Progressives (Liberals)

That’s like a 9 on the tension meter...

I am surprised he wasn’t impeached.

Let’s see if Centrist Dems prefer him to a real legit as hell lefty front runner. If they put action behind their decades of whining, Trump is out and the four years was worth moving substantially left and away from war and corruption.

I suppose if you're going to subcontract your thoughts out to third parties instead of thinking for yourself, it is best to choose smart people to do your thinking for you.

But are you capable of discerning who is smart? It looks to me as if you are calling this guy smart solely because you approve of leftist lunacy and he is a leftist lunatic.

As to the point of the article, which is that the role of moderates should only be to help extremists win, the article does correctly pick up on the fact that extremist nutcases currently dominate the Democratic Party. But the article is wrong about helping them win.

The role of the extremists currently dominating the Democratic Party is to lose, and lose badly, while Trump and the Republicans continue to run the government.

When it's finally time for the Democrats to win again, one day in the distant future, these extremist nutcases will be driven from the Democratic Party and the moderates will regain control.

You wish to stipulate the definition of "coronation" as the forwarding of one single individual for leadership where those making this demand are part of some high level power structure. We can run with that.

What would be a better word to describe the position I've detailed - where supporters of one candidate (Sanders in this case) but who represent a small portion of a political movement and yet who make the same demands? That is, There is only one legitimate supportable ruler and they state if not him, no one will get their vote. More extreme, if not him, Trump gets their vote.

What word would you prefer to describe this sort of absolutist demand?

Voting.
People can still choose to vote for who they please.
It’s not that curious.

He goes way back.

Tulsi Gabbard
‏
Verified account

@TulsiGabbard

Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia want to drag the United States into war with Iran, and Trump is submitting to their wishes. The cost in money and lives will be catastrophic.

I asked
You responded


Lazy, stupid, dishonest... It doesn't matter. I am done with you.

Oh dear. Has someone wandered into a subject where he can't simply point at other people and say "Look everyone! I think what that person thinks!" ?

Peter Beinart on the double-bind women face when in positions of power normally dominated by men.Atlantic

The Democratic Electorate on Twitter
Is Not the Actual Democratic Electorate

The views of Democrats on social media often bear little resemblance to those of the wider Democratic electorate.


nyt

Lots of graphics so I didn't try to post the whole article. Worth a look.

You keep trying to accuse me of something I’m not guilty of. I’m not playing.

No one can ‘demand’ that only one candidate is legitimate. You tried too hard to accuse me of being wrong by voting.

It’s voting.

Not lazy or stupid—and completely honest.

Definitely a necessary reminder.

This doesn't surprise me in the least. I was raised by my grandparents, who were conservative Democrats, and very involved. My grandfather was the Democratic precinct committeeman. Conservative Democrats seem to be the most invisible political group in the country. Clinton relied on conservative Democrats, and they didn't let him down. He happily signed DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act), probably not from any particular conviction about so-called gay marriage, but because it fit in nicely with the social agenda of the conservative Democrats upon whom he relied, without unduly offending moderate Democrats. Tom DeLay attempted to pack the Texas legislature by redistricting, but Democrats, who were a major part of the state house, left the state, preventing the assembling of a quorum. DeLay tried to get the Texas Rangers to arrest them and bring them back, but they were told at the Oklahoma border that they were our of their jurisdiction. Those Democratic lawmakers were typeical southern conservative Democrats, and they made a convincing case that DeLay's scheme would have left them without representation in the state house.

I hope these fools who rant around here will remember that most Democrats are not on the extreme left. All Democrats need to work together. One thing we don't need is people Lashing out at Democrats, just because they're not Berniebots.

I do not understand your assertion. Any money you sent to Bernie Sanders went to Bernie Sanders. I am not aware of any evidence of Hillary Clinton's campaign stealing money from Bernie sanders campaign. I 've never even heard anyone make such a claim or accusation.

No, I disagree. The Dems will nominate the candidate who actually wins the nomination contest.
If the winner ends up being one of the frontrunners such as Bernie Sanders or Joe Biden, then that is what it should be.
On the other hand, if the winner ends up being someone who isn't a frontrunner, then that is what it should be.

Yes, I agree that Bernie Sanders definitely deserves credit for moving the democratic party further to the left.
I also support and applaud him for what he has done.

Yes, I agree with you.
I would also add that an anti-Trump movement played a major role in this wave.
I would also add that a backlash against the current republican party also played a major role in this wave.

I respectfully disagree with this assertion.
I have no reason or evidence that anything like this ever took place.

Real Music, if you bet on a team to win the Super Bowl and you find out later the NFL has entered into a contract, stipulating that the opposing team WILL win, and later the Commissioner argues on the witness stand that choosing and backing the opposing team is legal—but you didn’t know this— you’d be pissed.

This happened.

You act as though you don’t know this. You do.

I don't think your analogy actually applies.

Based on that analogy, Hillary Clinton would have won the nomination over

Barack Obama because she was the odds on favorite.

Prior to the primaries, Barack Obama was a little known one term Senator who was just starting to become a rising star.

Barack Obama unexpectedly defeated the odds on favorite, Hillary Clinton.

She didn’t have a contract with the DNC when she ran against Obama... She actually had a paper contract with the DNC in 2016.

Her June or July acquiescence to Obama most likely required a contract and a coronation in 2016.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/static.theintercept.com/amp/dnc-donna-brazile-hillary-clinton-barack-obama.html

What happened.

Excerpt:

IN THE FALL of 2015, a year before the presidential election, the Democratic National Committee, we now know, was bought for the equivalent of a pawn shop by the campaign of Hillary Clinton.

The party organization was still deeply in debt from the 2012 campaign, owing millions to banks and vendors, burning through what little cash it had at a stunning rate of some $3 million to $4 million per month. By August 2015, the DNC was becoming unable to make payroll and approaching the equivalent of bankruptcy, according to a former senior party official, who requested anonymity, arguing that being quoted publicly criticizing the DNC in a news outlet connected to Intercept founder Glenn Greenwald, who is a critic of the DNC, would be damaging professionally.

And so the DNC, to save itself, sold everything to the only bidder. The Clinton campaign bailed out the DNC and, in exchange, effectively took it over, according to Donna Brazile, who served as the organization’s acting chairperson from July 2016 to February 2017.

“The agreement — signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias — specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff,” Brazile wrote in an explosive excerpt of her book published Thursday in Politico. “The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.”

Brazile’s belated acknowledgement that the DNC was, in fact, under the direct control of the Clinton campaign, rather than a neutral arbiter of the race, has enflamed a long-burning fight between Clinton’s backers and those of 2016 presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders, lending official credence to the argument that the DNC was tilted in Clinton’s favor.

There will be plenty of Facebook and Twitter threads to hash that out between now and the apocalypse. There will also be a chance to ponder the thinking behind Brazile’s timing — after it could have made a difference in the DNC chair race and a week before the Virginia gubernatorial election — as well as the motive, both personal and political. Indeed, during the campaign, Mook subjected Brazile to regular indignities, according to people who observed the relationship.

All that is fodder for a good flamewar, but walking away rather unscathed is the man who set the blaze in the first place: former President Barack Obama. “Nobody wanted to out the fact that Obama had let it get so bad,” said the DNC official.

All you're saying is...

Bernie was

-to stupid
-too poor
-too uninterested

to throw in his own money, support and following to do that himself.