Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

niyad

(113,471 posts)
Wed May 25, 2016, 12:53 PM May 2016

11 reasons why Bernie Sanders lost this thing fair and square

(since I was told that this belongs in gd:p)

11 reasons why Bernie Sanders lost this thing fair and square







Bernie Sanders exceeded all primary season expectations and was en route to building something of a real movement. But rather than locking in those gains and settling in for a long-haul effort, he’s opted for a legacy-busting temper tantrum instead, heading out the (primary) door in a cloud of whining, conspiracy mongering, and blame casting. It’s a bizarre finale to what was undoubtedly an incredible run. So here are some observations, not because it matters—he’s lost—but because his claims of victimhood are absolute bullshit and need to be corrected.



?1464026361
VALLEJO, CA - MAY 18: Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders speaks at a campaign rally at Waterfront Park on May 18, 2016 in Vallejo, California. A day after winning the Oregon primary, Bernie Sanders is campaigning in California ahead of the state's presidential primary on June 7. (Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

. . . .


2. He may want to disenfranchise them, but communities of color voted against Sanders

Take another moment to savor what that would mean—a party establishment ignoring the choice of the communities of color, who have heavily chosen a woman, to undemocratically hand the nomination to yet another white guy. That, my friends, is the essence of white privilege. It’s EXHIBIT A, and in case you are wondering, yes it fucking pisses me off.


3. No, Sanders won’t do better than Clinton against Trump.

Current polling has Clinton’s negatives baked in. They are her floor. Current polling doesn’t have Sanders’ negatives baked in. They are his ceiling. And dear god, there is plenty in Sanders’ background to feed the Republican Noise Machine for the general election. And by the end of the cycle, his negatives would match those of Clinton’s.

. . . . .



5. But what about the media blackout?

Who gives a shit if ABC Nightly News covered Sanders or not? This is 2016, not 1966. Every night, about 22 million Americans tune in to the three big nightly newscasts on ABC, CBS, and NBC. Meanwhile, every day, 4.75 BILLION pieces of content are shared on Facebook, and about 400,000 tweets are posted on Twitter … per minute. So while less than 10 percent of Americans watch TV network news (and to those guys … why?), 62 percent of all Americans are on Facebook every day.

. . . . .


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/5/23/1529938/-11-reasons-why-Bernie-Sanders-lost-this-thing-fair-and-square

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
11 reasons why Bernie Sanders lost this thing fair and square (Original Post) niyad May 2016 OP
All valid points tonyt53 May 2016 #1
and yet the reaction is astounding. niyad May 2016 #3
Stopped at: "He may want to disenfranchise them, but communities of color voted against Sanders" Lizzie Poppet May 2016 #2
facts are troublesome things, are they not? niyad May 2016 #4
LIES are troublesome Armstead May 2016 #7
How so? Lord Magus May 2016 #14
#12 The corporatocracy gets what the corporatocracy wants. Snarkoleptic May 2016 #5
Stopped at Asinine Point #2....A Steaming Pile of Swill Armstead May 2016 #6
Yes-all at minumum arguable and at best lies. Biggest is nonsense re msm. Opinion hit piece. snowy owl May 2016 #8
Great post. MariaThinks May 2016 #9
and, apparently, a very upsetting one. niyad May 2016 #10
. . . niyad May 2016 #11
K&R Point number 2 is similar to a post that bravenak made yesterday and was, predictably, smeared Number23 May 2016 #12
that is NO WAY to talk about the presumptive nominee reddread May 2016 #13
DU Rec. n/t Beausoir May 2016 #15
K n R nt fun n serious May 2016 #16
 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
2. Stopped at: "He may want to disenfranchise them, but communities of color voted against Sanders"
Wed May 25, 2016, 12:56 PM
May 2016

Not just a straw man, but a spectacularly inane, slanderous one. Trashing thread...Ignoring propagandist. Bye, Felicia.

Lord Magus

(1,999 posts)
14. How so?
Thu May 26, 2016, 12:16 AM
May 2016

Sanders is arguing that the superdelegates should overturn the choice of the voters. That's disenfranchisement.

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
6. Stopped at Asinine Point #2....A Steaming Pile of Swill
Wed May 25, 2016, 12:57 PM
May 2016
He may want to disenfranchise them, but communities of color voted against Sanders


Fucking lie, pure and simple.

snowy owl

(2,145 posts)
8. Yes-all at minumum arguable and at best lies. Biggest is nonsense re msm. Opinion hit piece.
Wed May 25, 2016, 01:05 PM
May 2016

Clearly acknowledged most people get news from tv. Another opinion hit piece. Irrelevant.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
12. K&R Point number 2 is similar to a post that bravenak made yesterday and was, predictably, smeared
Thu May 26, 2016, 12:05 AM
May 2016
Fact is, Clinton won people of color by massive margins. Sanders won white people. Sanders thinks the election results should be tossed aside in his favor. Whose votes would be disenfranchised in that scenario? This is simple extrapolation, and don’t think us people of color aren’t noticing.

Yep.
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»11 reasons why Bernie San...