They are, like Twitter, merely a platform for communication. What you should be blaming in the message and the messenger.

for picking the audience that they did

probably most, if not all, are connected to politics in one way or another

do critics really thing that CNN is going to pull people off the street for a town hall?

I want to hear questions from people who know more than I do. It's called learning but others see it as attacking their candidate

A college student doesn’t deserve vicious targeted harassment and stalking for asking Senator Sanders a question that is on a lot of people’s mind.

I find it hard to believe that you would try to rationalize it.

Welcome to DU, by the way.

And embarrassing at the same time.

the "sexual harassment" question @ BS..

And, it's about Trying to Kill the Questioners because Tough Questions..

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

ridiculous.. it's gaslit.

When Democrats can’t even ask you questions, it may be time for reflection.

Now imagine how the caucuses might go —people doxxed and harassed?

It is just so ridiculous.

for calling OUT BS.

BS did NOT Answer This Question Satisfactorily.. Not "perfect"

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

The question was fine...if you don't like his answer, that is also fine. Don't vote for him.

OUT BS.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

They were Democrats asking perfectly reasonable, tough questions.

I'm talking about blaming Bernie for random anonymous people on twitter who have #FreeAssange in their profile.

There are others calling out BS besides those who have "free assange" in their profile. I've never seen that.

Even without that clue, you cannot know who you are really dealing with on twitter.

Did it never occur to anyone on this site that the infamous "BernieBros" on Twitter and Facebook were Russian bots trying to stir up division and animosity in the Democratic Party?

Most of it wasn't real.

That anger was one of the side effects.

in the reality based wing is buying.

Perhaps we should consider a candidate selected by a different wing.

I assume you're basing this on polls where Bernie outpolls Trump?

Because those taking stock in such polls tend to ignore the fact that if Bernie had been the nominee, the actions of everyone involved would have been different.

You think the Republicans wouldn't have made hay of the rape essay, among other things, and made "socialism" the new "radical Islamic terrorism"?

You think they wouldn't have pointed to him being in congress for over 20 years and getting little of note done--in essence, being even more part of the "establishment" than Hillary?

And that's just a few of the things we KNOW ABOUT. Who's to say that the RNC, Trump's campaign, the FBI, Russia, etc. wouldn't have something(s) else up their sleeves, ready to deploy?

And that's just THE OPPOSITION. You think there wouldn't be backlash from Hillary supporters, or even Hillary herself, after losing the nomination twice? Imagine PUMA 2.0, very likely egged on by the same forces behind the supposedly mythical "Bernie bros."

All of these, or even just a few of them, could conceivably give Trump the win--possibly even a popular vote loss as well.

...by abandoning the Democratic nominee? I don't think so.

Bernie would have gone after Trump for his bankruptcies, and his failed businesses.

Is unlikely to the point of being practically impossible. She would almost certainly, as she did with Obama, give full-throated support to the campaign.

But her doing that does not preclude a fringe group—who, certainly, she would forcefully and vocally condemn—from providing grudging support at best and opposition at worst.

And seriously. Just about everyone knows about Trump’s failed businesses. What would Bernie do differently to make them the negative that puts him over the top?

Most people just knew him from "The Apprentice"

...so I see your point.

He repeatedly refuses to be interviewed by Vermont media - unless he gets to approve the questions beforehand, and in addition we have several examples of him walking out on interviews when asked questions he doesn't like. And when he cannot avoid it, it is veeeery convenient that his supporters attack those who ask questions he finds uncomfortable in such a manner that many will be hesitant to ask similarly inconvenient questions in a public setting again in this campaign. There's probably no collusion between the campaign, the candidate and these supporters, but there's no forceful action against this harassment either, only milquetoast appeals to refrain from it.

Trumpy.

and from people who challenge him at Town Halls.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/02/26/ive-reported-bernie-sanders-years-free-press-cant-give-him-what-he-wants/?utm_term=.25ff32cee4df

Though Sanders understands the problem, his solutions leave something to be desired. The way the senator sees it, the job of a journalist is merely to transcribe his diatribes unchallenged and broadcast his sermons unfiltered.

“He would not be happy with anything that did not basically publish his press release in its entirety — word for word, quote for quote,” said Graff, who spent nearly three decades reporting in Vermont for the AP.

Back when Sanders held regular news conferences in Vermont — it’s been a few years — he typically refused to answer questions unrelated to his chosen topic of the day. That’s problematic for local reporters, who rarely have the opportunity to quiz the members of Congress they cover without spokespeople running interference.

At a 1985 forum on the media, the late Vermont political columnist Peter Freyne complained to Sanders, then the mayor of Burlington, that he had reneged on his promise to hold regular press conferences, pointing out that “When asked a question you don’t want to answer, you leave the room.”

of how well Bernie would do against Trump in the general election.

in the 2020 general.

