Lash
 
  2  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 03:45 pm
@Olivier5,
It’s easy to check the veracity of the claim (not sure the claim was made by Bernie or his ‘camp’, but it’s easily proven by the demographic break down of their respective supporters.

Liz’ fans are very, very white and more affluent.
Bernie’s are very young, certainly more Hispanic, AA, and less affluent.

I’m a little pissed that Liz’ charges are being reported as facts and they don’t report either Bernie’s response or the usual disclaimer that he has not replied to a request for response.

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 03:48 pm
@engineer,
Quote:
Both. It's not either/or.
Yes, I understand which is why I acknowledged your moral argument has merit.

But thinking of this as a "flip side" matter frames it in a highly mistaken manner. The transgressions are not remotely comparable.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 03:54 pm
@revelette3,
1. We aren’t sure if the origin of the memo/campaign talking points.
2. I only read Liz’ and it was in no way trashing her. It’s a legitimate contrast between two presidential candidates.
3. Liz Warren is a bold faced opportunistic liar, and everybody knows it. She’s been tanking and trotted out some bullshit - attacking the front runner.

I’ve canvassed and you sort of want to know how far the campaign would want you to go when the potential voters ask questions. I thought it was mild.
revelette3
 
  0  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 04:31 pm
Quote:
A text message that referred to Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren as “Pocahontas” that was sent through rival Bernie Sanders' volunteer messaging system led to social media feuding and confusion among supporters of both candidates.

t turns out the text message came from a rogue Sanders campaign volunteer believed to be a supporter of President Donald Trump, the campaign told The Associated Press. The individual was removed from the system.

But the image of it, posted to Twitter on Monday by a pro-Warren fundraising group, led to misinformation and increased tension among Warren and Sanders supporters.

The campaign text message, addressed to a woman named Caitlin, asked: “Are you in for Bernie?”

The person responded by saying they weren't because they were a Warren campaign volunteer.

“Pocahontas, huh?” the text from the campaign replied — invoking the racial slur Trump regularly uses to mock Warren, who had previously claimed American Indian heritage.

Twitter users immediately questioned the veracity of the text message, with some claiming Warren's campaign staged the exchange and posted it online to undermine Sanders. Others insisted the image of the text exchange had been digitally manipulated.

In response, some pro-Sanders accounts tweeted out satirical images of offensive text messages from the Warren campaign that were shared online thousands of times.

The Twitter user who posted the image of the text message did not respond to the AP’s request for comment.

The Warren campaign has no affiliation with the account that posted the text message campaign, a Warren spokesperson told the AP.
A Sanders campaign aide confirmed the text was sent from its system, which uses volunteers who can enroll online to send text messages to voters across the country.

The Sanders campaign told the AP that it believes a Trump supporter sent the text after joining the program. The campaign can view text messages sent by its volunteers, and it subsequently removed the individual from the program.

The Sanders campaign did not immediately respond to further questions about why they think the individual was a Trump supporter.

The cellphone number listed on the text message has also been disconnected.



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/warren-sanders-backers-feud-after-pocahontas-text-message/ar-BBYXiuK?ocid=spartanntp
revelette3
 
  2  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 04:34 pm
@Lash,
Senator Elizabeth Warren is not an opportunist and no, everybody does not think or know it.

I am not surprised you thought it was mild. There was no need to go there by the volunteers, it is just more dividing and conquring saying Elizabeth Warren does not have their interest in mind and it is bull crap.

The memo went after Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg as well. Read the politico story again.

