Tuesday Reads: Bernie Sanders, Demagogue


Good Afternoon!!

Once again, I had to give myself several pep talks before I could get started writing this post. The attacks on Hillary Clinton from all sides are getting louder and meaner, but the nastiest rat-fucking is coming from people who claim to be “progressives.” Republicans might as well just sit watch and watch, because Bernie Sanders and his supporters are doing their work with incredible zeal.

I wish the DNC had just let Bernie Sanders run a third party campaign. I really believe trying to hand the White House to Donald Trump or Ted Cruz. Maybe he thinks that would trigger his livelong fantasy of a “political revolution.”

I know you all have seen these quotes from Sanders and his attack dog Tad Devine in the NYT by now, but I’m going to post it here again because it is simply shocking and unprecedented for a Democrat to attack another Democratic candidate in this manner.

But Mr. Sanders said the idea that voters would see Mrs. Clinton as better suited to win in November and do battle with a petulant Republican Congress was “quite a stretch,” adding, “There are people supporting Secretary Clinton who will spin anything for any reason.”

His advisers used the vacancy to highlight Mr. Sanders’s promise to overhaul the campaign finance system. Both he and Mrs. Clinton have vowed to appoint only justices who would overturn the 2010 Citizens United ruling, which allowed for unlimited political contributions. But Tad Devine, a senior adviser to Mr. Sanders, pointed to Mrs. Clinton’s support from a “super PAC” and her acceptance of donations from Wall Street executives.

“She cannot be trusted to appoint someone to the Supreme Court who will take the issue of campaign finance seriously,” he said.

Nevada supporters of Hillary Clinton have reported on Twitter about numerous dirty tricks on the part of the Sanders campaign. Today, @stylistkavin who describes himself as a “Proud SuperVolunteer” for Hillary has been posting about some really slimy behavior by the Sanders campaign, if true.

Kavin said he listend to this call himself. He is also reporting that Sanders supporters are knocking on people’s doors late at night and pretending to be canvassing for Clinton. Voters in Nevada have received calls from the Sanders campaign saying that Hillary is under investigation by the FBI. Finally, I’ve heard that Sanders people are calling. Republicans and asking them to vote for Bernie.

Obviously none of this has been verified, and I don’t expect the mainstream media to investigate; but these reports definitely fit a pattern of dirty tricks on the part of the Sanders campaign going back to Iowa.

Peter Daou: Bernie’s Dark Side: The Reckless War on Hillary’s Integrity.

Democrats have two candidates. Assume for the sake of argument that they each have a 50% chance of winning the nomination. And assume the Democratic nominee will face someone like Donald Trump or Ted Cruz in the general election.

With so much on the line, why is one of them waging an all-out war on the other’s integrity?

Why on earth would Bernie Sanders run a campaign premised on the destruction of Hillary’s public image?

As we’ve written: Hillary let Bernie off the hook in the last debate. She could have asked him a simple question: Does he believe President Obama is corrupt because of financial industry contributions? It’s a yes or no question that is central to the 2016 race.

Does Bernie think President Obama is compromised by Wall Street contributions? If so, he should have the courage to say it. If not, he shouldn’t imply that a female candidate would be influenced by donations or speaking fees. There’s a word for that.

The endless drumbeat that Hillary is dishonest is now driven directly from the top of Bernie’s campaign. The candidate doesn’t say it in so many words, but the inference is crystal clear. It is an “artful smear” where any mention of the “establishment” or Wall Street is a Pavlovian trigger designed to impugn Hillary’s character. The Wall Street Dog Whistle.

No matter how lofty and inspiring Bernie’s message, no matter how much he motivates younger voters, it is deeply unjust – and frankly, reckless – to run a campaign premised on the destruction of Hillary’s character through false innuendo. And make no mistake, Bernie’s campaign message and the behavior of his supporters have become less about something and moreagainst someone. His path to victory runs right through Hillary’s integrity. It’s a deeply regrettable turn of events in an election where Bernie had initially vowed to stay positive and issue-driven.

Daou may be biased toward Hillary, but he speaks the truth.

We can only hope that voters in Nevada and South Carolina will see through Bernie’s smear campaign. I never thought 2016 could get worse than 2008, but it is much worse. I just hope Sanders and his progs don’t force a repeat of what happened in Florida in 2000. The only difference between Sander and Ralph Nader at this point is that Sanders has access to DNC voter data.

