Before it was a race card. This is not a card game.

As for guns, we've all heard Hillary whispering that she is considering being a gun grabber. How will that go over in Alaska?

As for Alaska, when was the last time we won Alaska?

I wish you would not interject with your "bullshit".

Using descriptors like race card used to be the purview of conservatives to lash out against black people in a negative and bigoted way. I hope you are not engaging in the practice, my dear?

And when I see it being done, I will call it out.

It is not possible (imo) for Hillary to win Alaska but may be possible for Bernie to win there, so am asking what you think, since you live there.

I think Hillary and Bernie both lose Alaska. They are more anti socialism and the tea pary hasn't left here yet. Sad cause we get mucho govt money. Like welfare.

You are not really trying to equate me with Rush, are you? That would be a serious mistake.

Why don't you think Bernie can win Alaska? We don't even know who the R is. I do know Bernie can not be labeled as a gun grabber, what else is there that makes you think Bernie can't win there?

Bernie lacks leadership.

The link you provided doesn't seem to have anything to do with my previous statement. As to the 5 questions: Yes, Yes, Yes, No, No.

Hillary wants Snowden to rot in prison for the remainder of his life. Sanders stated that Snowden should be prosecuted, but the service he provided by disclosing the government's domestic surveillance program should be taken into account when sentenced. As in, you know, REDUCING the sentence.

I'd be willing to entertain the idea that Sanders is following Clinton's lead on drones (he supports LIMITED use btw) if you can provide a link where Sanders stated categorically that he is against the use of drones prior to making that statement.

Etc.? That's pretty far from specific.

prior to claiming he would approve of their use. Show me where he "evolved" on that issue, and how he followed Hillary's lead.

Unless you are saying she is following his lead on Drones? Because if so, COOL! I would rather see her as following him on this that the other way around.

In this context, Sanders would have had to "evolve" on the issue. Show me where he's followed Clinton's lead on that front.

Did he follow Clinton's lead as you claim he did?

This, both of them having to evolve on gay marriage, him voting for the crime bill, her promoting it.. Maybe it's toss up and they are so close in ideology that it matters not. I'll just pick the winner. Oh, and the side that is inclusive.
Before you ask:
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/27/rachel_maddow_confronts_bernie_sanders_over_past_opposition_to_marriage_equality_how_are_you_any_different_than_hillary_clinton/

I can move on or not if I choose to. I choose to ask what you think about this.
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/27/rachel_maddow_confronts_bernie_sanders_over_past_opposition_to_marriage_equality_how_are_you_any_different_than_hillary_clinton/

He was wrong to oppose same-sex marriage in 2006, but he never claimed that marriage was a sacred bond between a man and a woman like Hillary did. He just felt the timing was wrong, and as I said, he was incorrect.

See why I don't make much distinction? Same effect. Btw.

I find them all to be to my right. Since they are like way over there, from this perspective they are closer to each other tham to me. I have no emotional connection to either of them.

The only reason I even chose a side is because when I see black folks called race baiter, I know they are not my allies so I decided on hillary because her supporters defend against that stuff from right wingers and the few lefties that use such terms. It seems to bother some, but that is unfair, imo. Should I not feel accepted by the group I want to join? If not, join another group, right? People should be happy that I found a group that treats me kindly.

I can stop talking as soon as I stop seeing 'race baiter' and 'race card' and people being nasty to my friends. Then I will be comfortable enough to just go away, back to aa and know that there will be no drama. People were making the user experience difficult for them and I was sad.
I have to support them. That is how coalitions are built. I know you won't read this or care.

I saw him say that "all the shouting in the world" won't end gun violence, but I don't recall him saying nobody is allowed to shout.

Did I miss that?

You are not supposed to notice....

It was a witch hunt, just like the e-mail issue...just like the attacks on Bernie that are not based on reality. And I freely admit there are attacks on Hillary by Bernie supporters that are witch hunts too.

attention span and critical thinking skills are diminishing rapidly. I think I'm gonna have to find some Nyquil and check out in a few. Ugh. I'll catch you on the morrow.

Hugs. Love ya.

