CNN is reporting that during a private meeting last year, Sanders told Warren a woman couldn’t win:
The stakes were high when Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren met at Warren’s apartment in Washington, DC, one evening in December 2018. The longtime friends knew that they could soon be running against each other for president.
The two agreed that if they ultimately faced each other as presidential candidates, they should remain civil and avoid attacking one another, so as not to hurt the progressive movement. They also discussed how to best take on President Donald Trump, and Warren laid out two main reasons she believed she would be a strong candidate: She could make a robust argument about the economy and earn broad support from female voters. Sanders responded that he did not believe a woman could win.
The description of that meeting is based on the accounts of four people: two people Warren spoke with directly soon after the encounter, and two people familiar with the meeting.
One of CNN’s sources also says Sanders groused about the party’s “growing focus among Democrats on identity politics.” Sanders is on record decrying “identity politics,” but he denies telling Warren a woman can’t get elected president:
“It is ludicrous to believe that at the same meeting where Elizabeth Warren told me she was going to run for president, I would tell her that a woman couldn’t win,” Sanders said. “It’s sad that, three weeks before the Iowa caucus and a year after that private conversation, staff who weren’t in the room are lying about what happened. What I did say that night was that Donald Trump is a sexist, a racist and a liar who would weaponize whatever he could. Do I believe a woman can win in 2020? Of course! After all, Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes in 2016.”
CNN is moderating the debate tomorrow, along with The Des Moines Register. There’s absolutely zero chance they won’t hound Warren over this. Not Sanders — Warren. No comment from the candidate herself so far.
Open thread.
Yutsano
ALEXA! ORDER ALL THE POPCORN!!!
I have physio tomorrow unfortunately. I’ll miss a big chunk of it. But oh man do I hope Wilmer gets some teeth marks in his hide.
Princess
It seems very plausible and on brand for Bernie to have said this. He was probably trying to get her to endorse him and for that he had to persuade her not to run.
More to the point, maybe, is that I am impressed she held onto this until now to leak it. Perfect timing. I’ve always liked her on policy, but this shows pretty good political chops.
Served
After the Rose Bunch started their “not officially coordianted” attacks on her in earnest, this comes out.
As they say: Talk shit, get hit
trollhattan
Ugh. Predictable but nevertheless galling, when the quiet things are said out loud.
In my tiny domestic polling, E. Warren has pulled even with Mayor Pete among teens living in my house. She showed me a pic of Bailey wearing a “W” scarf this a.m.
geg6
Ooooo, that’s gonna leave a mark. Good on SPW for hitting back after that asshole and his minions decided to trash her via canvassing. Bastard.
trollhattan
@Princess:
For somebody who didn’t grow up around politics, she seems nevertheless to have a bit of Nancy SMASH’s chops. The professor is also a good student.
GoBlue72
OK Boomer.
You’d think a crew that can’t stop screaming about “BUT HER EMAILS” would be a bit more credulous about a CNN hit piece right before the debate #1036 that is being HOSTED by CNN. And which reporting is based on anonymous sourcing of people who weren’t even in the room. MJ Lee (and her husband) are both products of Tiger Beat on the Potomac – and it shows.
Might think about that a little bit harder about the incentives of corporate media and ask yourself why these hit pieces setting Warren against Sanders are starting to come out in a wave right before the debate, as the Dem field is being winnowed down of its moderates and the progressive wing (whether Sanders or Warren) is showing a lot more staying power – enough to start making the rich white guys who own the country a little bit more nervous.
trollhattan
Hey, is this what Kellyanne was talking about with her “Bowling Green Massacre?”
Baud
“Senator Warren, should voters be worried that a woman can’t win.”
artem1s
sounds just like you actually.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@GoBlue72: Hiya Dwight! I was wondering when you were going to start stirring shit more regularly, instead of your drop in at the end of a dead thread thing you’ve been doing lately. Are you going to be wearing your Bernie! tee-shirt all through the campaign, or do you also have your pragmatic moderate costume at the ready?
“Okay, Boomer”… so you’re pretending to be a millennial again? As I recall that didn’t end well last time you tried it.
How are things in Cubicle Row 3? Did you ever get your manager Debbie to agree to have the company pay for Friday donuts again? Anyway, good to see you, buddy!
Baud
This could work out for Klobuchar, who scored some points trying to moderate the infighting at the last debate.
pamelabrown53
@Baud:
OMFG! I can hear that question posed verbatim.
robmassing
Though I might say that at some other meeting.
geg6
@artem1s:
Seriously. Seems pretty on brand to me. My identity tells me that I hate assholes like Wilmer, so I’m going full speed identity politics and hating that mother fucker.
Chyron HR
Well, yeah, I mean that’s literally his platform.
Chip Daniels
I love how “Identity politics” doesn’t seem to include the thinking that a woman can’t win, i.e., that only men should be nominated.
the Conster
@GoBlue72:
I hope he keels over from all the stress of being outed as a snake, a con man, a snake oil salesman, a Putin stooge, a grifter, a racist, a sexist and an anti-immigrant socialist dictator wannabe. He should have just taken his rubles and kicked back at the dacha on the lake. Unfortunately for him, I don’t think that was an option for him. I’m convinced that Barr’s DOJ told him he could say their bank fraud investigation on his grifting wife was *closed* so that the old fraud could continue his ratfucking operation, and his buckraking.
MazeDancer
As part of the legion of tweeters who encouraged Senator Warren to take out Bernie or she would look weak, thrilled to see him getting attacked. May it continue. Next NRA support and porn writing.
Also, as WaterGirl reminded us last night – Please use the Pie filter instead of feeding the trolls.
Citizen Alan
@Chyron HR: I’m a 50-year-old white guy. And I’m still amazed that so many people cannot imagine that “old white dude” is an “identity.”
Baud
Warren should tweet this out.
trollhattan
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Heh. It had been a lovely period of silence, hadn’t it?
Meet the new pie, same as the old pie….
Geoboy
Did anybody bother pointing out to Bernie that in 2016 a woman did win.
Spider-Dan
@Chyron HR: I mean, unless the identity is the white working class. Then Bernie loves identity politics.
I specifically mention the white working class because Trump lost handily to Hillary among the non-white working class, yet Bernie’s focus is always on winning back the working class that voted for Trump. “Working class Trump voters” is coded identity politics for “white working class,” full stop.
Yutsano
@GoBlue72: Not sure if “serious” or just trite at this point.
HRH mistermix, Lord Bombay Sapphire, Duke of Schweppes
I want to know how the hell Steyer made the stage – I mean, process-wise,I know why he’s there, but I smell monkey business.
Litany
Count me as one Bernie/Warren supporter who thinks it’s possible something like this happened. Everyone understands that it’s harder for people in marginalized groups to win higher office, and that’s doubly true on the national stage. Do I think Bernie said it was impossible for a woman to win? Not really; it’s not consistent with his record or his past comments. I CAN see him saying that it’d be an uphill struggle or it would be a lot harder for a woman to win, both of which are objectively true statements. I can even see him putting his foot in his mouth on this topic, making these points with some sexist language that goes beyond the actual difficulties that female candidates face. But this is a game of telephone at this point with only 2 sources even (allegedly) hearing this from Warren directly, so I’m going to withhold judgement until she comes out and says something on the subject.
I will say that it’s notable these statements are coming out now, when the Warren campaign is floundering on the rocks and trying to bounce back in the polls after their feud with Pete. The last two rounds of polls both showed her not cracking double digits with either Hispanic voters or black voters, which as we know from 2016 is pretty much a kiss of death when it comes to Democratic electoral politics. If this really did happen exactly as reported then Warren has been sitting on this bombshell for a long time, and at this point I worry that too many primary voters are just going to see it as a desperate smear. That’s unfortunate, because I don’t dispute that there’s very possibly SOMETHING here and I believe that that progressive voters should make an informed decision when deciding between two candidates who both make compelling arguments.
MisterForkbeard
This seems very plausible to me – I’ve even considered this myself, and my preference for 2020 was Harris -> Warren -> Buttigieg -> Klobuchar -> Biden, at the outset. I don’t actually blame Sanders for it, and saying it privately to Warren is much MUCH better than saying it publicly.
But seriously, seeing how the media pissed all over Hillary, then dragged Kamala and Warren through the mud and subjected both of them to scrutiny NONE of the men received… I’m sympathetic to the notion, even if I don’t believe it.
Betty Cracker
As I’ve admitted, I have the political instincts of a concussed garden slug, so caveat emptor, but I don’t think Warren has anything to gain from confronting Sanders directly. My guess is she’ll answer Wolf’s question by saying something like “look, it was a private meeting blah blah blah.” My guess is she’ll be gracious about it. We shall see.
the Conster
@Spider-Dan:
Exactly. He and cult refuse to acknowledge that, and is why I’ve come to hate him with a fiery passion. He white flighted to the farthest whitest part of Vermont just as the two large diverse cities he was from were integrating, and had no diversity on his staff in Congress until he ran for president.
He’s such a lying grifting fraud.
Baud
@Betty Cracker:
Agree.
JMG
@Spider-Dan: Sanders hasn’t represented enough African American constituents in his decades long career in politics to fill one of the theaters in a Cineplex 1-16. Not his fault, he’s from Vermont, but that demographic is an abstraction to him.
MisterForkbeard
@MazeDancer: As weird as I find it to be in partial agreement with our resident crazy trolls (that this is probably true but not a big deal), you just stopped me from interacting with them.