There are a few journalists questioning the Sanders campaign’s tactics, but I don’t know if that will filter down to voters who get most of their information from TV and newspapers.

From Buzzfeed: Sanders Campaign Missteps With Influential Nevada Union And DREAMers Anger Activists.

Against the tightening race in Nevada, the Sanders campaign is still trying to catch up organizationally — and the battle for every Latino and union voter has become critical. At a union rally outside Palace Station Hotel on Friday, staffers for both campaigns were handing out leaflets. Some Hispanics approached by the Sanders campaign could be heard saying, “Si ya estoy con el,” or “Yes, I’m already with him.” Others, mainly Latinas, said they’re with “La Hillary.”

Behind the scenes, the Sanders campaign has angered people inside the Culinary Union — in instances both reported and previously unreported. The campaign has also unleashed demolition derby tactics on the DREAMers who have endorsed Hillary Clinton. Both have given the battle for Nevada a harder edge, and made activists, members of the union, and supporters of both candidates question the Sanders campaign’s tactics in the key state.

There have been concerns that the campaign has at times not used union labor. There was the time Sanders was set to stay at a non-union hotel, a big no-no among people close to labor groups, and Yvanna Cancela, the union’s political director called the campaign with a list of hotels he could stay at instead. Sanders never stayed at the non-union hotel. (“I would have done that for any campaign as a courtesy,” Cancela said, when asked to confirm it happened.)

There was the time — last week — when a reporter called Culinary officials to ask: Was it true that Bernie Sanders had personally convinced the powerful Nevada union to stay out of the race and not endorse Clinton, in effect helping him? The union official, according to someone with knowledge of the conversation, said no and asked where the reporter had gotten that information. It came from the Sanders campaign, the reporter said.

In the most publicized instance, in late January, two Sanders staffers wore Culinary Union pins to gain access to employee-only areas in four hotels in an effort to persuade union members to support Sanders. The union was “disappointed and offended,” leader Geo Arguello-Kline said at the time.

Read more at the link about Sanders’ attacks on DREAMers.

From Salon, a mild but interesting pro-Bernie critique: The Sanders campaign is flirting with danger: The two big warning signs coming out of last week’s debate.

It would be extremely premature to say that the media’s begun to turn against Sen. Bernie Sanders. But coming out of Thursday’s Democratic debate, there were signs that, on both the superficial and the substantive level, the media’s treatment of the Sanders campaign is about to lose some of its (relatively) soft touch….

During one of the few tense moments of PBS’s generally “chill” debate, Sanders, responding to Clinton’s explanation of how she will use her “political capital” once she is “in the White House,” sniped, “Secretary Clinton, you’re not in the White House yet.” The remark inspired some audible expressions of displeasure from the audience, and reminded some media observers of Obama’s “likable enough” moment in 2008….

Sanders has profited from the media’s lack of interest in challenging his self-presentation as a kind of non-politician. He’s similarly benefitted from his mostly-unchallenged self-presentation as a kind of happy warrior — angry and loud, yes, but in a lovably earnest kind of way. The Clinton campaign has desperately tried to get the media to challenge this image. Sanders has to be careful not to do it for them.

That brings us to the more substantive criticism that’s dogged Sanders in the past few days; and it’s one, I’d argue, that is more likely to resonate if the campaign press is already becoming less sympathetic toward Sanders on a personal level. It had to do with one of Sanders’ signature big, bold promises — namely, that he’d all but end mass incarceration before wrapping up his first term….
As Mark Kleiman, Leon Neyfakh, John Pfaff, Chris Hayes, Tim Murphy and German Lopez all noted, this is not simply a very ambitious goal. It is absurd, outlandish, ridiculous, disconnected — you name it. And not for the usual reasons that people say such things about Sanders’ promises, either. Not because it’s hard to imagine, but because it is impossible, full stop.
Read all the details at the link.
Quoting Sanders:

I believe that we have got to pass comprehensive immigration reform, something that I strongly supported. I believe that we have got to move toward a path toward citizenship. I agree with President Obama who used executive orders to protect families because the Congress, the House was unable or refused to act. And in fact I would go further….