Hope we both feel better soon.

rushed over to Hillary, towering over her and demanding "You want a piece of this!"

talking to crowds. It had nothing to do with her but she is playing that card. He meant that everyone across the country that is shouting about gun control (in other words upset about it) needs to talk about it sensibly. Nothing more. Geeze Hillary is desperate to use that on Bernie. He is for gun control.

Maybe because he used her name?

She's just looking for sympathy. Poor poor little ole me. Big bad Bernie is playing the gender card. It's like sniper fire, it's all made up.

But it still wasn't playing the gender card. People shout over guns all the time. It wasn't directed at her in general. People should shout about guns.

"As a senator from a rural state, what I can tell Secretary Clinton, that all the shouting in the world is not going to do what I would hope all of us want, and that is keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have those guns and end this horrible violence that we are seeing.

He wasn't saying it in a bad way. I'm sure he shouts about gun issues too. Shouting is not male or female.

Sorry for my mistake that Clinton's name wasn't said by Bernie.

It could be that he's a condescending scold to everyone, regardless of gender.

Hillary didn't call him a sexist either. That's just an extrapolation.

Bernie's the one who's crying like a child because the mean lady said something he didn't like.

She likes to play games. Let Hillary do herself in. It won't take much. All we have is time. Tick Tock Tick Tock.

Why didn't the strong and assertive leader take issue with him demanding that she stop shouting during the debate?

She tweaked him and he bit on it as did his followers. His problem not hers!

she wants to stir up a shitstorm of negative personal-oriented campaigning. She's chomping at the bit to bust loose from the issue oriented standards Sanders has been trying to adhere to.

She didn't say anything except that she would not be told to shut up, period!

Like that awful sexist brute Bernie is trying to "shut her up" because she is a woman and has no right to take stands and speak out on issues.

Total 100 grade bullshit.

All of the pundits (including those favorable to Clinton) have stated that was her intent too.

no matter how many times you click your heels together.

And it's because it's true. It's not sexist. It's just a fact.

Larry David is the perfect person to impersonate Bernie. They have that similar angry New Yorker vibe about them. Bernie probably just thinks it's passion. Hillary gets passionate about gun regulation. I think she needs to be. Would we rather they go all Ben Carson Zombie on us.

She can be passionate about out guns because even some Dems sit in fear that someone will take their guns away. Are there so many criminals in the the Democratic Party to fear common sense gun laws? We need to get back to the 2nd Amendment stance of the 20th century. It's overkill now.

Just sayin'.

Or did you mean angry New York Jew??

I completely reject your attempt at calling me "antisemitic". Doing that does not help your cause at all. Watch "Moonstruck" with Cher. Those were the words of an Italian Brooklynite shouting "Snap out of it!" It's Brooklyn. Hillary is not from Brooklyn but the suburbs of Chicago.

So I am pretty sure she doesn't really think Sanders was being sexist. She is just doing the sleazy political thing.

the MSM will be sensitized to anything he says that can be interpreted in even the smallest way to be sexist.

HRC's campaign know that he's going to take her on with respect to her record and flip flops - so they are setting the meme that he is sexist and any time he has even the most remote reference to anything Hillary - they are going to call him sexist. They are getting that meme out now in preparation for the next debate as well as sensitizing the undecided American to this as well. They are planting the thought in the minds of the American People - so that when they do make reference of it - they will have heard it and it will become a thing.

It's "elther" "or" and not the idea that being heard when when Bernie speaks far above his normal speech level when he debates or speaks to a broader audience. Hillary's voice requires some pushing in order to project it. Obama has a magnificent voice which never sounds shrill or like angry shouting that we often hear from Hillary or Sanders. Poor Bill Clinton never figured out how to project his voice and still goes hoarse.

he's done where the PA system was on the fritz.

but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the man.

well..good luck...those of us who know Bernie know better....but nice try

He was not saying she was shouting he was saying it in general. He used her name (his tone of voice told what he was saying,different then a transcript). to address the issue of gun violence and people who only yell about it need to take action. That is all he was saying. If Hillary can only find that to b*tch about regarding Bernie then that is very pathetic and desperate.