Thanks! :)
@Betty Cracker: I agree. I think she’ll say “This was a private conversation, and Bernie was worried that female candidates would be treated differently than men. Which is absolutely true and I applaud him for raising that concern in a diplomatic and friendly way.”
Going negative on Bernie doesn’t do much for her. Being magnanimous and pointing out that the female candidates are held to a different standard (and forcibly bringing Bernie along on it) is a smarter play.
CaseyL
JFC, two of them.
I guess it’s a testament of some kind that so many trolls think hanging out at BJ is a worthwhile use of resources.
But I foresee many threads that look like bakery shop windows :)
the Conster
@Litany:
Has it ever occurred to either you or him that IF HE THREW HIS SUPPORT BEHIND A WOMAN, wholeheartedly, LIKE HILLARY, it wouldn’t be a self-fulfilling prophecy? He leaned into the whole *it was rigged* and *corrupt* and *establishment* active measures, instead of letting his cult know he knew his campaign was being boosted by the Russians, AND LEADING HIS CULT TO VOTE DEM instead of creating the margin of victory for Trump.
He’s just a misogynistic pig.
MisterForkbeard
@CaseyL: Top 10,000 blog, man! We rate lots of attention from the various troll factories.
the Conster
@Betty Cracker:
If you’re unwilling to take down Sanders, you can’t take down Trump.
It’s really just that simple. Liz needs to nuke the lying hypocrite from space.
Freemark
@Geoboy: Actually, Bernie pointed it out. It is in the post.
joel hanes
I would love to see Warren respond to some leading-question inanity from Wolf Blitzer with:
“You know, I’m not even going to dignify that with an answer. Better questions, please.”
MazeDancer
@MisterForkbeard:
Thank WaterGirl.
Cannot tell you how serene it is to see nice pics of baked goods instead of trolls and those forgetting themselves and feeding them.
Pie, people. Don’t feed the trolls.
Shalimar
Clinton beat two 70+ year-old assholes in 2016, one in the primaries and one in the general election. Warren seems to have a better path to the office than Sanders.
O. Felix Culpa
@the Conster: Troll. Do not feed.
Eunicecycle
@HRH mistermix, Lord Bombay Sapphire, Duke of Schweppes: One of the MSNBC folks, probably Kornacki, said Steyer had spent something like 10 or 20 times more than anyone else on TV advertising in 2 states-I think Nevada and SC?- and so had gotten to 7% in 2 state polls. Therefore made the debate. In other words, bought his way on.
O. Felix Culpa
@MazeDancer: I’m particularly fond of catcake.
Litany
@the Conster: This line always comes up here, and I’m not sure why. 12% of Sanders voters went for Trump in the general; a clear majority of them were independents or even Republicans who were unlikely to vote for Hillary no matter what. In contrast, in 2008 25% of Hillary voters went for McCain. As the Post explains:
“Another useful comparison is to 2008, when the question was whether Clinton supporters would vote for Barack Obama or John McCain (R-Ariz.) Based on data from the 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project, a YouGov survey that also interviewed respondents multiple times during the campaign, 24 percent of people who supported Clinton in the primary as of March 2008 then reported voting for McCain in the general election.
An analysis of a different 2008 survey by the political scientists Michael Henderson, Sunshine Hillygus and Trevor Thompson produced a similar estimate: 25 percent. (Unsurprisingly, Clinton voters who supported McCain were more likely to have negative views of African Americans, relative to those who supported Obama.)”
Candidates can’t direct their electorate to vote as a lockstep block, and that’s doubly true if certain parts of their coalition have irreconcilable differences with the people they endorse. What happened to Hillary is what’s happened to every ultimate winner of the Democratic primary: they lose some jilted primary voters who defect to the Republicans. Sanders voters honestly did that at historically LOW rates despite the fact that so many of them weren’t even Democrats, but you’ll never hear any establishment figures admit that because they want to make Sanders into a Nader and punish anyone criticizes the party.
Kent
@trollhattan: My LGBT teen is all in for Warren right now. Buttigieg is not on her radar. She is a little Bernie-curious but I’m working on that….heh.
Freemark
As far as I am concerned every primary candidate should have the knives out. The Republicans aren’t going to hold back. We need to know now who can best respond to attacks.
Hunter Gathers
@Betty Cracker:
Nope. She needs to knife the fucker.
What sucks about Gillibrand and Harris being out is that they would have already handed that asshole his balls and his lungs 15 minutes after this hit.
Barbara
@Litany: You mean the poll that showed her with 38% in Iowa if first and second choices were included? I don’t trust any polls, including whichever unspecified ones you are citing.
What I would say is that it is coming out NOW because of what happened yesterday (though you keep arguing that what is being reported in lots of places didn’t actually happen). You might say that it is a warning that if Sanders goes dark on others, others can and will go dark on him. It’s what is called a brush back in baseball.
VeniceRiley
I saw a Wilmer volunteers thread from Iowa with their If voter is for candidate X, say: …
thread on Twitter. At work so cannot check now. But His team is definitely attacking Warren and hard.
So of course the lying grifter denies it.
Kay
It is true, though and I say that as a Warren supporter :)
I’m frankly shocked and horrified at how backward this country is regarding women- it’s been a real eye opener, let me tell you. Awful.
trollhattan
@CaseyL:
My theory was the BRINKS TRUCKS dude was actually compensated for his time trolling, compensation that vanished after election day, along with him. It’s not impossible similar payment schemes exist among other noisy, annoying cohorts.
O. Felix Culpa
@Barbara: Please not to be feeding the troll.
Shalimar
@the Conster: She doesn’t have to take down Sanders personally, any more than the attacks on her the last week have been by Sanders personally. This is what campaigns have surrogates for, to do the sliming.
Barbara
@O. Felix Culpa: Okey dokey. It was a point I wanted to make anyway.
Yutsano
@O. Felix Culpa: But they look so hungry and pathetic!
the Conster
@Litany:
They gave Trump the margin of victory in the EC, along with the Stein vote. This is indisputable.
WhatsMyNym
@MisterForkbeard: Does that mean we get stuck with new hires? I couldn’t make it pass the 1st full paragraph. We really need better trolls.
trollhattan
@Kay:
Ironically, Wilmer also has limitations as a transplanted New York, Jewish, self-declared “socialist.” He totes a basket of self-limitations that I’ll wager is larger than that of Warren or Klobuchar.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
I can’t believe Blitzer hasn’t been relegated to some Willard Scott/Andy Rooney side role yet, but there are two other moderators. I don’t watch CNN, I just see clips that get passed around twitter and such, but Abby Phillips strikes me as sharp and willing to cut against the grain. The third is a DMR reporter named Brianne Pfannenstiel. Maybe she’ll bring it up.
A couple months back Mimi Rocah, part of the MSNBC stable of former-federal-prosecutors caused a twitter stink when she said Bernie made her skin crawl, and I suspect stuff like this is part of that, that educated, professional women pick up on Bernie’s (barely) unspoken “There you go again..” when people talk about ‘identity politics’
Kay
It’s funny because I just don’t even think attacking Warren is a good strategic move for Sanders.
I think it’s dumb. His opponent is Biden. That’s who he has to beat. This whole Warren thing is pointless and damaging to him.
O. Felix Culpa
@Barbara: Fair enough to make your points, but please not in response to troll, who uglified a major thread yesterday.
Lumpy
@Geoboy: Did you bother to read the entire post, or just jump right to the comments?
“Do I believe a woman can win in 2020? Of course! After all, Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes in 2016.”
This seems like a ginned-up controversy that’s designed to reinforce the divisions. Not surprising or unexpected though.
As far as who has good political instincts and who is running a good campaign, I believe both Sanders and Warren are running flawed campaigns. Warren is too reactive to outside manipulations (like taking the ancestry test) and Bernie is not doing enough to appeal to older black voters.
Litany
@Barbara: I’m not saying it didn’t happen, after seeing the campaign’s response I’m willing to admit those materials went out. What I WILL say is that I’ve phonebanked for both Sanders and Warren during this primary, and I’ve never seen these talking points. As far as I can tell these were not widely used or distributed, and even if they were it’s honestly not even that much of a smear: saying that a candidate is your second favorite choice but that her base is wealthier on average (demonstrably true) isn’t even that dirty. Again, 2008 was considerably more vicious.
If you don’t trust polls I don’t trust unsourced stories where none of the sources were even in the room when the alleged event happened. I find it hard to believe that Warren would not only withhold this story for over a year but would even praise Bernie’s character frequently over that period if he had really gone this far out of bounds. I could be wrong about that; like I said, I’m waiting for the debates and official comment from the campaign.
the Conster
@Kay:
He’s a misogynist. He won’t pull the same crap with Joe. He started to, and Joe just blew him off.
WhatsMyNym
@Kay: We are not the only developed nation that treats women as second class citizens.
ETA: that’s not an excuse for us.
Freemark
@O. Felix Culpa: Which thread? Comments seem perfectly fine in this thread.
Splitting Image
It is very possible that a woman can’t get elected President. There are other reasons besides sexism for the 2016 results, but sexism made the election close enough to steal. It is not impossible that the same will be true in 2020.
However…
O. Felix Culpa
@Freemark: Sorry, don’t have time to look it up, but it was one of yesterday’s longer threads. Certifiable trolling.
ETA: Might have been a Betty Cracker post, if memory serves.