“Somebody who is very fond of the president, agrees with him most of the time, I disagree with his recent deportation policies. And I would not support those. Bottom line is a path towards citizenship for 11 million undocumented people, if Congress doesn’t do the right thing, we use the executive orders of the president.”

This seems to come close to a promise to use executive action to defer the deportation of all of the undocumented immigrants who would be legalized under the legislative proposals Democrats have championed. (The Senate comprehensive immigration bill aspires to place 11 million on a path to legalization, but in practice would lead to legalization for closer to nine million people, by some estimates.) And indeed, this is what immigration advocates think they heard Sanders say last night….

In saying this, Sanders confirms that he believes the president has significantly more executive authority to grant deportation relief than President Obama believes he has. Obama’s most recent executive action — which is being legally challenged by two dozen states and will come before the Supreme Court this spring — seeks to defer the deportations of some five million people who are the parents of children who are U.S. citizens or permanent residents. But the administration deliberately excluded parents of DREAMers — people who were brought here illegally as children — because administration lawyers thought going that far would be legally questionable.

It seems clear to me at this point that Bernie Sanders is every bit as much of a demagogue as Trump or Cruz. He is making promises he can never fulfill; should be get the Democratic nomination, he may end up breaking the hearts of his young followers and driving them away from politics altogether.

I’ll share more links in the comment thread. What stories are you following today?

66 Comments on “Tuesday Reads: Bernie Sanders, Demagogue”

  1. dakinikat says:


    Finally, and at the risk of alienating you a little, I think that preferring my moral/political purity over these life-or-death questions is a privileged position to take. I think one reason Bernie’s supporters tend toward the white, young, and privileged is that we don’t have as much skin in the game as others who would be affected by a Republican victory. Moral purity is a luxury not.

  2. William says:

    Sanders has never been supportive of the Democratic Party. He has never worked with any of his fellow senators to pass reasonable legislation. He is an outsider who seems to have no concern whatsoever as to whether the Democrats win the election. And I am sure that many of his supporters are stupid and spiteful enough to want to see Hillary lose, so that they can feel vindicated and then they can have Warren in 2020. Warren would get about 35% of the vote in a national election, but that doesn’t matter to the Jacobins, who want purity rather than governance.

    No real Democrat would run the kind of campaign which Sanders is running. He says that he is running on real issues, but he is trying to impugn Hillary’s integrity on a daily basis. And my experience with having watched Sanders on many political shows during the last several years, is that he never concedes a point, never stops, never seeks any compromise. So far, he has not only attacked Hillary for making speeches to organizations, he has dug up one comment of hers in her 450 page book, about Henry Kissinger, and attempted to use that to mischaracterize her completely. He was going to sue the DNC; he has complained about every aspect of the caucuses in Iowa; he now complains about the Superdelegates. It would not at all surprise me if he runs as a third party candidate, claiming that the Democratic Party is corrupt. That would likely win the election for the Republicans, and make the Supreme Court Radical Right for another 40 years, by which time there would be no recognizable America. He has already done damage to Hillary’s candidacy, by making accusations, insinuations, and misrepresentations. And I do not know what will make him stop, as he never has stopped before with regard to any matter. Nor has the Far Left, which realy feels more comfortable always being out of power and bitterly and smugly carping about it

  3. William says:

    I would just hope that Sanders ultimately does the right thing, endorses and supports Hillary, and goes back to working in the Senate. The tenor of his campaign is becoming increasingly worrisome, though. Of course, his supporters, the usual suspects on the Left, are enabling and spurring on this scorched earth campaign. It is his voters who have to ultimately make the decision.

    • bostonboomer says:

      Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if he goes back on his word and pulls a Nader.

      • Riverbird says:

        Yes, I’m starting to worry that he might pull a Nader.

      • List of X says:

        I would be surprised if he does.

        • bostonboomer says:

          Why? It’s only Feb., and he has already stated in a speech that he is running against the Democratic Party. And he’s using incredible smears against both Obama and Clinton.

          Fortunately, Obama again telegraphed in his press conference today that he prefers Hillary. When he was asked if Sanders has been disloyal, there was a very pregnant pause.

          • List of X says:

            Because we’re still talking about someone who voted with Clinton 93% of the time while they were both in the Senate.
            And I assume that by disloyalty you mean that time when Sanders suggested that someone should challenge Obama in the primary, without actually acting on it, much less by launching a third party bid, or was there something else?
            Finally, did he say that he is running against the Democratic party (40+ million people), or the Democratic party establishment (10-15 thousand politicians and activists)? The latter would indeed be shocking, and I’m surprised the party didn’t get the memo.