She always has to spin and even lie - and it was a lie -- about Sanders intent on that statement in the debate.

Yes, women have to defeat those awful sexist men like Bernie Sanders, who can't stand strong women. Stand with me sisters against misogynists like my neanderthal opponent.

And naturally she had to do it while also misrepresenting Sanders as an NRA loving gun nut.

She epitomizes what is wrong with politics. Duplicitous. "You can never take politicians at the word. They lie. They twist the truth."

Bernie may be ornery, but he says what he really thinks, and what he really means. You don't have to break out the internal polygraph when he is talking.

I can't wait until the General Election when Clinton starts tossing her current "progressive" positions under the bus. It wouldn't be surprising for her to start talking Family Values to appeal to a demograohic that may not be as receptive to women's issues.

either she is going to be a strong feminist who stays on message and refuses to get in the mud, or she is going to be a whiny victim like she has been.

and even as a non hillary supporter, i am happy to recommend the former. nobody likes whiny psuedovictims

"either she is going to be a strong feminist who stays on message and refuses to get in the mud, or she is going to be a whiny victim like she has been."

Don't like your options. She is running for president. This requires leadership, inspiring, strength, compassion, smarts,flexibility, and being able to make Americans understand where she's coming from. And she is doing all those things. I just don't want her being too cute by half by repeating little barbs. And Bernie ought not rile up his gun nut supporters with put downs like he did.

and i would imagine gun "nuts" are not overly fond of his background check etc policies. as to hillary, if she wants to present as a strong leader, she needs to address the issues and not the shit stirring media ratings mudfest drummed up by the creeps at cnn, etc.

there is no bad blood between bernie and hillary. but that doesn't get ratings. but if she keeps playing the gender card and the "they are picking on me because i am a woman" routine, its going to wear very thin very fast.

After Sandy Hook, you know why nothing really got done? It was all shouting and demands to do things that would not have stopped the murders, not discussion about how to stop such things but just blather and name calling and the people I agree with use lurid language about the people we disagree with and all of that has gone on for years and years and the bodies still keep piling up.
Anyone want to assert that the current methods, rhetorical or otherwise, have made the change we need, persuaded anyone or advanced the safety of the American public? If not then do you really think more of the same is going to do the trick? I don't.

Hillary isn't the whole world to a whole lot of us. You know everything isn't about Hillary even though some want it to be.

When you can't win issues, you do this.

For example, I thought her laugh during the Benghazi hearings was wonderful. All night? Really? It was awesome.

I do not think she was trying to make a terrible accusation about Sanders. Rather, it was clever and a bit of good natured sparring that dudes do all the time.

. . . I fail to see what that has to do with this particular discussion.

is that with her "momentum", exceptional poll numbers, name recognition, and endorsements that she (or her supporters) even need to acknowledge what Bernie has to say. That anyone would suggest that he necessarily meant her shouting about anything is a stretch, but even if he did, why does anyone need to point out if it was sexist if indeed it was sexist? And again, why spend time on someone whom she and her supporters clearly believes she will beat? Wasn't MOM more aggressive toward her during the debates? If they are both beatable, why focus on one and not the other?

I would hope and expect for her (and her supporters) to focus on the real issues that are facing America and not anyone's "damn shouting". IMHO

you feel compelled to spew this nonsense.

Go Hillary !

If Clinton was so good for Democratic Party why in 2000 did the Republicans end up controling all three branches of the Federal Government?

For one, the GOP stole the 2000 presidential election. (& 2004) GW Bush was not elected president, he was appointed president by SCOTUS when they stopped vote counting in FL. Plus, swing state vote results were hacked by the Rove/Bush organization & the IT company working for them, & 2 IT techs (who helped crash state election servers, transfer vote counts to their own servers, then change vote totals) ended up dead after they agreed to testify about what they did. And ... our media totally freaking ignored it.

Seriously. IT tech working for Karl Rove (ie Bush) found dead in motel bathtub days after he agreed to testify about his role in stealing the election (hacking state election servers & changing vote totals) for GW Bush ... & no mainstream media reporting, no investigation. I investigated myself & I have all the records & files I could find.