JustRuss
@Kay: It’s not true, Hillary came within a whisker of winning, and without a shitload of ratfuckery she’d be president now. That said, yeah, misogyny makes for some very heavy lifting. But a woman can win.
LeftCoastYankee
This is an insane process. It’s like a year long infomercial for a product someone else buys for you.
Not one vote has been cast yet, and in all likelihood by the time some of us get to vote in the primary a winner will be “declared”. I can’t remember a Presidential primary vote I’ve ever cast that mattered to the outcome.
This one particularly. I’d vote for Badger or “Box of Rocks” in the general as long as there’s a D next to the name.
Kay
@trollhattan:
Most of you guys think Bernie is weaker as a GE candidate than I do. It’s simple for me- I think he’s in the top three of the primary. That to me means he’s by definition roughly as competitive in the GE as the other two. I still think Biden is probably the most electable because there are a lot of centrist Democrats but I don’t think it’s miles apart. I think they’re clustered as “most electable in a general” in the same way they’re clustered as “most electable in the primary”. Part of it is the map. The map is favorable to the Biden or Bernie candidacy as compared to the others. So then it becomes Biden or Bernie and I think that’s fairly close on electability, with Biden as a slim favorite.
I know this is unpopular so don’t all start yelling at me :)
glory b
@MazeDancer: Yeah, she’s not my choice, but she can’t talk constantly about “fighting” and stay silent while Bernie’s minions attack her.
If you can fight, here’s an opportunity to show us. His people aren’t abiding by any kind of unwritten agreement, he knows he probably can’t win while she’s there. He’s trying to take her down now, it’s time for her to react IMO.
Litany
@Freemark: The one where the news about the script first broke, I assume. I’ll admit I got pretty dismissive there, but people were hoping Sanders dropped dead of a heart attack and blaming the entirety of 2016 on him so I wasn’t really in the mood to assume everyone was arguing in good faith.
I’m not trying to be a troll, honestly: I’ve read this blog since I was a dorky kid way too into politics trying to keep up with all the blag-o-sphere sources that my parents liked. I find the community here valuable as a long time lurker, and although I’ve moved significantly to the left since 2008 I also don’t want to cut myself off in a socialist news bubble. I often have a different perspective, but I realize that liberals and leftists share a lot of common causes and I’m honestly trying to comment and explain my perspective in good faith.
Kay
@the Conster:
I think that’s true, Conster, that Bernie shows more deference to his male competitors than he does his female competitors. Agree. I genuinely believe he has a little issue there.
MazeDancer
@O. Felix Culpa:
CatCake is adorable. But they’re all nice.
If we ever have another Troll, think I’ll choose quotes, though, just to see what they’re like.
randy khan
As I’m averse to feeding trolls, I will note that I find the arguments about Bernie voters based on exit polling to be interesting but not terribly convincing. Among other things, voters who supported the losing candidate in a primary process have three choices, not two – in addition to voting for the winner and voting for one of the winner’s general election opponents, they also can stay home. There’s pretty good evidence that there was a lot of staying home among people who otherwise might have voted for Clinton, and it’s a good bet that a decent chunk of that was Bernie to nobody voters (so to speak), who might have voted for Clinton if Sanders had acted more like someone who thought it was important for the Democrat to win.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
OT: some never-trumpers are putting their shit where their mouths have been, this clip from the Lincoln Project speaks to me as an angry Democrat. It’s a bust in the mush. News outlets in CO are tweeting Rick Wilson for permission to use the clips on their broadcasts, and he hints strongly that they’re putting one together for Martha McSally.
Maybe they can work Tom Tillis’ pathetic birthday wishes for Prince Eric into one for South Carolina.
Kay
I;m still blown away by Bernie’s attack-ad canvass speech. They knock on the door and deliver an attack ad? I have never seen that in my life. It’s bizarre and I would think it’s off-putting. I would think “don’t bring that to my DOOR, asshole”
Betty Cracker
@Kay: Agree that the US is horrifically backward on women in leadership, but I still think a woman can get elected. 2016 was a perfect storm of rotten luck and malfeasance. Everything had to break exactly the way it did, and it was still a squeaker.
glory b
@Baud: Yep, especially she should mention that there is no evidence that Clinton ever said “I’m a woman, vote for me!” Just like he constantly called her corrupt, and when she asked him to point out where and when, he ignored that and kept harping on it.
In 2016, I made a few younger folks in my fam kind of upset when I said it’s a strong charge to make, and keep making, without any proof.
I’d like someone to ask him his reaction to Hillary getting another decision that she did nothing wrong or unethical.
mrmoshpotato
“Hillary beat Senator Heart Attack over there like a rented mule in 2016, and then she went on to beat the now-impeached motherfucker by millions in the popular vote.
How’s your ticker by the way Bernie? You’re not going to keel over in the White House, are you?”
Freemark
@the Conster: And meaningless unless they were people who would have voted for Hillary but didn’t because of Bernie. The evidence shows that isn’t the case. Matter of fact I would say the opposite is true. I know many Bernie supporters who voted for Hillary who wouldn’t have voted at all except that Bernie got them motivated initially to register and vote in the primaries.
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: If a Dem group did that, we’d be hearing lectures on civility from the usual suspects.
I like it.
Litany
@randy khan: The problem is that we have data about that as well, and it doesn’t significantly raise the tally. Here’s Brian Schaffner, the data scientist whose work is cited in the Post and NPR, calling those who stayed at home “the small % who abstained” and demonstrating those numbers via a graph.
I think the best argument you can make is that Sanders implied or even argued that Hillary was corrupt, which in turn caused some voters to stay home. But it’s demonstrably true that his voters stayed home AND voted (R) at lower rates than we’ve seen in past primaries.
glory b
@Betty Cracker: Like I sad above, she talks about fighting, let’s see it. How can I think you’ll fight for me if you won’t fight for yourself?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
a thread from the right about this very topic, though he doesn’t really explain why “wokeness” scares them. I have a few ideas….
Major Major Major Major
Ignoring this until Warren weighs in, personally
glory b
@the Conster: I dunno, maybe it’s a black (girl) thing?
Barbara
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: This is what Josh Marshall at TPM suggested that Dems should be doing. Gardner and Joni Ernst practically ran away when they were asked about Trump’s extortion of Ukraine in the fall. They want to hide in the crowd.
Barbara
@mrmoshpotato: I second this approach!
Baud
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I’m going to go with identity politics.
Ruckus
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Thank You, saved typing.
Kay (not the front-pager)
@Chip Daniels:
Come on. We all know “identity” doesn’t include white or male. White male people are just regular! It’s everyone else that is playing an identity card!
Barbara
@O. Felix Culpa: Yes, I saw. Doing level best in this one as well. Will henceforth ignore, especially since points are what you might call highly repetitive.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Barbara: I agree with you and @Baud:
The Dem candidates in Iowa and NC haven’t gotten much press or made much noise. I hope that’ll change. There’s video of Ernst talking about cutting Social Security, fercrissakes! “behind closed doors”! she literally wrote the ad for us!
Kent
@Kay: I’ve never argued against Bernie based on “electability” which I think is a LOT harder to predict than we all think based on Clinton in 1996, Obama in 2008 and Trump in 2016, none of whom were thought to be “electable” at this part in the nominating process.
My arguments with Bernie are on policy and style. I don’t like the holier than thou shouty old man telling me he is the only one pure enough to save the country. And that he is going to do it by taking the 99% down to Kentucky and DEMAND that Mitch McConnell implement M4A and free college for everyone.
Betty Cracker
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: God, what a gross ad. The twitchy psycho soundtrack. The sweaty, bloated, cooties-encrusted visuals. The sophomoric “emasculating” language. Looks like something the dude who did the disgraceful Cleland hit job would put together to smear a Democrat. (I love it.)
Gravenstone
@GoBlue72: Fuck off and die, trollbot.
General comment about the pie filter – this fuckstick name keeps wriggling out of it and I’d love to know how. It is on my filtered list, yet here its blatherings are clearly visible.
joel hanes
Open thread
Very well.
http://wisdems.org/donate
https://twitter.com/benwikler/status/1216798882346283008
You jackals with shekels know what to do.
Omnes Omnibus
@Kent: How was Clinton not electable in 1996? He was a sitting president.
the Conster
@mrmoshpotato:
I mean, what is so hard about this? One of the candidates needs to bring up his health – WHERE ARE HIS HEALTH RECORDS?
One of the candidates need to bring up his gun votes.
One of the candidates need to bring up his appearance in the Mueller Report, and what did he know and when did he know it?
Media loves a good fight. Give them a reason to make him answer questions THEY never want to ask him.
geg6
@Litany:
Still am, actually.
Why would the Democrats want to run someone who can't win???
If a lot of Americans are sexist, and if sexists wouldn’t vote for a woman–and if Sec. of State Clinton was hurt by sexism–then wouldn’t it be less likely for Americans to vote for a woman?
The criticism isn’t of Sen. Warren. It’s of the sexist, piece of shit American people.
Ultimately they are the ones who determine who wins an election.
Jeffro
Breaking: RWNJ Dad is pinning his 2020 hopes and dreams on…a brokered Dem convention.
So, let’s not do that, Dems! (Cleek’s Law in reverse =)
Meanwhile, The Mooch is tweeting that the end is coming and will come “abruptly” (for trumpov). FSM, please let it be so.
glory b
@Baud: Wilson was on Morning Joe today, saying that politics is ugly and we need to face that reality if we want to beat Trump.