In reality, the self-avowed "socialist" is the one Trump would most love to run against.

running against the best known candidate in modern history.

Calling him a "self-avowed socialist" is straight out of the RW lexicon, BTW.

Trump will look like a buffoon standing next to Bernie.

this time, instead of one of the multitude of others. And there's no reason to think that the majority of Americans will vote for someone who's determined to brand himself as a "socialist" -- like the Soviet Socialist Republic and the National Socialist German Workers Party -- or today, the dictator in Venezuela. Words matter, and for most Americans, that word contains too much baggage. We'd be far better off to use a term like "FDR Democrats," if that's what we meant.

In any case, the primaries won't be won by someone with only 43%. If he can't get a majority, then the superdelegates will be voting. And they won't view Bernie any more favorably than last time.

Most Democrats in the real world like Bernie. DU is not representative of the party as a whole in that way.

50+% of the vote. The reason Bernie and Biden are doing so well now is name recognition -- but that will change as the voters learn more about the rest of the field.

The superdelegates will likely be deciding, and there's little reason to think they'll choose Bernie, given so many great alternatives.

65 million voted for her in the GE.

Now that Bernie has money and name recognition he can register independents in all of the key states as Democrats.

not "socialists," whatever that means these days. Independents often split their tickets between D's and R's. Outside of Vermont, someone like Biden, Klobuchar, or O'Rourke is much more likely to appeal to them than someone who presents himself as a far left socialist.

Bernie's actual policies appeal to a majority.

That's a mistake, unless you're young enough or (old enough) to think it's cool.

And then tell me how his popular positions are significantly different from Elizabeth Warren, Kamal Harris, and others -- who aren't trying to carry the baggage of his brand.

Except of course, for his relatively weak record on gun control, where they do differ significantly.

Interesting. Really says a lot.

And she's a much nicer person who isn't labeling herself with a silly brand.

Doesn't seem to be a big problem unless you already hate Bernie.

Funny, the interviewer says it's the first time he's had someone walk out.

http://www.kgw.com/video/news/bernie-sanders-walks-out-of-interview/75-2023195

of answering the question. This is relevant now because of this recent townhall where he stumbled on questions outside his comfort zone. Who will he attack to change the subject now?

Good find, betsuni!

outside his comfort zone.

After he answered the last question, he got up to leave, and explained that the 4 minutes that they had agreed on were up.

That video is 4 minutes and 42 seconds.

The interviewer was very unprofessional at the end.

This was a dumb Republican attack on a vote that Bernie made on constitutional grounds that had no effect on the passage of the bill.

Bernie reads the bills in their entirety and if he sees something in the bill that is wrong, he votes no.

He doesn't waste his time with reporters who keep asking questions that he has completely answered.

answered." If only Democrats could do this! But that's different, right? Birth certificates, emails, Benghazi, voting records, things said decades ago, things Republicans did that Democrats are blamed for -- that's different, reporters should hound them relentlessly

Other politicians have only themselves to blame if they don't know how to shut down endless questions about the same subject.

Mahalo for the PROOF, betsuni..

All anyone has to do is Google "Bernie Sanders walks out of interview":

What does that tell you?

"berniehate" for the Reality of what BS actually says, does, and does Not do.

Based Dems have been saying all along! Shine the LIGHT!

I've been here a decade and a half and am bone fucking tired of Bernie's supporters blaming EVERYONE BUT BERNIE for his screw ups.

while I would be okay with almost all the Dems running (sanders and gabbard will make it hard to vote), Harris is seriously impressive. When someone can take down whoever with intelligence and a smile, I'm almost in love (alas, I'm straight).

JeezFC! Somebody had to say it!

comment to be false as shown in Sanders’ own behaviors to media even in his home state. This might be a huge obstacle now, as he wasn’t vetted before. There shouldn’t be this much resentment and dysfunction about answering some questions.

I watched him run for President, and he was perfectly willing to answer questions.

that completely refute what you are saying. His own home state media contradict you. We ALL watched him, and it’s been a known fact that he was not vetted. He sticks to his script and rarely deviates. He has not been vetted.

Some serious irony there when the entire base of this issue was Sanders not noticing the harassment within his own campaign, giving a statement that he was too busy running around trying to get elected as reason, then when a student questions him, and... summarily gets harassed for said harassment, it’s a senior advisor, and not BS himself that steps up to the plate to address the harasser.

Even then, the advisor doesn’t tell him he was wrong, just that it “isn’t helpful”.

Really?

Bernie hate is depressing to watch.

gotcha chief. Hyperbole much?

Bernie haters expecting him to respond to a single tweet is even more absurd.

How dare us peasants expect a response indeed!

He is most certainly above having to respond to someone, in support of him, cyber bullying and doxing someone who had the audacity to ask him a difficult question!!!