Second, years ago the GOP realized that if they could gerrymander state districts, they could create districts where Republicans would win every election. That's how they took the House & Senate. Not because the majority of Americans support them, but because they gerrymandered & "rigged" the election system so they would win, no matter what.

But it's going to going to get a lot uglier if her attacks on Barrack Obama in 2008 are any indication.

"Clinton's talking point is also landing because it plays off not-unreasonable fears that a lot of women have that at least some of the Sanders support base is coming from condescending know-it-all men who have unconscious issues with women in authority. These kinds of men do tend to respond to suggestions that they are unintentionally sexist with over-the-top defensive posturing that suggests this is, in fact, a sore spot." (Yes, yes, yes, NOT ALL MEN, don't get all worked up.)

Acknowledging unconscious sexism and racism in our society causes some people (NOT ALL PEOPLE) to instantly accuse those on the receiving end of it of playing cards and stirring things. It's too bad the first instinct isn't to put yourself in the shoes of others. Another reason the U.S. can't have nice things.

Sanders shouts about billionaires, but he thinks there is too much shouting about guns.

He shouts about the things that matter to him. Gun control just does not matter to him as much, but it does matter to a lot of people.

I'm finally gonna say it.

I've been a DU member for a long time. Over 15 years, although not under this name.

I believe intelligent debate, framed with good intentions, is GOOD for the Democratic party. Let everyone make their case, based on facts, data, reality, etc. If a particular position/policy stands up to scrutiny & helps America & the American people as a whole, fine, let's unite behind it, move it forward, make it reality.

That's all good.

What I'm really getting tired of is the petty "Bernie this" & "Hillary that" ... well ... I'll call it juvenile bickering ... that I see all over DU lately.

Note that I'm making a distinction between PETTY/opinion-based attacks & fact-based position/policy analysis - things that can be empirically supported.

I originally joined DU because it was a place filled with reasoned, fact-supported discussion, among a wonderful group of people who, despite personal differences, united behind the vision of the Democratic party, & perhaps most importantly, were determined to save America from the scourge of Republicans/conservatives (& everything they do to destroy our country).

Now? I feel like I see so much petty Hillary/Bernie bickering on DU (which basically illustrates a lack of respect for other's beliefs), I wonder if we're all on the same side anymore. Are we?

There. I said it. Flame me if you want. Report me if you want. I just hope that some of you on DU feel the same way I do. We're Democrats. We're better than mindless f%$king petty bickering. I know we are. That's the sordid realm of Republicans. Leave the juvenile name-calling to them while we engage in intelligent debate. I believe in us.

#UniteBlue #P2 I'm on Twitter at @TruthTeamOne.

I completely agree. I guess some people honestly don't know the difference between a fact and an opinion. DU used to have the most information-packed comments, I learned so much. Now basic facts can't even be agreed on. Is it cultural influence? How emotion and feelings have become more important than reason? Experts ignored? Thinking objectivity is impossible? The emphasis always on conflict?

Sincerely, thank you. I've been wondering if I was the only one feeling this way.

Don't get me wrong, when I wake up every morning DU is still the first web site I visit. It's my first source of news, as I drink my coffee, before I go to Twitter. But, it's gotten to the point where I just skip over most of the Politics section.

Your words:

"Now basic facts can't even be agreed on. Is it cultural influence? How emotion and feelings have become more important than reason? Experts ignored? Thinking objectivity is impossible? The emphasis always on conflict?"

Very astute observations, 100% correct. IMHO those are not characteristics of Democrats, they're characteristics of cons/Repubs. The exact things I have criticized in the opposition for decades, & now it seems like we're falling into the same cesspool. All of those things are now fracturing the Repub party & rendering it ineffective. I damn sure don't want to see the same thing happen to the Democratic party.

Anyone want to talk me off of this ledge? Go for it.

I wonder how she makes it through any given day.

Bernie Sanders wasn't talking about literal "shouting" on the gun issue. He meant that outrageous statements aren't helpful in passing a compromise.

His speaking style during the debate wasn't shouting.

of our unreasonable imaginations.