He said a re-election is a referendum on the office holder, focus on attacking the Trump target-rich environment, instead of spending lots of time explaining dense policies that most people will find difficult to understand.
Mnemosyne
I’m kind of amazed at all of the people who are convinced that tact-free Bernie who prides himself on “telling it like it is” couldn’t possibly have said something like this. ?
Betty Cracker
@Litany: Sanders hired some of the nastiest “Bernie or Bust” people from 2016 for key campaign positions, including a woman who went on TV the week of the election and said she could not bring herself to vote for Clinton and another person who encourages rabid supporters to out Twitter randos for the sin of criticizing her boss. I’m a progressive Democrat who used to like Sanders a lot, but this isn’t just about 2016; it’s about who Sanders hired to run his current campaign. Hard nope.
glory b
@geg6: Is the mean girl table getting back together? Western PA, represent! Suzanne, where are you?
Kent
@Omnes Omnibus: Yeah, OK, I meant 1992 when he was in the midst of all the “bimbo eruptions” and struggling in the primary. Only reason he didn’t have more serious opponents in 1992 was because the “experts” thought that Bush was going to win re-election in a landslide.
mrmoshpotato
@MazeDancer: You can toggle back and forth between pics and quotes. :)
Steeplejack (phone)
@Freemark:
Knock yourself out.
geg6
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
This guy never heard of racism, I guess?
geg6
@Betty Cracker:
LOL! That pretty much encapsulates my feelings on it.
Barbara
@glory b: Hey, I will be in the ‘burgh this weekend. Is there ANY interest in a meet up? Would have to be Saturday night or possibly Sunday morning.
geg6
@glory b:
Don’t fuck with Yinzers! LOL!
Barbara
@Betty Cracker: It should be shorter, but other than that anyone who calls a candidate “impotent” has some serious brass.
Mnemosyne
I am happy to see that I managed to correctly put a particular BernieBro commenter into the pie filter as was requested after yesterday. Hopefully CatCake will make an appearance.
WaterGirl
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: In the wise words of the Thin Black Duke this weekend:
Dorothy A. Winsor
@Jeffro:
What’s the Mooch basing that on?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
as far as the debate goes, here’s hoping there are questions on the Judiciary and the USSC, and that our candidates figure out how to turn that into a discussion of the Senate
J R in WV
@geg6:
My identity as an intelligent and curious human being with empathy also tells me to reject Wilmer/Sanders, etc, etc, in total agreement with you.
Everything I know about Sanders tells me he can’t run a good campaign in the General Election, and that if by a miracle (a bigger miracle than the bird landing on his podium!) he was to win the Presidency, he would be terrible at that too.
Donated again to Professor Senator Warren, considering donating to Amy K as well… will bring it up with management (wife).
Gravenstone
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: In that context, I would suggest they view “wokeness” as corresponding to the zeal of the converted. And they know from zealots….
randy khan
@Litany:
If you’re going to cite him, you might want to cite this as well:
Bernie to Trump voters in significant states
Gravenstone
@joel hanes: The fortunate thing is, WI has same day voter registration. Yes, the ideal is to get people re-registered and to build on their enthusiasm to vote. But they can literally get back into the game at the last minute up here, if they so choose.
Betty Cracker
O/T, but Trump has been squirrely even for him on Twitter today. He tweeted a photoshopped picture of Schumer in a turban and Pelosi in a headscarf. Fucksake.
The Dangerman
i don’t get the Identity Politics thing. Of course Identity comes into politics. Evangelical is an identity. Russian Stooge is an identity. Get over it.
Maybe I’m getting older and more curmudgeonly. There was some asshole on FOX over the weekend who said, in his expert opinion, that liberals hate Trump. Well, no fucking shit, Sherlock. Donald Trump is a racist, sexist, xenophobic piece of shit and I proudly state that I hate him the with heat of a thousand suns, so fuck you very much for your expert opinion. Donate your check to charity, asshole.
I like to browse used bookstores and lately I’ve been seeing more copies of the “Book of Virtues” by Bill Bennett. I recall that being all the rage while Clinton was President (published 1996). I guess as long as it’s a Republican President, who gives a shit about Virtues.
I wish I believed in a Hell as some of these assholes need to be riding the “going down escalator” someday.
the Conster
America for Amy Retweeted
“Minnesota Nice” Amy should be the one to go hard after Sanders. She should bring up his campaign’s catch and kill operation, and ask him if he’s figured out who from his campaign had the authority to pay out hush money to silence the harassed women and what he did about it. Just like Trump, he hates him some powerful women. His own reputation as a staff abuser neutralizes him there too.
FOR GOD SAKE WILL ONE OF THE CANDIDATES JUST TAKE THE GEEZER OUT ALREADY.
mrmoshpotato
@the Conster: Absolutely. I’d love to see a barrage aimed at St. Wilmer. (Have I mentioned how he should’ve fucked off to the forest and taken up knitting in May 2016 after being mathematically eliminated from the nomination?)
Hell, I might actually watch the debate even though I’ll be constantly going, “What the fuck are Steyer and Yang doing there?”
Steeplejack (phone)
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
The comments in that thread clearly show what they’re afraid of. It’s not “wokeness” or socialism.
Josie
@glory b:
“the mean girl table” – I like it.
NotMax
@mrmoshpotato
Yang didn’t qualify this time.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Betty Cracker: I don’t know what the first one in this list refers to, and I’m not sure I want to, but I’m sure I’ll know before I go to bed tonight
zhena gogolia
I’m doing the pie filter for the first time. Whee!
mrmoshpotato
@Jeffro: The Mooch? Are you talking about I-hold-a-job-for-10-days guy?
Kent
@the Conster: Not wanting your low level staff to say something stupid or offensive is not the same as never going on the attack yourself as a candidate. Obama and Clinton certainly both went at each other in 2008 and that worked out fine. But they also both kept their staffs reined in as best they could.
zhena gogolia
I must have done it wrong, because it’s filtering gravenstone and I didn’t add them.
trollhattan
@Kay:
You may, of course, be right because I’m stuck on Sanders’ noisy core supporters as obscuring what his actual chances for gathering a winning coalition might be. Can all the key voter groups coexist and come together as a winning team? I have deep doubts, because I suspect a lot of so-called swing voters* will find him repellant.
*who may exist, or not.
MattF
@Betty Cracker: So, in any event, the slander is right out there. ‘Asshole, liar, bully’… I’ll note that modifying this list to ‘Asshole, liar, bully, and, arguably, comedian’ is not actually an improvement.
trollhattan
@zhena gogolia:
It also pies responses to the pied.
Yutsano
@mrmoshpotato: You gotta admire the man. He turned that 10 day job into an MSM consulting gig that probably pays better.
zhena gogolia
Okay, I get it, it’s when somebody else replies to the pied person. Interesting.
mrmoshpotato
@glory b: LOL :)
Jim, Foolish Literalist
and looking for the Rupar tweet, I found this one
I would add, the perfect tweet of trump’s republican party. The only think missing is a picture of her posing with a confederate flag or talking about “our Southern heritage”
Barbara
@zhena gogolia: And you can click toggle to see the comment if you want.
jeffreyw
@Citizen Alan: I identify as an old white grouchy dude. Get off of my lawn.
Gravenstone
@zhena gogolia: Nah, filter hits both the OP and anyone who replies to them. Since I replied to it, my post should disappear for you as well. Now, if only I could figure out why he keeps slipping free of my version of the sin bin…
Steeplejack (phone)
@zhena gogolia:
You’ll put your eye out fiddling with that thing!
WaterGirl
@O. Felix Culpa: My ❤️ goes pitter-patter for CatCake.
zhena gogolia
@Kay:
Once Sanders is the nominee the gloves will be off. You’ll see oppo research like you’ve never seen before. For some reason it’s all been kept on radio silence while we’ve been debating Biden’s old votes or Harris’s career as a prosecutor.
zhena gogolia
@WaterGirl:
gravenstone was CatCake!
zhena gogolia
@Steeplejack (phone):
I think I already did!
mrmoshpotato
@Betty Cracker: *SIGH
WaterGirl
@Gravenstone: I will look at that, thanks.
He has posted once here, with 4 replies so far.
Drop me a quick note next time you see him wriggle out so I can try to catch it in real time.
zhena gogolia
@the Conster:
Haha, you’re even worse (better?) than I am!
zhena gogolia
@Betty Cracker:
He’s like the guy in “They’re coming to take me away, haha!” But the “nice young men in their clean white suits” are going to have to come to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
mrmoshpotato
@NotMax: Good! Fuck his 12000-dollar lottery shit!
