrat."

 

His odds were very very thin. He knew that. If you want to talk about honesty (and I'd prefer not), Bernie Sanders was not very honest with his supporters about his "path to victory." He is, as Laripu has rightly pointed out, a politician. Politics is a tough business sometimes.

 

Bill

Lifetime Democrats are leaving in droves, Bill. Even as you keep trying to excuse the inexcusable. The DNC broke their own rules and conspired against their own.

 

RR (#DemExit Class of 2000)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're leaving in droves, Bill. Even as you keep trying to excuse the inexcusable.

 

RR (who #DemExited in 2000)

 

There was nothing inexcusable that happened. Big Lie type propaganda doesn't alter reality.

 

Regressives that decide to support Trump/Stein are not Democrats (or Progressives) in the first place. Bernie is with us as part of the Clinton coalition.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was nothing inexcusable that happened. Big Lie type propaganda doesn't alter reality.

 

Regressives that decide to support Trump/Stein are not Democrats (or Progressives) in the first place. Bernie is with us as part of the Clinton coalition.

 

Bill

Sorry you can't see it. Suffice it to say, enough are outraged to tilt the election. And instead of reaching out to Bernie supporters, communicating with them, and canning the culprits who colluded and conspired.... you all act like everything's just ducky and maintain that no wrong was done.

 

Well, feel free to ride that train into November then. Odd thing is, a lot of Bernie supporters were considering voting for Hillary until this WikiLeaks leak happened. The DNC sank their own boat.

 

Btw, Trump and Stein aren't running on the same ticket. :rolleyes: They despise each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Up here in my neck of the woods, lifetime Democrats are un-registering from the Democratic party in droves."

 

Just curious, are they re-registering as "No Party Affiliation", Independents,Green,or what?

 

Does the #DemExit have a longer term strategy, or do you consider it an act of protest?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry you can't see it. Suffice it to say, enough are outraged to tilt the election. And instead of reaching out to Bernie supporters, communicating with them, and canning the culprits who colluded and conspired.... you all act like everything's just ducky and maintain that no wrong was done.

 

Well, feel free to ride that train into November then. Odd thing is, a lot of Bernie supporters were considering voting for Hillary until this WikiLeaks leak happened. The DNC sank their own boat it seems.

 

Btw, Trump and Stein aren't running on the same ticket. :rolleyes: They despise each other.

 

Yes, there are some very fucked-up thinking people that have themselves worked up into a false-sense of outrage, one that their former leader (but now identified by them as a traitor to their cause) Bernie Sanders doesn't share.

 

They have a new cult-leader in the person of Jill Stein to feed their delusions and narcism, while the Clinton-Sanders coalition gets down to the truly important work of defeating Donald Trump, and preparing to carry forward liberal-progressive values in this country.

 

It there should be legitimate outrage, it was the behavior of false-Democrats who booed civil rights hero Elijah Cummings at the convention. That was reprehensible. Those people want to leave? Good riddance, And don't come back.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Up here in my neck of the woods, lifetime Democrats are un-registering from the Democratic party in droves."

 

Just curious, are they re-registering as "No Party Affiliation", Independents,Green,or what?

 

Does the #DemExit have a longer term strategy, or do you consider it an act of protest?

It started after Bernie's endorsement but has grown a LOT since the WikiLeaks emails came out. They're re-registering as both Independent and Greens. It's a definite vote of "no confidence."

 

 

while the Clinton-Sanders coalition gets down to the truly important work of defeating Donald Trump,

Do you truly believe Bernie adores and trusts Hillary? Do you truly believe he's "over" the information that was leaked via WikiLeaks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You dodged the wrong-headed action of booing a civil rights leader, which was far more outrageous than two staffers discussing (but doing nothing about) the obvious fact that Bernie Sanders being an atheist could hurt him electorally. People in politics discuss vulnerabilities of candidates, even the ones they favor, as that's part of the job. Nothing outrageous happened at the DNC.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bernie Sanders wants Hillary Clinton to win. Does he harbor slights and hurts over the campaign, I'm sure he does.