          • bostonboomer says:

            Actually, I’m referring to many many comments that Bernie has made against Obama over the past 8 years and his attacks on Obama during this campaign.

          • bostonboomer says:

            Don’t forget that Bernie’s dirty tricks are probably based on voter data he stole from her.

      • Fannie says:

        You know, when you mentioned the Sanders/Nader connection, I couldn’t help but think how spot on you were, and yes, he’s gonna do it. It has been worrisome.

    • bostonboomer says:

      I really don’t see how Bernie could credibly support Hillary in the GE after accusing her of corruption, lying, etc.

    • I just saw a “Sanders/Warren 2016” with a ‘promise’ of Warren being elected POTUS in 2024. Wow, lots of magical dust offered to the women folk who have been reduced to body parts if they dare run for POTUS.

      • William says:

        The actual Socialists in Germany in the last 1920’a were sure that once the Germans had gotten tired of Hitler, they would be the choice to govern. Obviously, it didn’t happen, in any context. There won’t be any Sanders presidency, there won’t be any Warren presidency. Fantasy wishes have been the death of many political parties in the history of the world. I have always considered myself a liberal, but the Far Left on the Democratic side has been helping to lose elections for decades, with their sanctimonious and pretentious purity. What happened to the Peace and Freedom Party that they used to champion?

  4. bostonboomer says:

    It turns out that when the media and the Sanders campaign say he’s getting all the young voters, they really mean “young white voters.”


    Among Democrats, Clinton leads Sanders 50 percent to 40 percent. Heading into South Carolina, whose Democratic voting electorate is more racially diverse than either Iowa or New Hampshire, Sanders holds a narrow 3-point advantage over Clinton (47 percent to 44 percent) among white voters.

    While Sanders has drawn a significant portion of his support from the youngest voting bloc (under the age of 30), just 25 percent of millennial black voters said they are supporting the Vermont senator, compared with 64 percent who said they are backing Clinton. The reverse is true among white millennials, who support Sanders 75 percent to 22 percent.

    The poll was conducted online from Feb. 8-14, surveying 11,417 registered voters nationwide. The survey’s overall margin of error is plus or minus 1.1 percentage points.

  5. bostonboomer says:


  6. bostonboomer says:

    Hillary’s speech is on MSNBC right now.

  7. jackyt says:

    The dirty tricks (misdirecting voters re: time, polling stations, etc., the call/visit in the middle of the night to cheese off the supporters of one’s opponent, and many more) were perpetrated on behalf of the far right candidates in Canada in both the 2011 and 2015 elections. They worked in 2011, but were publicized and prosecuted leading up to 2015. Presumably, they came from the Karl Rove/Tea Party play book, closely followed by the Harper Reform-a-Cons here in Canada (thankfully soundly defeated last October).
    That the Sanders campaign is resorting to the dirtiest of tricks tells me all I need to know about his ethics and suitability for public office. I wouldn’t vote for him for dog catcher, much less president!
    And, yes, I’m still a citizen of the US and I still vote in presidential elections… although I’ve been a card carrying/active supporter/campaign worker for the NDP (social democrats) in Canada for nearly four decades.

  8. As a Sander’s supporter I completely agree with you.

    We have a responsibility as voters and there is a model for the membership of a political party who are smart enough to vote for anyone who becomes the nominee for that party. Our political world is the result of a slow take slow takeover of our political system starting with school boards in the South.

    It is all spelled out in a 1992 documentary on the radical right called Blood in The Face. Find it and watch it. In the end one of the national leaders spells out the long term plan of working within the system to take it over.

    They would take over the Republican Party starting with school boards, then state wide, then nationally and use the party to take over the judiciary
    and Congress.

    They are more interested in controlling Congress because where the real power is in the United States.

    We must realize that what we call the Republican Party is a costume for an oligarchy that prefers to have us quibble over who ‘deserves’ to make more that 15 dollars an hour.

    Saunder’s proposes a return to the regulated capitalism of the New Deal.

    He needs Clinton because she understands and can work with the corrupt opposition that his agenda already provokes.

    Progressives moan about their disappointment in President Obama.