Freemark
@Steeplejack (phone): Read the whole thread. The troll isn’t Litany, unless having a different opinion is trolling. Litany was the sane one in that thread. Of course people probably think I’m a troll because I disagree with many long time frequent posters on here even though I’ve been here going back a very long time. The person who says someone should die, or someone should keep their mouth shut, is the person I would call a troll. Someone pissing you off because they don’t agree with you doesn’t make them a troll. Maybe I missed something, what exactly do you consider ‘trollish’ about the statements? Serious question, I would really like to know.
mrmoshpotato
@zhena gogolia: Gravenstone knows what he did! ?
the Conster
@zhena gogolia:
I keep saying this because I believe it to be true: Barr’s DOJ let Jane Sanders off the hook as a quid pro quo, THE WEEK OF THE BLUE WAVE, so Sanders could ratfuck the Dem party by running again without that FBI bank fraud investigation hanging over their heads. They had her dead to rights, and a grand jury was hearing testimony. Guess what else recently happened? Barr’s DOJ hired Jane’s Vermont nemesis who brought the entire issue to light, which wasn’t made up by GOP operatives, he unearthed the facts from public documents on file with the Vermont public higher education accreditation and bonding agency. The day after he’s nominated, that investigation will be re-opened, she’ll be indicted and there are probably tax fraud violations too. Anyone who looked through those returns and didn’t think they were sketchy AF has no idea how anything works. In fact Jane is a lifelong grifter who does her dirty work when she can get her hands on other people’s money, like campaign funds, college tuition and bank loans. The entire 2016 campaign was structured with her doing ad buys for Bernie’s campaign with shell companies set up by friends she’s grifted with all along. Between shady dealings and the nepotism, they’re the hillbilly Trumps.
WaterGirl
@zhena gogolia: I wanted to add CatCake to the image library twice, and then select both images as part of the Pie Filter Image Collection. The developers said that would be bad form, so I acquiesced, but I’m not sure that I won’t be temped to do it anyway at some point in the future.
I searched high and low for a dog cake, also, but to no avail.
Mnemosyne
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
… with a Boston accent. ??
WaterGirl
@trollhattan: Which is a nice feature, I think, because you can get a feel right away for whether a thread has been overrun with rodents.
mrmoshpotato
@Yutsano: Well, it’s hard to admire a grift…
germy
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Who was suffering from Alzheimer’s.
What a horrible story. And then the beauty queen offered to write a check while in court, and her lawyer said there should be no jail time because “she made it right.”
zhena gogolia
@Betty Cracker:
Their ad about Trump the great religious leader is also quite good.
zhena gogolia
@the Conster:
You don’t have to convince me!
Kent
Wish I knew what you all were talking about. Biden’s voting record is public knowledge, as was Harris’s former career as a prosecutor. What is all this Sanders dirt and why can’t we talk about it now?
Mnemosyne
@Freemark:
The part where he keeps insisting that the absolute number of Democratic-to-Republican voters is more important than their actual effect on the 2008 and 2016 elections is pretty trollish, and yet he keeps bringing it up over and over and over again as a defense of 2016.
Oh, and I’m still giggling that goblue1972 told me back in 2016 that my vagina is not magic as an attempt to tell me that women shouldn’t be listened to when we worried about misogyny. Good thing misogyny didn’t have any effect on the outcome of the 2016 election, huh? He sure would look ridiculous if it had.
the Conster
@zhena gogolia:
I know I know. I know this happened, because that’s what I’d do if I were as crooked as Barr. I’d make sure I used every bit of leverage I could over Bernie to keep his wife out of jail, and to forfeit all their ill gotten gains.
Another Scott
@WaterGirl:
Dog Pupcake.
:-)
Cheers,
Scott.
J R in WV
@The Dangerman:
Bill Bennett, he’s the hypocrite who wrote a whole book about being a good and pure white Republican person, while himself suffering from a gambling addiction that would have bankrupted a less wealthy asshole.
OMFG what an evil piece of scum!
NotMax
@WaterGirl
You mean a cake shaped like a dog?
MattF
@germy: Besides the criminal conviction, there’s also civil suits totaling over $300,000. A poor little lamb, who’s lost her way… not!
FlipYrWhig
My hunch is that Sanders said something like “I have a hard time thinking that a woman can win, because the way to win is to connect with the working class and working class men don’t respond well to women in power.” That would be true to Sanders’s (simplistic and self-congratulatory and not alert to the racialization of the category of ‘working class’) worldview AND piss off a woman who heard it.
The funny thing, though, is that the last Democratic nominee who pushed hard on the connecting-with-the-(white)-working-class button and succeeded was Bill Clinton, who I’m guessing Sanders would never consider a model.
zhena gogolia
@the Conster:
Yeah, I’m not with the conventional wisdom on this one.
Nobody EVER attacks him.
Gravenstone
@WaterGirl: A somewhat related note. I observed in another thread today that if someone replies to multiple people in a single post, if one of those replies is to a pied individual, the overall reply will be visible rather than filtered. A minor issue overall, but thought it might be worth noting.
mrmoshpotato
@zhena gogolia: Many moons ago, Kurt Eichenwald tweeted about a two-foot-thick file of oppo research that the GOP had on Wilmer.
Point 2 (Eichenwald’s Newsweek article)
zhena gogolia
@Kent:
“we” is not you and me, it’s the Republicans. They are holding it in reserve until he gets the nomination. His assignment is to lose to Trump.
MattF
@Betty Cracker: I think there’s an important point to be made about these ads— supporting Trump will have a cost. At last.
J R in WV
@Gravenstone:
He changes the details of the speling of his Nym. Drop upper case letter to lower case letter, etc, etc. Add a space to the end, even…
germy
@MattF:
Kent
@FlipYrWhig: I don’t even care what Sanders actually said. His whole campaign since 2016 has been misogynistic. Deeds are stronger than words.
patrick II
@Litany:
Nice numbers, but context matters. Trump ain’t McCain. You might vote for Hillary or McCain if you thought they were both moderates. The same can’t be said of Trump, an obvious lying racist thief from day one.
FlipYrWhig
@Kent: I have thought for a long time that the thing that would bring down Sanders is depicting him as too hippie-dippy to keep America safe. To a degree Warren will have to face that too. Biden won’t. Hillary Clinton faced a lot of things, but not that. It’s not going to come up in Democratic primaries but it sure as hell will in a general election. Sanders isn’t used to that. He’s used to saying that everyone else is a warmonger and that he’s been opposed to every conflict since and including King Philip’s War. That’s not necessarily what a general electorate wants to hear.
J R in WV
@Kent:
Read the comment, which contains a sample of the dirt, if you’re going to remark on it!! Non-Bernie stans expect all this news to drop right after Sanders wins the nomination, if he does.
I personally dunno, I just hate him for his misogyny and racist bigotry, along with the Russian stoogery.
And the finger wagging!!
Steeplejack (phone)
@Freemark:
Take it up with OFelix Culpa. All I did was point you to the relevant thread.
JPL
@Betty Cracker: hmmm sorta like the one you just responded to. just sayin
Kent
@zhena gogolia: Honestly what I actually expect is that 2020 will be the biggest barnburning shitstorm of fake news and trollstorms and Trump craziness and utter media madness that this planet has ever seen. What is actually true about Sanders or Biden or Warren’s past is going to be mostly irrelevant to how well they can command the media narrative and paddle through the putrid sea of shit that Trump, the GOP, and their Russian backers are going to dump on us.
So I’m looking for the candidate with the most political skill to push through it and rise above it and command attention anyway. That takes rare talent. I think Bill Clinton had it as did Obama in spades. As did JFK way back in the day. I think it was what Hillary lacked despite all her immense qualifications. I’m still not sure who it is in 2020. I don’t see anyone with the raw innate political talent of Bill Clinton or Obama. My instinct tells me maybe Warren because she is so earnest that stuff doesn’t really stick very well. But I really don’t know.
So while yes, maybe the GOP has binders full of actual dirt on Sanders, maybe they don’t. I don’t really think it even matters. No matter who the nominee is they are going to unleash it all and most of it will be either 100% fake, or 95% fake and the rest distorted beyond all recognition like the swiftboats and the emails and Benghazi.
mrmoshpotato
@Mnemosyne:
1. “vagina is not magic” LOL
2. Ooff to being told misogyny didn’t exist in the 2016 election.
3. I bet he feels foolish now! /S
the Conster
@Kent:
i agree about the media shit storm coming, but the shit storm is stinkier the more it has the added benefit of it being true.
Kent
Do you really think that “Sanders is more corrupt and a bigger fraudster than Trump” is going to be a winning argument in 2020? I know the Trumpers basically always project. But wow, that would be the biggest projection of all time.
mrmoshpotato
@NotMax: OMG! No way could I cut into that cake.
germy
Here’s one sample of Brady’s advocacy:
Kent
@the Conster: None of it is true and all of it is true simultaneously is basically how these things always work. And there aren’t any referees to decide.
I’m all in for attacking Sanders in the primary. And I’m happy to know about any actual real dirt that is out there. But in the grand scheme of things I think you guys are over-emphasizing this a bit. Some folder full of oppo research isn’t going to make or break the election. Political talent and the ability to command the narrative will.
CindyH
@Kent: “Crooked Hillary” was projection too – and it worked on more than just the deplorables
germy
@Kent:
I think Hillary had it. But her coverage was distorted. To see her at a live event, unedited and uninterpreted by the media, was different from the way she was portrayed by the gatekeepers.
Kent
@CindyH: My point exactly. There was zero truth to it. The truth doesn’t even matter. Just how well you can deflect and command your own narrative. Obama had that rare once in a generation talent of being able to do that. Everything they threw at him basically didn’t stick. Hillary just didn’t have the same level of political talent despite all her other strengths.
Mnemosyne
@Kent:
Actually, the argument would be the same one that’s been working for Republicans for at least 30 years: “All politicians are corrupt anyway, so why not vote for the people who are honest about being corrupt and don’t pretend to be better than they are?”