 

Does Hillary Clinton (and many Democrats, including this one) feel that Bernie Sanders and his campaign acted in some unfortunate ways during the campaign? Sure.

 

But we are adults. Politics is a rough business. You get over it (if one is smart) and work toward progress. Joining the Regressives was not Bernie Sanders' move. He wisely joined Team Clinton, along with most of his supporters, to go for the win in stopping Donald Trump and electing a great Democratic nominee in Hillary Clinton.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You dodged the wrong-headed action of booing a civil rights leader, which was far more outrageous than two staffers discussing (but doing nothing about) the obvious fact that Bernie Sanders being an atheist could hurt him electorally. People in politics discuss vulnerabilities of candidates, even the ones they favor, as that's part of the job. Nothing outrageous happened at the DNC.

 

Bill

I didn't dodge anything. They weren't booing Elijah Cummings. They were booing the gestapo-like forced unity efforts being imposed on them in the stands. Of course, that stuff wasn't covered in the mainstream media.

 

Now please do not dodge this question: Why didn't the DNC tell Bernie last November that the nominee had already been chosen and that he'd be wasting his time running?

 

 

Does Hillary Clinton (and many Democrats, including this one) feel that Bernie Sanders and his campaign acted in some unfortunate ways during the campaign? Sure.

The question to ask yourself is did the DNC work and/or conspire to make Hillary look bad? Of course, that's a big N-O. Unlike they did with Bernie.

 

I expect campaigns to launch shady b/s against each other. I do NOT expect their party to launch shady b/s against their own damn candidates! They were REQUIRED to remain impartial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't dodge anything. They weren't booing Elijah Cummings. They were booing the gestapo-like forced unity efforts being imposed on them in the stands. Of course, that stuff wasn't covered in the mainstream media.

 

Now please not dodge this question: Why didn't the DNC tell Bernie last November that the nominee had already been chosen and that he'd be wasting his time running?

 

So they just happened to be booing during the speech by civil right hero Elijah Cummings? I think that was fucking outrageous.

 

To your question: Any sane political observer understood that Hillary Clinton was the most likely nominee in 2016, and that goes back to 2008. Likely nominees don't always win. This year we have the example of Jeb! as proof. He was favored by the RNC, and lost. They moved to Rubio. Rubio lost.

 

Nothing is in the bag. There was a moment when Hillary was down and (had he chosen to) Joe Biden might have jumped in and displaced her.

 

Bernie Sanders had a fair-shot. He did better than anyone expected, including Bernie. It is a false-narrative that victory was stolen from him because two DNC staffers noticed his atheism would be a political weakness (while doing nothing about it).

 

Beware being pulled into the world of conspiracy-theory, as the Greens are as detached from reality as BeAChooser-types are as analogues on the right.

 

Associating with whack-a-doodles is playing with fire.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question to ask yourself is did the DNC work and/or conspire to make Hillary look bad? Of course, that's a big N-O. Unlike they did with Bernie.

 

I expect campaigns to launch shady b/s against each other. I do NOT expect their party to launch shady b/s against their own damn candidates! They were REQUIRED to remain impartial.

 

There was ONE ugly incident, where Busters (once again) acted inappropriately. Making death threats against a Democratic official in Nevada, disrupting a convention, and booing and shouting over a speech by one of the great progressives in the Senate, Barbara Boxer. Outrageous behavior.

 

In the telling of the story one point (that a chair or chairs were thrown seems to have been exaggerated, as it seems a chair was picked up as if to be thrown, but then put down) a case of battery vs assault. But who picks up chairs to threaten people. Outrageous behavior.

 

The fault for this incident lies in those elements of the Sanders campaign who acted badly. making death treats isn't cool. It is outrageous.

 

Booing Progressive Senators isn't cool. It is outrageous.

 

Picking up a chair like you are going to throw it isn't cool. It is outrageous.

 

This stuff wasn't make up. And the behaviors (my some) repeated themselves at the convention. It is outrageous.

 

But better to move on in solidarity with well-thinking people like Bernie Sanders in a coalition than to re-fight the primaries. Only Trump wins if we war on ourselves.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Do you truly believe Bernie adores and trusts Hillary?"