    But given that the opposition party is dominated by men and women who are unscrupulous and frankly racist, I’m surprised he got anything done at all.

    Think about it; progressives could not rouse themselves to give the guy we voted into office a congress that would support his legislation. Why?

    When will we learn that if we want our government to work for us, we must work for it as informed citizens.

    If we want a progressive government we must provide it with progressive leadership from top to bottom.

    We owe it to the planet to snap out of our dream world.

    Do we really want to hand our government to a neo-confederate who will finish it off for good?

    • bostonboomer says:

      How will supporting Bernie for the nomination accomplish that? Do you believe he will be nominated? How will he get elected in a General Election when the entire right wing noise machine focuses on destroying him?

      What about Bernie’s problems with black voters? Just last night one of his top surrogates attacked Hillary by saying having a uterus doesn’t qualify her to be president? What about his attacks on President Obama? Will these help Bernie attract the votes of women and people of color?

      How would Bernie be elected president without the support of black people and people of color generally? How does attacking the first black president win him votes with black people in the South?

      How will Bernie win the nomination without the support of the Democratic Party? What will happen to downticket Democrats if he is at the top of the ticket? He doesn’t even raise money for them. They will have to distance themselves from him if they are in red and purple states.

      Why are no elected officials in Vermont supporting Bernie? Why do black people in Vermont say that he has ignored their issues? Why is Vermont number 4 on the list of states with huge numbers of black people in prison? If Bernie is so concerned about mass incarceration of black people, why hasn’t he addressed the issue in his own state?

      How will Bernie create a revolution when voter turnout is down in the primaries?

      I could go on . . .

      • bostonboomer says:

        BTW, I’m not a “progressive.” I associate that term with the people who push for Obama’s election and then turned on him because he wasn’t perfect.

        I am a proud liberal.

      • Boo Radly says:

        Well said.

      • Question: How will supporting Bernie for the nomination accomplish that?

        Answer: I don’t support him for the nomination but if he gets it I will vote for him.

        Question: Do you believe he will be nominated?

        Answer: I don’t know if he will be nominated. But this is an unusual election year.

        Question: How will he get elected in a General Election when the entire right wing noise machine focuses on destroying him?

        Answer: At this point the right wing noise machine is no longer able to mask its true agenda.

        But I hope that the people who don’t want a President who thinks that his religion is more important than the rule of law will be able to hear the truth through the noise and vote for the democratic nominee.

        Question: What about Bernie’s problems with black voters?

        Answer: I can’t speak to that – Hillary is also accused of having a problem.

        But neither of these two people openly advocates for stricter sentencing in order to feed the lives of black men to our for profit prison system.

        I hope that African-American voters have a bigger problem with the Republican effort to re-establish indentured slavery in the United States.

        It’s also hard for me to gauge Sander’s problem with Black voters given that the surrogate you mention in the statement that follows is an African-American rap artist.

        You wrote: Just last night one of his top surrogates attacked Hillary by saying having a uterus doesn’t qualify her to be president?

        My reply: This is what I found: “When people tell us “hold on, wait a while” — that’s what the other Democrat is telling you. Hold on Black Lives Matter, just wait a while. Hold on young people in this country, just wait a while. And then she get good, she have your own momma come to you, your momma sit down and say, “Well you’re a woman.” But I talked to Jane Elliott a few weeks ago, and Jane said, “Michael, a uterus doesn’t qualify you to be president of the United States. You have to have policies that’s reflective of social justice.”

        The statement itself is essentially true.

        A uterus is not a qualification for the job as president.

        Neither is a penis – what matters are questions of leadership and skill.

        Question: What about his attacks on President Obama? Will these help Bernie attract the votes of women and people of color?

        Answer: From what I’ve read the Clinton campaign is “claiming” that Sanders is attacking Obama.

        However when I read what Sander’s does say it seems a bit dense:

        “The Vermont senator has notably not backed down from criticizing the president. At last Thursday’s debate he said “relations between the races” haven’t gotten better under Obama and that in his administration they “absolutely” would.

        Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/15/clinton-campaign-attempts-to-paint-sanders-as-the-anti-obama/#ixzz40TSVh9tY

        Sanders misses the point that the entire eight years of the Obama administration was marked by the most aggressively racist attacks I’ve seen in decades. The entire right wing echo chamber began to viciously attack this president from the day he won office.