Lumpy
A case against Jane Sanders doesn’t sound like there’s much that will stick with voters. Allegations against a spouse aren’t much more convincing than allegations against a son. The Hunter Biden controversy doesn’t seem to be making a difference, and I doubt a Jane Sanders controversy will matter.
Josie
@Kent:
I think you are right about what is coming. It seems to me that Biden has an advantage here. He may not be the gifted politician that Bill Clinton and Obama were, but we have known him for a long time. There are no surprises to him. All his weaknesses are already baked in and accepted by most people. The others are more recent in our history and easier to tear down with lies and distortion.
the Conster
@Kent:
Then you really haven’t paid any attention to all the stuff that has been reported on locally in the Vermont papers, all lying around for everyone to use but don’t.
His campaign ran a catch and kill operation. Who was his Michael Cohen?
He was in the Mueller Report as Putin’s 2nd choice who used Sanders and his supporters to hurt Hillary. What did he know and when did he know it? Why didn’t he tell anyone?
What happened to the hundreds of pages of FEC violations? Why did he have so many foreign contributions? Were they returned? Why did he avoid filing his final FEC personal disclosure statement?
Why did he instruct his campaign to always have $10 million cash on hand, when his GOTV was nonexistent and he was laying off staff in CA, but let his supporters keep sending him money?
Who was behind Old Towne Media? Who were the beneficiaries of the millions the campaign poured into it?
Why did he hire Tad Devine, knowing he was fresh off a partnership with Paul Manafort working for Putin in Ukraine? Why didn’t he say anything about his supporters chanting Lock Her Up, like Trump’s did?
For starters.
Kent
@germy: I don’t really want to re-litigate 2016. I really loved Hillary and my soul still aches thinking about 2016. But I really don’t think she had the raw political skills of Obama. Those are very very rare. Once in a generation rare. She was good, but not great. And good should have been more than enough to beat Trump were it not for Comey and the Russians and all the voter suppression and corrupt media coverage that all aligned to allow Trump to shoot a hole in one.
Freemark
@Mnemosyne: Have to admit I don’t see it as trollish because it appears to be correct. I find people blaming Bernie for Hillary’s loss to be more trollish by your definition because there is little actual evidence for it. But my definition I wouldn’t consider your belief trollish. What I consider trollish is saying that certain should die. Or calling someone a troll just because you don’t agree with them. There are people passing deep conspiracy crap about Sanders on here without any proof but that appears to be ok because you and others don’t like him. But someone stating actual facts is trollish because they like Sanders.
What I saw was that Litany never said ‘Hillary should have a heart attack and die’. Litany used well reasoned responses to troll-like attacks. The only reason people refer to Litany as a troll appears to be because they disagree with them.
There are a number of reasons to not like Sanders but there is a lot of conspiracy nut trollish stuff coming from the anti-Sanders crowd that populates this particular blog that appears to make them call reasonable people trollish.
As for this particular post I hope Sanders didn’t actually say that Warren shouldn’t run because a woman can’t win. I like Sanders in general but agree with many gripes about him (too old, doesn’t play well with others, not a great manager, etc.). I want to hear what Warren says because I trust her to tell the truth. I don’t trust hearsay.
Kent
@the Conster: Yes, I don’t read the local Vermont papers. I doubt anyone here does. So why aren’t you guys who know all this stuff not blogging and tweeting about it? Connect the dots for us and put it out there for all to see. What is stopping you?
the Conster
@Lumpy:
Stealing money from kids’ college tuition and shoveling it to your daughter while bankrupting their college and throwing students, faculty and staff out of their jobs while your husband is advocating free college and socialism and with a long background of admiring left wing dictators will be on a 24/7 loop. They’ll be turned into Chavez and Imelda Marcos.
She had disabled adults evicted from the church-owned group home they spent their lives in to service the liar loan she defrauded a bank to get.
If Hillary could be held accountable for Bill, then Bernie will be held accountable for Jane.
the Conster
@Kent:
I’m blogging about it all here.
Kent
@the Conster: You are throwing a lot of shit out there but not actually documenting any of it with sources and putting it anyplace permanent that people can find more than an hour from now when this thread dies.
Nobody googles up the 207th comment in an old blog post a week from today.
Mnemosyne
@Freemark:
Except that the statistics proving that Sanders-to-Trump voters swung the election in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania are included in this WaPo article that Litany provided to try and prove the opposite point. That’s what makes it trolling: ignoring the actual facts and insisting that your counterfactual is the real truth.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election/
chopper
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
maybe the mooch has seen trump’s financial docs and thinks they’re gonna come out soon. hey, we can only hope, right?
taumaurto
@artem1s: Damn. Because a woman can’t win the presidency that’s why he refused to support and vigorously campaign for Hillary. Say what? 39 rallies in 14 states.
japa21
@Kent: They went after Clinton as being corrupt and it worked. (It helped that Sanders had laid some of the groundwork.)
And the whole Jane Sanders thing has more meat to it than the Clinton stuff.
Chyron HR
@Freemark:
Wow, I really struck a nerve with you lunatics by suggesting that Bernie isn’t an immortal divine being. It’s a good thing Bernie and his psychotic worshipers never, ever, ever, ever considered saying anything about Clinton’s health in 2016 or you might come across as slightly hypocritical.
prostratedragon
@JMG:
Moved to Vermont from Brooklyn in 1968; had attended Brooklyn College and UChicago. Up until then had been involved with some civil rights groups. But by 1968 those groups had become embroiled in the Black Power insurgency, which in part was a reaction against perceived “white saviors” who were thought to be steering the Movement in too moderate, and ineffectual, directions.
Kent
@chopper: In my perfect universe, Chinese hackers would penetrate the IRS and release every Trump and Trump Spawn’s tax returns on a drip by drip daily basis from September until election day.
But unfortunately the universe never gives us quite that kind of poetic justice.
Barbara
@Mnemosyne: At this point I think FM and Litany are the same person . . .
satby
@geg6: right there with you!
WaterGirl
@Gravenstone: Yep. We discovered that in preliminary trading. It’s a product of how WordPress handles comments that are replies.
The pied person you reply to is the parent comment. There can only be one parent so that’s why that happens.
Kent
@japa21: I’m not arguing how they went after Clinton. They went after her with everything. That’s how elections work.
All I am saying is that they will go after EVERY 2020 Dem nominee with equal parts fury and lies. They will attack Biden for corruption too. And Warren as well because she took money from corporations or some shit. We are in a post-truth era of politics. The only thing that matters is having the talent and organization to push through and rise above it. AOC has it. Greta Thunberg has it. Obama has it. I’m still undecided about which of our 2020 candidates also has it, or even if any of them do. I honestly thought Harris had the most raw talent. So that shows what I know. Or perhaps her campaign failed for other reasons.
eddie blake
@Freemark:
you mean BESIDES all of the lies and the bad-faith arguments?
eta: what Mnemosyne said.
taumaurto
@the Conster: Unlike any of the other democrat candidates, Bernie actually put his body on the line during the civil rights unrest.
Ruckus
@trollhattan:
I like the new pie.
Which just got it’s first customer.
trollhattan
@Chyron HR:
Heart attack, schmart attack, whaddaya gonna do?
Dorothy A. Winsor
@Kent:
If they want to go back far enough, Republicans can drag out the fact that Sanders honeymooned in the old USSR.
Betty Cracker
@JPL: If there was general consensus on what constitutes a troll, there would be no need for a pie filter.
Freemark
@Mnemosyne: But it doesn’t actually prove what you think it does. If you read the article you would have read that “In short, it may be hard to know exactly how many Sanders-Trump voters there were, or whether they really cost Clinton the election. But it doesn’t appear that many of them were predisposed to support Clinton in the first place.” Litany appears to be much more on the factual side than you in this instance. Unless those voters are ones who would have voted for Clinton without Bernie causing them not to, your point is pointless. The article clearly backs Litany’s evaluation.
I live in Pennsytucky. I campaigned for Hillary, knocked on doors for her, and gave rides to people to vote for her. I saw endless ads by her campaign about how bad Trump was, but basically none about what she would do. If her campaign would have done a better job she would have won PA. I also know a minimum of six people who voted for her that would almost certainly not have voted at all if it hadn’t been for Bernie’s campaign. It is more likely she would have done WORSE in PA if not for Bernie. So I see things quite a bit differently than you.
the Conster
@Kent:
Here’s all the receipts from Sanders history, not including his wife’s messes and nothing since after the election.
Receipts
Ruckus
@Betty Cracker:
I think you are correct.
She shouldn’t have to, politics have been for decades a place where a properly placed pen in the back has been the norm. But of course we know that isn’t the way women are allowed to act. Which is bullshit of course, but that doesn’t change the reality.
Harris was my first choice but see how that worked out, my second is beginning to be float towards – you know I’m not going to say, bad karma and all that…….
Dorothy A. Winsor
I think this is connected to Pelosi releasing the articles of impeachment.
JPL
@Betty Cracker: true..
Ladyraxterinok
@Kent: All his weird articles from 70s?? about women having rape fantasies, having child out of wedlock, support of NRA, vote/support of dumping radioactive waste in area of poor people in SW US, Jane’s $$grifting,
That’s what I vaguely recall seeing re fr wrenches to.
Kay
@zhena gogolia:
I’m not sure it matters as much as it once did. I think our impressions of the 2020 electorate go back to what I see as the big divide in the D Party- there’s those who think Trump was kind of a turning point and those who don’t. I see both sides- they both have good arguments, but I’m firmly in the “turning point” camp.