 

No, I do not believe this in the slightest. Personally, I have a big issue with Hillary in the area of military Intervention, so I have been vehemently opposed to her on that issue.

 

"Do you truly believe he's "over" the information that was leaked via WikiLeaks?"

 

No, I do not. He's been a Senator for 10 years, and knows how to achieve progress on the issues.The question is what is he doing about it. Currently, he is supporting progressive candidates down ballot. Looking further down the road, I have heard him mention several times about his plans for 'the day after the election". I suspect there will be a major announcement from him on Nov 5th regarding the future of the movement.

 

There are many (Republicans, Democrats, and others) that are wishing that Bernie's supporters would just shut-up, and disappear. I will not do neither, and continue fighting for the Progressive agenda in whatever way is most effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie is supporting a progressive candidate up ballot as well.

 

This liberal is happy for those who supported Senator Sanders to be part of the Democratic coalition. Being part of the voting block advances causes most of us on this sub-forum favor. Joining with Regressives to set back progress and to help elect Trump is madness, and not Progressive.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You dodged the wrong-headed action of booing a civil rights leader, which was far more outrageous than two staffers discussing (but doing nothing about) the obvious fact that Bernie Sanders being an atheist could hurt him electorally. People in politics discuss vulnerabilities of candidates, even the ones they favor, as that's part of the job. Nothing outrageous happened at the DNC.

 

Bill

It's the principle of the thing. It's doing your job without bias or prejudice. It something I have to do every day at work. I can't give the DNC a free ride if I had an issue with Kim Davis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the principle of the thing. It's doing your job without bias or prejudice. It something I have to do every day at work. I can't give the DNC a free ride if I had an issue with Kim Davis.

 

Nice going stirring the pot. Hope you're happy.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit, it's hard for me to get outraged, sitting on the beach enjoying a beer on this warm, and windy day, but I will attempt to conjure some negative feelings...

Things that Outrage me (in order of outrageousness):

  1. Right wing Republicans - like Paul Ryan, Rick Scott, the entire "freedom Caucus".
  2. Trump- no explanation necessary
  3. Sen Clinton's 2002 vote on H.J. Resolution 114 - October 11, 2002 at 12:50 a.m. EDT - I have a long memory.
  4. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (& some select DNC members) - because no list would be complete without mentioning Debbie, but not all DNC members are alike.
  5. Sen Howard Dean's (from VERMONT!) superdelegate vote for Hillary, despite the primary vote being 86.1% to 13.6% in Bernie's favor, & earning all 16 'real' delegates.
  6. Obama's support for TPP - Looking to get further outraged if it passes during the lame duck session after the election.
  7. Information contained within the DNC Wikileaks. I have known about the Debbie & Co.'s antics for many years, the leaked did not shock, or surprise me at all.
  8. Rachel Maddow: psuedo - progressive TV personality that has been doing the bidding of her corporate overlord, while pretending to support the causes popular with progressive causes.
  9. My beer bottle is empty

But alas, the sun is setting, so I shall wander up to the Tiki Bar and drown my misery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nice going stirring the pot. Hope you're happy.

 

Bill

I'm not. I'm pissed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit, it's hard for me to get outraged, sitting on the beach enjoying a beer on this warm, and windy day, but I will attempt to conjure some negative feelings...

Things that Outrage me (in order of outrageousness):

  • Right wing Republicans - like Paul Ryan, Rick Scott, the entire "freedom Caucus".
  • Trump- no explanation necessary
  • Sen Clinton's 2002 vote on H.J. Resolution 114 - October 11, 2002 at 12:50 a.m. EDT - I have a long memory.
  • Debbie Wasserman Schultz (& some select DNC members) - because no list would be complete without mentioning Debbie, but not all DNC members are alike.
  • Sen Howard Dean's (from VERMONT!) superdelegate vote for Hillary, despite the primary vote being 86.1% to 13.6% in Bernie's favor, & earning all 16 'real' delegates.
  • Obama's support for TPP - Looking to get further outraged if it passes during the lame duck session after the election.
  • Information contained within the DNC Wikileaks. I have known about the Debbie & Co.'s antics for many years, the leaked did not shock, or surprise me at all.
  • Rachel Maddow: psuedo - progressive TV personality that has been doing the bidding of her corporate overlord, while pretending to support the causes popular with progressive causes.
  • My beer bottle is empty
But alas, the sun is setting, so I shall wander up to the Tiki Bar and drown my misery.