        I don’t see how Obama could have made ‘race relations’ better when a political party acts as a megaphone for the Ku Klux Klan.

        Question: How does attacking the first black president win him votes with black people in the South?

        Answer: I don’t know why it wouldn’t get him votes since the majority of the Republicans in South Carolina think the Confederacy should have won the Civil War.


        Question: How will Bernie win the nomination without the support of the Democratic Party?

        Answer: I have no clue about this.

        But if the people select Sanders as the nominee I would expect the Democratic Party to do its job and give its support to the nominee.

        I’m going to skip to the last question:

        How will Bernie create a revolution when voter turnout is down in the primaries? I could go on . . .

        Answer: I don’t view giving the government back to its rightful owners, the people of the United States, a revolution.

        The vision that Sander’s articulates is like the one articulated by Franklin Roosevelt in his
        Four Freedoms speech.

        I believe that regulated capitalism in a nation that honors its own law is an American tradition…the revolution was the takeover of the government by wealthy oligarchs.

        In that sense Sanders is counter-revolutionary.

        Thank you for a thought provoking reply.

    • William says:

      Your point about the importance of Congress is very important. I hope that you know that Sanders has never campaigned for one person out of state in his entire career. Hillary has raised something like $20 million for various Congressional and downticket canddiates in her career, and has campaigned for them in their states. Sanders has never shown one iota of interest in electing other Democrats. Even now, all the talks about is some vague “revolution” which will sweep people into office. Of course there is no such thing, and the Democratic turnout in New Hampshire was no larger than in the last elections. The only person who can actually rebuild the Democratic Party on the state level is HIllary Clintonm and that should be more than obvious. And Sanders’ candidacy actually fits the Republican agenda perfectly, which is why they send him money and vote for him in every open primary.

      • Everything you say is true,

        I think Clinton and Sanders are essential to each other.

        Only an outsider like Sanders can express the agenda of restoring the New Deal and the reason it resonates is because the people have had enough of living in a world that normalizes squalor on our streets.

        The New Deal which was the real source of our economic power and moral credibility as a nation, even through the 1980’s.

        I don’t expect any politician to be perfect. I do expect them to know the art of leadership and to understand that the direction of our nation is set by those who are able to build coalitions.

        Hillary is a product of a centrist Democratic Party that was reduced by necessity to appeasing a republican majority that bullied and shamed its opposition into silence.

        For almost 40 years the terms of political debate in the U.S. was set by a group of reverse elites that argued that the ‘Heart’ of America was located among the simple folk of the Midwest even as the leaders they elected to enact their narrow view of morality fleeced them.

        Sanders and Clinton have gifts that each needs.

        Hillary must understand that she no longer has to appease her conservative opposition.

        They have revealed themselves and the nation waits for Democrats to articulate a vision that gives the government and its resources back to its rightful owners: the people of the United States of America.

        It is the people’s government and the people have the right to expect it to work for us.

        The time for battling each other over scraps is over.

        The one who wins the nomination should bring the other onto the ticket.

        • bostonboomer says:

          Hahahahaha! That will never happen! Give me a break. Sanders has called Hillary corrupt. He has lied about her repeatedly. Last night one of his surrogates said that her “uterus” is her only qualification. Sanders was standing right there and never said a word.

          What would qualify Bernie to be either president or VP? He has been in Congress for 30 years and has accomplished almost nothing. He has ignored the Black voters in his own state and he is insulting people of color around the country now. His policy proposals are ridiculous.


          He doesn’t even see Roe v. Wade as worth protecting. He said his only litmus test for SCOTUS would be ending Citizens United!

          Hillary Clinton is running a serious campaign. For the first time she’s running on her own terms and arguing for real change, not only in the financial sector but she wants to deal with systemic racism and sexism. She was always much more liberal than Bill, but the media wants to paint them as one person.


          Have you seen the polls today? Hillary is far ahead in 10 out 12 March 1 states and she’s leading with people of color by massive amounts. Bernie is trying to tear down the Democratic Party. Except he got tired and had to go home for a couple of days, cancelling his commitments–with a caucus on Saturday.

          Sorry, but Bernie’s not up to it. He a narcissistic one-note candidate. He should quit, but I’m sure he won’t. He’ll go to the convention and then might go Nader. I just hope he doesn’t put Donald Trump in the White House. Luckily Hillary is strong and resilient because she has been tested in the Washington cauldron for decades.