I think Biden has benefited from this too- the attacks on him don’t seem to be landing- so Bernie isn’t the sole beneficiary of this change.
I don’t look at this election like I did others. I think it may not follow established rules.
jeffreyw
@WaterGirl: I know it’s a bit late for this but I was wondering why I get a pop-up comment box when making a reply. If I X out of it, the “reply to” code is still in the regular comment box.
Kent
@Dorothy A. Winsor: And so did 7 GOP Senators during 2018. Shrug. My point is that this stuff just doesn’t matter so much in 2020 when the truth no longer matters. If it actually mattered, the closest Trump would have gotten to the White House would have been the view from some country club Federal Penitentiary in Virginia.
the Conster
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
She knows what she’s doing. I wish everyone would figure that out already.
Freemark
@Chyron HR: Funny how I never even came close to indicating any of those things. But I do appreciate you backing me up on who is actually trolling here.
Omnes Omnibus
@Dorothy A. Winsor: Bill Clinton visited the USSR while he was a Rhodes Scholar.
I really think that some people may need to step away from their computers for a bit. Not everyone we disagree with is a troll. Not everyone who supports Sanders is a Bernie Bro. We have to make to November, so let’s try to pace ourselves. It’s a marathon not a sprint.
eddie blake
@Freemark:
dude. the response to litany was “it’s people like you (who have spent the thread attacking democrats in good standing, the party establishment AND the base) makes me want wilmer to have a heart attack and die.”
that was ONE person. and not a SINGLE person said that wilmer was responsible for the ENTIRETY of clinton’s loss, though his actions and that of her supporters CLEARLY contributed to her electoral college defeat…
no lie too BIG, no lie too SMALL for litany.
if you’re ALSO gonna be in the misrepresenting game, thanks for playing, but it ain’t a winning hand backing litany-the-not-troll
Kay
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
Pelosi won another round. She’s amazing. She is the single most effective person versus Trump. If he loses, and I hope he does, the history of his single term will be Pelosi versus Trump and he fucking knows it.
I’d take her side in that bet. Historically speaking :)
?BillinGlendaleCA
@jeffreyw: The popup reply box was the one thing I hated when I was testing the new site, I may have used the phase “hate with the intensity of 1,000 suns”.
mad citizen
Kent, your shitstorm prediction is right on, I think. I was thinking, what if we’re in a pre civil war decade where the nation has to eventually divide up based on the fox/right set of facts, and the rest of us with reality.
Reminds me of Barry Corbin in No Country for Old Men telling his son “What you got ain’t nothing new. This country’s hard on people. You can’t stop what’s coming.”
zhena gogolia
@the Conster:
Wow, that’s very good.
Kent
This gives weight to my argument that Trump is uniquely vulnerable to strong women. Which is why he can’t stand having them around. They are like kryptonite to his bullshit macho bitch-slapping approach to politics. I love me some Pelosi too. And I know it might go against the grain. But I honestly think either Warren or Klobuchar are the two most potent candidates against Trump, now that Harris is gone. Trump just can’t handle strong women and it shows.
satby
@mrmoshpotato: Chicago style! Me likey. Because, yeah that’s the first response I had too. A woman beat your ass so bad you still need butt balm, Bernie old man!
Ruckus
@Kay:
Like he’d ever figure that out……
Betty Cracker
@Dorothy A. Winsor: Kind of amazing that Trump has done a complete 180 on witnesses and isn’t being called out constantly on that. And by “amazing,” I mean, routine media framing fail.
Kent
Biden should be out there volunteering to testify as long as Trump and all the GOP lackies like Bolton and Mulvaney also testify. Taunt the motherfuckers. Ramp up the pressure. If he is clean as we know he is, it would only help his campaign.
Freemark
@eddie blake: What lies and bad faith arguments? Mnemosyne brought up one with a link that actually backed up Litany’s argument. Saw differences in opinion but nothing that could be called ‘bad faith’. What were the ‘bad faith’ arguments?
Mnemosyne
@Freemark:
Funny, the article doesn’t seem to be nearly as clear-cut as you claim.
The question wasn’t “did every Sanders voter vote for Hillary?” The question was “did Sanders to Trump voters affect the outcome in three crucial states?” The answer seems to be “yes,” with some caveats.
Pretending that the answer is “no, of course it didn’t despite what the data says, and here’s my anecdote” is, well, trolling.
catclub
@Dorothy A. Winsor: Important if true. I will not be surprised if one of the Senators was Lucy Van Pelt.
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Maybe not nationally, but we’ve been overrun with Votevets ads for Cunningham in NC.
eddie blake
@Kent:
on the surface that seems viable, but really the focus needs to be kept on tang the conqueror and his merry band of miscreants.
biden’s gonna be slagged enough in the media without him giving them new clips to deceptively edit while he’s on the stand.
Citizen Alan
@FlipYrWhig:
showing wall to wall coverage of him praising the Iranian Revolution while we’re in a shooting war with Iran, which is why Shitgibbon is trying to start one up.
Ruckus
@Mnemosyne:
And it’s better for your blood pressure!
Although it doesn’t have any chance of changing their minds but then again I’ve never seen logic and sanity work on most trolls so it seems like it’s not worth the effort.
Plus Pie! If I can’t eat it, at least I can look at it.
Citizen Alan
@Freemark:
No, that was me. And I said that because I am absolutely convinced that Wilmer dying of indisputably natural causes is the only possible scenario that will not result in him and his cult doing everything they can to throw the election to Shitgibbon.
Kent
Biden should be craving any opportunity to speak directly to 150 million people. Any politician worth his salt would. In an impeachment trial he would actually start by answering pre-scripted softball questions from sympathetic Democratic House Managers who could let him command the stage and go on and on and on as long as he wanted with only the Chief Justice there to reign him in as the Senators are just supposed to sit and watch. And then he could get all indignant with the “have you no shame!!!” stuff with the GOP defenders get up.
I can’t imagine in a million years that the Trump campaign would actually want to put Biden on the stand under those circumstances. Not knowing in advance how it is going to play out. He could actually win the election right there if skilled enough. But he can paint them into a corner by volunteering.
They already have 3 decades of Biden clips to deceptively edit. They don’t need any more for that.
eddie blake
well there were QUITE a few-
but let’s just go for the easy ones in the factionalism thread.
mr forkbeard summed it up nicely to start @134.
caught dishonestly attacking the nominee in ’16, pivots INSTANTLY to saying ‘uh, i meant BIDEN!!”
@174 chock FULL of lies and misrepresentations that boil down to ‘democrats BAD!”
@185- but her EMAAAAAAIIIILLLLZZZZ!!!
seriously, dude. i could go on. (and on and on) bad faith actor. bad faith arguments. inability to own up to lies (or even, charitably, errors) when pointed out.
Betty Cracker
@Kent: I’ll probably get clubbed like a baby seal for saying this, but Biden’s go-to line when he gets the Hunter questions from reporters is: “I trust my son.” Well, I don’t. Why would I trust a serial fuck-up like Hunter Biden?
I don’t fault Joe Biden; parents aren’t objective about their children. But this potentially affects all of us now. “We never discussed it, but I trust my son” isn’t a good enough answer.
eddie blake
@Kent:
that’s fair. but doesn’t the gop ALSO get to question him? and i would imagine in very-not-sympathetic ways?
now it would be amusing and a good visual if the one asking the questions was a foaming-at-the-mouth giuliani with biden sitting there unflappable,
but i don’t think we’ll be that lucky and i don’t think he’d be able to weather eleven hours of questioning like hillary did.
Freemark
@Barbara: Considering I don’t have the same opinions and I’ve been here well over a decade that makes no sense. I think it is funny someone disagrees with you and suddenly you think it’s trolling or sockpuppeting.
eddie blake
@Freemark:
sorry @254 is for you.
eddie blake
@Betty Cracker: lolol..yeah my father NEVER woulda said, “oh, i trust my son.”
never in a MILLION years.
Kent
@Betty Cracker: Of course it’s not a good enough answer. He’s better have a whole lot better answer in the general election anyway. And if his advisors and attorneys let him go in front of Congress and the world without a better answer than that they would deserve to lose.
I honestly think they would never actually want to put him on the stand because the entire Ukraine thing wasn’t about that. It was about making up fake dirt from afar.
All I am saying is that a talented politician could completely own the entire impeachment and beat Trump right then and there if given the opportunity. Real political talent like Bill Clinton and Trump seek out the limelight. And then own it. They don’t shy from it.
VFX Lurker
@Kent:
All the more reason not to nominate the candidate with the most genuine baggage (and genuine health problems).
Kent
@VFX Lurker: Sure, OK fine. I don’t like Sanders either. But I think he is unelectable due to his actual 2020 campaign positions and narrow appeal, not some obscure dirt from 1973.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Betty Cracker:
That’s one where I start to worry about Biden’s kitchen cabinet. There was no one around them who could go to one or the other and say, this really isn’t good.
As I’ve said about the Clintons (as long as we’re doing unpopular opinions), that was ex-candidate behavior. But of course, up until the sudden return of Beau’s aggressive cancer, Joe probably thought of himself as an ex-candidate, and that Hunter would sort himself out before Beau went for the big chair.
Mrs. D. Ranged in AZ
I’m no Bernie fan but I honestly don’t think he said that to Warren. More likely he said nothing at all like that OR he implied it by asking her questions like, “How will you deal with the misogyny you’re going to face?” Which, let’s face it, is a legitimate question. I just can’t see two candidates calling a truce and sticking to it for all these months if Bernie had said such thing to her.