Sanders has not denied the memo. He blamed it volunteers.
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 04:41 pm
@revelette3,
Quote:
The Sanders campaign told the AP that it believes a Trump supporter sent the text after joining the program.
Damn good chance. Such activity has been a feature of GOP dirty tricks ("rat *******") campaigns since Nixon at least.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 04:48 pm
@blatham,
Quote:
Such activity has been a feature of GOP dirty tricks ("rat *******") campaigns

You seem to be having a hard time seeing over the gutter lately. Are you appealing to what makes your voters tick?
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  2  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 05:09 pm
@blatham,
It just more whataboutism. Sanders and Warren are exchanging barbs which is to be expected at this point in the campaign. BUT WHAT ABOUT TRUMP?? What about him? I certainly didn't bring him up. Sanders launching an elitism attack on Warren is also not equivalent to shooting down an Ukrainian airliner, but we can still talk about it.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 05:16 pm
Quote:
BERNIE CAMP EXPOSED: Field Organizer Says ‘F***ing Cities Will Burn’ if Trump Wins, Calls for Murder of Enemies

This seems newsworthy.
https://hannity.com/media-room/bernie-camp-exposed-field-organizer-says-fing-cities-will-burn-if-trump-wins-calls-for-murder-of-enemies/
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 05:23 pm
@blatham,
Greg Sargent wrote:
There is a certain type of Extremely Online supporter of Bernie Sanders who tends to dismiss the importance of Russian interference in our elections. (...) In other words, Sanders speaks to the threat of Russian interference not through the sort of neo-Cold War frame often derided by some of his online supporters, but through a frame that pits liberal democracies that share a common, if sometimes wobbly and ineffective, commitment to international institutions against a global movement of “oligarchic authoritarianism.”


Gee, you don't think???

Few things in this current manifestation of Occupy Lalaland have surprised and (I hate to say it) disappointed me more than the near total blindness of "Extremely Online supporters of Bernie Sanders" in regard to Russia's determination to undermine the political effectiveness of western democracies and encourage right-wing populism. It reminds me of the points brought up by Russell Blackford concerning the way different groups of people react politically to stories and events based on certain preformed narratives:
Quote:
As the philosopher Neil Levy has argued, the scientific topic of global warming was intensely politicized by organizations with vested interests in unrestricted capitalism. These hired the notorious “merchants of doubt” to propagandize against respectable science—the doubt merchants set out to debunk the whole idea of global warming and climate change. There was no deep reason such radical science denial should have become a shibboleth for right-wing orthodoxy, but it’s now the case in many circles. There is evidence that many right-wing or conservative citizens view acceptance of climate science as the mark of an ideological enemy—an ill-intentioned person who cannot be trusted and should not be given a hearing.

Free-market opportunists and fanatics have the most to answer for in this instance—they have acted cynically to damage the social fabric—but left-wing environmentalists have not always been helpful to their own cause or to the planetary future. In that respect, another philosopher (and environmentalist), Simon Keller, expressed something of a mea culpa in a book chapter published in 2015. Keller points out that the revelation of dangerous global warming, backed up by more and more research, was not a surprise to environmentalists, who already possessed values and a worldview that made them receptive to the message. The facts about global warming fitted well with environmentalists’ pre-existing understanding of the world, which included a critique of indefinite economic growth. For this group of people, news about global warming even seemed like a vindication.

https://able2know.org/topic/44061-919#post-6942138

Totally different reactions to the same event. Similarly, I think the association between the "Russians" and the Clinton campaign probably underlies much of the denialism concerning Putin's intentions. Left-leaning activists were never too fond (for good reason) of our intelligence agencies and the FBI, and they were pretty stoked by the Wikileaks and Snowden revelations. To see these government spooks trotted out to provide reasons for the results of the 2016 election that didn't lay the blame entirely on the Clintons and their forty year career of drug trafficking, paedophilia, and corruption really rubbed some people the wrong way. Every new revelation was condemned as part of the same MSM plot to rehabilitate HRC (and presumably insult Sanders). For some reason, Trump's overt admiration for Putin, his campaign's collusion with Russia, to say nothing of Russia's involvement in Brexit and in undermining European elections, never raised these progressive eyebrows.
revelette3
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 05:39 pm
@blatham,
Makes it hard for people to know anymore what is real and what is maliciously fake.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 05:42 pm
@hightor,
Quote:
For some reason, Trump's overt admiration for Putin, his campaign's collusion with Russia, to say nothing of Russia's involvement in Brexit and in undermining European elections, never raised these progressive eyebrows.
Yes. It's the wrong story. Wrong because it could fracture consensus and for many humans, particularly those with tendencies towards strict authoritarian organizing of the community, maintaining consensus is of over-arching importance.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 05:43 pm
@engineer,
Quote:
but we can still talk about it.
Of course. For a day or so.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 05:46 pm
@revelette3,
Quote:
Makes it hard for people to know anymore what is real and what is maliciously fake.
Yes. That is exactly the intention. As I've noted before to the probable point of boredom, the intention and mechanisms of liars and propagandists is to make people stupider through misrepresenting reality.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 08:41 pm
@blatham,
No problem. Listen to what Trump and all the trumpies say and believe 180 degrees the opposite of what ever they say. At the present time. The problem is determining who is a trumpie among the ones claiming to be a democrat.
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 09:35 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:

For some reason, Trump's overt admiration for Putin, his campaign's collusion with Russia, to say nothing of Russia's involvement in Brexit and in undermining European elections, never raised these progressive eyebrows.


Does it bother you that nothing in this statement is true?

Overt admiration of Putin? That's a pretty bold statement. The two most powerful politicians in the world and you think they should hate each other and what would come of that? Perhaps you mean Trump's respect of Putin? Or maybe his ability to work with Putin?

The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

Russia has lost most of it's power on the International stage. I have not looked into any of Russia's meddling with Europe but wouldn't be surprised.
Sturgis
 
  3  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2020 11:27 pm
@McGentrix,
You don't have much of a grasp on reality, do you? That can happen when investing too much time observing Fox News programs, Rupert Murdoch publications and other right-wing media/blogs/editorials, etc.

Seek out more balanced and sane sources of information. It will be worth it. If not for the sake of your own peace of mind, but the universe as well.
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Wed 15 Jan, 2020 12:26 am
@Sturgis,
Quote:
Seek out more balanced and sane sources of information.

Please refer us to any unbiased sources.
Sturgis
 
  4  
Reply Wed 15 Jan, 2020 12:32 am
@coldjoint,
Learn to read. I indicated "BALANCED, I didn't write a thing about unbiased information. It's human nature to be biased.
hightor
 
  3  
Reply Wed 15 Jan, 2020 04:54 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
Overt admiration of Putin?

Yes. He's said as much. He's deferential to Putin. He believes the word of Putin over that of our intelligence agencies.
Quote:
The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”

Why did they continue to have contact and even meet with Russian-affiliated individuals? Why didn't they refuse to take their calls and immediately report the attempted contacts to the FBI? Why did they try to hide this from the citizens of the USA?

Quote:
On April 18, 2019, a redacted copy of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election” (Mueller Report) was released to the public. The Mueller report builds on the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that there were two campaigns to elect Donald Trump— one run by Trump and one run by the Russian government. The Mueller report clearly identified collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, despite repeated denials from Trump and many of his senior advisers and close associates that there were any connections between the two campaigns.

A total of 272 contacts between Trump’s team and Russia-linked operatives have been identified, including at least 38 meetings. And we know that at least 33 high-ranking campaign officials and Trump advisers were aware of contacts with Russia-linked operatives during the campaign and transition, including Trump himself. None of these contacts were ever reported to the proper authorities. Instead, the Trump team tried to cover up every single one of them.

Beyond the many lies the Trump team told to the American people, Mueller himself repeatedly remarked on how far the Trump team was willing to go to hide their Russian contacts, stating, “the investigation established that several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the Office, and to Congress, about their interactions with Russian-affiliated individuals and related matters. Those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference.”

source

Quote:
Russia has lost most of it's power on the International stage.

Which makes it more dangerous, as it now relies solely on its military strength and its army of internet hackers to pursue its ultra-nationalist goals of territorial expansion and disruption of democratic governments.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 01/27/2020 at 04:16:17