          • janicen says:

            bb, where are you reading that Bernie went home for a few days? I can’t find it anywhere.

          • If she gets the nomination she has my vote. The worst Democrat is better than the worst Republican.

            I don’t like having to cut my losses when I vote but until Democrats learn to unite as a party those of us who don’t want to live another decade under neo-confederate rule will give out votes to the democrat regardless of the nominee.

            My point is that I don’t care who he or she is a a personality. I assume that anyone who wants to be the President of a nation is touched by narcissism–but then they need that narcissism because politics is a brutal high stakes profession.

            What I’m saying is that both of these democrats express what sounds like a sincere interest using government to serve the needs of the people of our country.

            I’m not about to participate in anything that splits the Democratic party in warring factions.

            When that happens we lose elections.

  9. ownaa says:

    My problem with him is not just as a democrats but also as a socialist. He didn’t do much in that regard either beside talking. Why didn’t he work towards the revolution all those years when he was in the public office. He could have started the free college program or at least made it an issue. He could have started in his state a serious cops and programs of that nature. Instead he worked in the dem party committees and did whatever they asked him to do. Everyday the hypocrisy becomes more and more evident

  10. bostonboomer says:

    A short time ago, one of Sanders’ black surrogates said at a rally that having a uterus doesn’t qualify you to be president. So far no response from Bernie.


    • bostonboomer says:

      Here’s the full quote:


      • Delphyne49 says:

        Someone posted that on FB and I responded with the following. Feel free to delete it if you think it’s inappropriate – I’m tired of women’s bodies being shamed when they’re actually quite remarkable.

        Actually, having a uterus qualifies women in many ways – it is the strongest muscle in the human body and only we have them; pregnancy teaches patience; labor is moving beyond pain to love (in wanted pregnancies); having a monthly period – well, perseverance for 30+ years; birth control – our responsibility in taking them is admirable; menopause – ability to stand up to the heat of the moment.

        A uterus is far superior to a penis, which can barely be controlled as witnessed by premature ejaculation, failure to rise to the occasion and lack of patience (wham bang thank you ma’am).

        • bostonboomer says:

          Excellent points.

          Still, it’s incredibly demeaning to reduce the accomplishments of a former First Lady, Senator, and SOS to her sex organs.

          • Delphyne49 says:

            It is demeaning and I believe that is their point – diminish the accomplishments of women until women are no long relevant and can never be taken seriously. It’s been going on for millennia. I’m sick of it.

            How Hillary deals with this is remarkable – I admire and respect her fortitude and of her supporters.

          • bostonboomer says:

            The Bernie people are actually trying to defend this shit. Including Marcy Wheeler. I can’t believe I ever thought she was smart.

    • “Vermont incarcerates black people at the fourth highest rate in the U.S.” <- Looks as if Sanders isn't going to mention this statistic in his rally nor that the GOP was more responsive to the calls/invites by NAACP and other orgs. I am shocked!

      • bostonboomer says:

        I’m not. Bernie is a single-issue candidate, and he doesn’t even understand how to address his single issue.

      • NW Luna says:

        Vermont has the 4th highest rate — whoa! You’d think that would get the attention of a Vermont politician running for POTUS.

  11. bostonboomer says:

    New PPP poll (pdf). Hillary leads in 10 of 12 early March primaries, benefits from overwhelming black support.


  12. roofingbird says:

    So, today we are having a discussion over the $10 million donated in $35 increments from half the population of NY, to the Sanders campaign. Technically he isn’t yet in hot water over this, because this campaign and FEC will have to determine whether any of those names have reached the $200 mark. I find it interesting however, that just last week tweets were excoriating Clinton, regarding the same figure, a reported $10 million, that she had reputedly received from a couple of donors. I don’t think even the rats deserve to be vilified for this kind of behavior. Someone with big money does.

  13. Dee says:

    Meanwhile, BS is running for re-election to his Senate seat in 2018 as an INDEPENDENT and uses the Democratic Party he hates.


    “This detailed profile of the Friends of Bernie Sanders PAC shows that the bulk of his Senate campaign backers reside not in Vermont but California. His home state came in second place as far as contributor counts but New York, Texas and Massachesetts round out the top five states.”