Some journalist is bound to bring the story up and I think the smart thing to do for Warren is to answer it with her current elect-ability argument, which works on many levels and avoid the controversy. That way regardless of whether Bernie said it or not, she stays clear of it and she gets another opportunity to posit why she should be the nominee.
David ??Merry Christmas?? Koch
Mnemosyne
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
The ironic part is that I suspect that the Ukrainians hired Hunter to try and make themselves look better and less corrupt after they fired the known corrupt board members. D’oh.
Ruckus
@zhena gogolia:
Could it be that he is an interloper? Someone in the game not actually expecting to win but to harm the opposition so that we end up with someone less electable. Given the numerous candidates and who has had to drop out already it might be working.
Anyway, just a thought.
Freemark
@Mnemosyne: You completely misrepresent the math and the articles actual conclusions and then want to call the people pointing out the facts the trolls….lol
Blaming someone for people not voting for a particular candidate who were never going to vote for that candidate is seriously delusional.
I actually believe Sanders could have done a much better job trying to get Hillary elected. Hillary could also have done a much better job on getting Hillary elected. But Litany’s views, of this one article, are certainly more inline with the actual facts of the article.
I just think that calling someone a troll based on your own misreading/misunderstanding of an article isn’t a good thing.
Princess
@Kay: This is why I think it’s wrong to say a woman can’t beat Trump. Women rattle him. Pelosi freaks him out. Hillary rattled him, but the effect was somewhat muted by their personal acquaintance. Harris would have shook him. I think Warren can too. He does not know how to handle women he doesn’t want to f**k.
Ruckus
@germy:
Social Security really, really does not like sending out checks any longer. I’ve been on SS for 8 yrs and they were already almost 100% direct deposit. The law changed in 2013 that all federal benefits must be paid by direct deposit or a federal debit card for that purpose. If her mother was getting checks before that and never applied would seem to be the only way she could be getting checks. I wonder if the daughter was taking the money for a long time?
Freemark
@eddie blake: Not fully on board with you here. These are mostly things you disagree with. Litany was completely correct about the emails being an easy, if disgusting, line of attack. Her line blaming Clinton for Trump winning the primary is pretty ludicrous even though Hillary absolutely wanted Trump to win the primary her influence certainly wasn’t that great. But we have people peddling actual conspiracy theories against Sanders and no one calls them trolls.
Not saying Litany is correct, except for the article talked about previously in this thread, but it seems more about disagreement than trolling. Also some extreme distortion like your ‘EMAAAAAIIIILLLZ’ comment. What Litany said in that was perfectly ok. It had nothing to do with the actual validity of the Email attack. @174 was not chock full of lies. It was mostly true except the Tea Party wasn’t ‘populist revolt’. And they have gotten shirty at the end but certainly no worse than many others on here including you.
I want to make it clear I really have no problem people not liking what Litany has to say. But it really seems to be called trolling because you don’t like what is said. Not because it is really out of bounds.
As for my own beliefs I thought Sanders would have been a better candidate in 2016 even though I thought Hillary would probably have been a better President, In this election I greatly prefer Warren to Sanders but he is still my second choice.
eddie blake
@Freemark:
iirc, sanders waited four weeks to endorse her, and he was already mathematically out of contention after the april 19th ny primary.
eddie blake
@Freemark:
lot to unpack and not a lot of time here- lemme just point out that IMO, redmap (or not seeing it coming and not preparing for it) was obama’s second biggest mistake as president (the other taking what critiques the republicans were offering at face value)-
2010 was a lot of blue dogs running as fast as they could from the ACA while a huuuuge top down, faux grass roots movement was sparked by the notion that ‘those people’ might get mortgage relief.
the democratic party had a filibuster -proof majority for exactly three months, IIRC, between the time that coleman conceded, franken was seated and kennedy died.
i’m quite tired of analysis and criticism of the democratic party that INSISTS it exists in a vacuum, but that being said, i find litany misrepresents a LOT just to find avenues to attack democrats.
for example, please find me ONE member of the house or senate leadership, or governor or mayor who is a democrat who said it’s perfectly ok to assassinate a cabinet member of a country we’re not at war with, we’d just like to be notified first!
that’s straight up bullshit.
i’ve bumped heads with litany in other threads where he/her/they are resistant to actual indisputable facts and SERIOUSLY- who persuades by attacking the party he/her/ their champion OSTENSIBLY wants to LEAD?
how productive is that?
how is that NOT trolling?
eddie blake
@Freemark:
oh. and as to the emails?
the CORRECT answer is, “that’s a made up scandal. there is no there there. as a cabinet secretary, secretary clinton has declassification authority, and as far as i know, any questionable emails were marked classified after the fact. this is a made-up gop line of attack because they have nothing substantive to say about my opponent, so they default to lies and innuendo.”
Freemark
@eddie blake: And so? I never claimed he was a great supporter of Hillary or handled the primary aftermath really well. Litany may have, but that is their opinion, also doesn’t make them a troll I think Bernie could have definitely done more and better to get Hillary elected. I also think Hillary could have done more and better to get Hillary elected. Here in PA her campaign did a mediocre job and her advertising sucked. I wish a lot of things had been done differently.
the Conster
@taumaurto:
It was a college protest. Who was the black woman he “chained” himself to? THen he white flighted to Vermont, disappeared from the movement so that no one who was actually involved in the movement ever saw him, didn’t vote until he was 40, then for himself, and didn’t hire a woman or POC for his staff in 35 years in Congress.
Freemark
@eddie blake: Wasn’t what Litany was talking about though. Litany just pointed out that it was an easy line of attack he could have used and didn’t. Absolutely true. It was a smart play on his part so I don’t give him the mad props for it Litany does.
the Conster
@Omnes Omnibus:
Did Bill Clinton have a Soviet Union flag in his governor’s office? Did he go to Nicaragua to support the Sandenistas? Do you know how politics works?
Freemark
@eddie blake: OK, this was my first day off in a while and could finally follow a thread. As someone who doesn’t hate Sanders I do see people getting attacked unfairly by the Sander haters in this blog even as I can only occasionally lurk. Maybe that predisposes to not seeing Litany’s trolling. I’ll pay more attention to their posts in the future. Obviously doesn’t mean I’ll agree but I’m willing to see more evidence.
the Conster
@eddie blake:
NARRATOR VOICE: IT IS TROLLING
eddie blake
@Freemark:
ok, here’s the thing. so, we’re talking, we’re discussing, we’re having a difference of opinion.
i’m giving you some evidence, my interpretation of it, you’re responding by giving me YOUR interpretation. were i litany, i’d be attacking the organization her/his/its preferred candidate purports to want to lead, using specious, sometimes debunked lines of assault- (and, coincidentally YOUR organization, for whom you’ve shed blood, sweat and tears over for years.)
i’m ALSO not attacking you, which litany was doing quite a bit with the other posters.
and really, there’s a LOT of misrepresentation and “look at me, i’m a victim’ going on when he/she/they say “EVERYONE was saying THIS or EVERYONE was saying that.” when in one case it was literally ONE person, and as i said, in the other case? NO ONE.
so yeah. i’m calling bad faith actor.
i could be TOTALLY wrong. i’ve lurked here a LOOOOOONG time before becoming more active recently, and i’ve not seen as effective a shit-stirrer as litany in quite a while.
eddie blake
@the Conster:
hahahaha.
nice.
Ksmiami
@Kay: He’s an ass and a misogynist – leopard, stripes you know
Jinchi
The problem is that the statistics you’re referring to don’t prove what you say and the article you cite doesn’t make that claim.
You’re citing an editorial, which references polling data with high statistical uncertainty about a small subgroup of voters, which is then extrapolated to even smaller populations within specific states. So you’re already about 3 steps removed from a rigourous statistical conclusion. And you insist that it definitively proves that Sanders cost Clinton the election.
You’re also ignoring the fact that a 6-12% defection rate is entirely normal, if not on the low end. This is explicitly pointed out in your own reference. According to that, 24% of Clinton primary supporters voted for McCain against Obama in 2008.
Further, you’re attributing Clinton’s loss entirely to that small sliver (6-12% or 800,000 to 1.5 million) of Sanders-to-Trump voters, while ignoring the far larger number (6 to 8 million) of Obama-to-Trump voters and the fact that Clinton also gained votes from people who originally voted for Republicans like Kasich (32%) and Rubio (10%). Not to mention the roughly 40% of registered voters who didn’t show up at the polls for the general election or the millions who were perfectly happy to vote for Trump from the very beginning.
The Other Jerome
@Jinchi: It’s weird how many don’t care. Especially considering that this site was founded by a converted republican who voted for Bush’s first term. The intolerance of this place in the last couple of years is crazy. Actually it’s republican-like in a way. Again, ironic.
At any rate, we are all likely going to have to choke down a Joe Biden “mystery meat casserole” during the holidays in the general. So why not start practicing putting on a happy face now, before the guests arrive and figure out something is wrong with this “Democratic family” eh?
Fig leaf anyone?
cain
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
That’s why I never give any money to the DNC. They have all these opportunities but they waste their times trying to win back Trump voters who voted for Obama. Fuck them.
AxelFoley
@The Other Jerome:
You new trolls are welcome to fuck off if you don’t like it here.