 

I reached #10 about 2 PM today. Fortunately, I had more. :D Howard Dean's a pro-establishment douchenozzle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And one more thing!!

After serious discussions with some of my compatriots at the Tiki Bar, I have decided to add another outrage:

The slogans "I'm With Her", "Stronger Together"

Not that I disagree with the messages, it just doesn't stack up to the classics like:

  • "It's the Economy, Stupid", or
  • "Change we Can Believe In",or
  • Nixon's 1972 "McGovern Can't Lick Our D**K".

I would have preferred Hillary Campaign slogan to be "Two Atoms in a Molecule, Seperately Combined" but I'm no Slogan Phd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am outraged, and I will continue to be outraged until Hillary actually shows by actions that she supports the progressive Democratic platform. Choosing Kaine was a big step in the wrong direction. I support many of the down-ballot progressives, I support a lot of the Democratic congresspeople, but a good part of the party leadership has got to go, frankly. As for Hillary Clinton herself, what she did with her email server continues to bother me. What can I say? I am working towards a career in network security, and what she did and her lies about it are a huge reason for my distrust. I had actually come to a grudging admiration for her when she was Secretary of State, but this reminded me why I did not like her. It brought crashing back all the memories of her Wall Street ties, her dismissal of stay-at-home moms, her evisceration of her husband's victims, and the way she seemed to switch political ideals whenever it suited her personal agenda.

 

Like I've said before, I will vote for her if and only if it looks like Trump will take Illinois, but I will do everything I can legally do to ensure that she only gets one term in office if she betrays the ideals of the Democratic platform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to rewrite the nomination rules then. They need to state, straight up, that "the DNC is biased and if we favor someone else, we're going to sabotage your campaign."

 

Why did they LIE and say they were being impartial? Why didn't they just announce last November that Hillary was going to be the Democratic candidate?

 

Why did they waste everyone's time and money? Why the 7-month long dog and pony show?

Well.....there WERE rules, they were broken and Debbie is the "fall guy". In politics.. do you REALLY expect committees and leaders to be really Neutral?

 

You can create rules so tight they are unrealistic or so loose they hardly matter. Who polices it? Well....that's also tricky. This stuff is not the stuff of law and statute.. it more resembles house rules of a playground basketball game. The main players have the most say and the details are gonna vary. It was on Debbie to herd the cats in general and ALSO mind the DNC itself. Debbie wasn't that unbiased herself.. and that let things get flaky. Bernie? He was a real long shot but.. less so than expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was nothing inexcusable that happened.

Odd. :huh: You apparently believe the DNC are liars then. Because the DNC themselves called it "inexcusable" in their apology letter to Bernie:

 

On behalf of everyone at the DNC, we want to offer a deep and sincere apology to Senator Sanders, his supporters, and the entire Democratic Party for the inexcusable remarks made over email, interim DNC Chairwoman Donna Brazile wrote in a joint statement that included other top DNC officials.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/dnc-apologizes-to-sanders-for-inexcusable-remarks-in-email-leak-226149

 

This crap's going to cost the DNC. When people lose trust in the process itself, they're gone.

 

 

 

 

Big Lie type propaganda doesn't alter reality.

The reality is the DNC was actively campaigning and colluding against one of their own candidates for the purpose of aiding the other candidate. Where I come from, that's called corruption.

 

Regressives that decide to support Trump/Stein are not Democrats (or Progressives) in the first place. Bernie is with us as part of the Clinton coalition.

 

Bill

Now that's helpful. Name calling and flamebaiting. :rolleyes: I'm a progressive.

 

Yes, Bernie will follow through on his promise to campaign for Hillary. He promised he would. However, I'd bet that deep down, he's as enthused about it as he is for getting a root canal. Jmo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that everyone has the outrage out of their systems, let's go win the General :P

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...