Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign megathread

[henster]

There are better ways Bernie could've been more principled about it. Why not donate the money from the book deal to a charity or something? Why buy three homes? He's setting himself up for these attacks given his past rhetoric.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

As a Clinton ‘16 supporter I find it weird that folks are attacking Bernie for being a millionaire now. Love him or hate him, his entire career has been focused on boosting working families.

Are his supporters annoying online? Yeah, definitely. But is he being fake or hypocritical for not being poor himself? No. No one attacks Warren Buffett as hypocritical for being one of the richest men in the world and pushing for a millionaires tax. Bernie’s positions have never changed. And the tax return attack is plain stupid.

[Higgins]

Bernie is probably the only Dem I'd vote for at this point. The others support policies I cannot support and would only increase division in an already broken society.

[GoTfan]

As a Clinton ‘16 supporter I find it weird that folks are attacking Bernie for being a millionaire now. Love him or hate him, his entire career has been focused on boosting working families.

Are his supporters annoying online? Yeah, definitely. But is he being fake or hypocritical for not being poor himself? No. No one attacks Warren Buffett as hypocritical for being one of the richest men in the world and pushing for a millionaires tax. Bernie’s positions have never changed. And the tax return attack is plain stupid.

The same argument could be used with Bill Gates. One of the richest people in the world, and is a huge charity man from memory who want the wealthy to pay more taxes.

[SInNYC]

https://twitter.com/paulheintz/status/1117083572152799240


Major hypocrisy for the fake populist. Now a living millionaire whose representing well to do leftists in Williamsburg.

Being a millionaire doesn't automatically mean he's a "fake populist".

News flash: most major political figures are far wealthier than the average American.

Most major political figures don't base their entire politicial career on criticizing millionaires and billionaires. I don't have any issue with Bernie being a millionaire. I do have an issue with him and his supporters placing a blanket blame for America's problems on the 1% while their leader is literally a member of the 1%.

Being a millionaire does not make you a 1%er. The estimates are 8-9 million for the general population, and it gets a lot higher for older people.

In any case, I dont know that being a 1%er (or 5%er or whatever) disqualifies you from proposing policies for the 99%. And dont forget that the most pro-commoner president of the last century was FDR.

[Xing]

These sorts of attacks just come across as desperate and spiteful. He never said that literally anyone who is a millionaire is a terrible person, simply that the rich ought to pay their fair share, and many go to extreme efforts to avoid paying taxes. I doubt Sanders himself would mind paying more in taxes. I get that some people do have actual disagreements with Sanders, but when he gets lambasted for these sorts of things by the same people who said it was unfair to attack Clinton for making more than Sanders’ net worth for speeches, it’s clear that some people would rather Trump win than Sanders.

[Heebie Jeebie]

It would seem that Clinton supporters on this site are still bitter towards Sanders even though it was Trump and not Sanders who defeated her. When she won the primary Sanders quickly supported her as he had promised, but that doesn't seem good enough for Clinton supporters.
It's quite sad really.

They seem to want to continue to be divisive which can only help Trump.

Ha, a Sanders supporter accusing others of being divisive!  Pot. Kettle. Black.

Seriously, though, your comment is the lamest kind of straw man. I can assure you that I and many, many others deeply dislike Sanders not only for what happened in 2016 but also for most of what he's done since.

What more could he have done for Hillary in 2016 besides vigorously endorse and campaign for her, as he did? And what has he “done” since then that’s so horrible, besides fix his sights on taking down Trump and creating a more progressive Democratic Party? I don’t expect any specifics from you, cause you have none.

A Sanders supporter criticizing someone for a lack of specifics!  That's cute.

Look, I'm not interested in rehashing 2016.  You think Sanders's support for Hillary was vigorous, and I remember it being resentful and tepid at best.  Neither of us is going to rewrite the other's memory, so no point in arguing about that.  But I will try to articulate why I disliked him then and why I still dislike him now. 

I think Sanders is basically running a con, and one with the potential to cause distinct damage to the progressive cause.  Sanders's explanation for everything he wants to do is that we need a revolution in this country.  But we're never going to get a revolution, and Sanders knows it.  You don’t build a revolution on top of an economy like ours.  If you want to get anything done, you’re going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: through slow, boring, hard work.  If you want to make a difference in this country, you need to be prepared for a very long, very frustrating slog. You have to buy off interest groups, compromise your ideals, and settle for half loaves—all the things that Bernie disdains as part of the corrupt mainstream establishment.  In place of this he promises his followers we can get everything we want via a revolution that’s never going to happen. And when that revolution inevitably fails, where do all his impressionable followers go? Do they join up with the corrupt establishment and commit themselves to slow, boring, hard work?  Or do they give up?  If you don’t want your followers to give up in disgust, your inspiration needs to be in the service of goals that are at least attainable. By offering a chimera instead, Sanders has done the progressive movement no favors.

[henster]

It would seem that Clinton supporters on this site are still bitter towards Sanders even though it was Trump and not Sanders who defeated her. When she won the primary Sanders quickly supported her as he had promised, but that doesn't seem good enough for Clinton supporters.
It's quite sad really.

They seem to want to continue to be divisive which can only help Trump.

Ha, a Sanders supporter accusing others of being divisive!  Pot. Kettle. Black.

Seriously, though, your comment is the lamest kind of straw man. I can assure you that I and many, many others deeply dislike Sanders not only for what happened in 2016 but also for most of what he's done since.

What more could he have done for Hillary in 2016 besides vigorously endorse and campaign for her, as he did? And what has he “done” since then that’s so horrible, besides fix his sights on taking down Trump and creating a more progressive Democratic Party? I don’t expect any specifics from you, cause you have none.

A Sanders supporter criticizing someone for a lack of specifics!  That's cute.

Look, I'm not interested in rehashing 2016.  You think Sanders's support for Hillary was vigorous, and I remember it being resentful and tepid at best.  Neither of us is going to rewrite the other's memory, so no point in arguing about that.  But I will try to articulate why I disliked him then and why I still dislike him now. 

I think Sanders is basically running a con, and one with the potential to cause distinct damage to the progressive cause.  Sanders's explanation for everything he wants to do is that we need a revolution in this country.  But we're never going to get a revolution, and Sanders knows it.  You don’t build a revolution on top of an economy like ours.  If you want to get anything done, you’re going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: through slow, boring, hard work.  If you want to make a difference in this country, you need to be prepared for a very long, very frustrating slog. You have to buy off interest groups, compromise your ideals, and settle for half loaves—all the things that Bernie disdains as part of the corrupt mainstream establishment.  In place of this he promises his followers we can get everything we want via a revolution that’s never going to happen. And when that revolution inevitably fails, where do all his impressionable followers go? Do they join up with the corrupt establishment and commit themselves to slow, boring, hard work?  Or do they give up?  If you don’t want your followers to give up in disgust, your inspiration needs to be in the service of goals that are at least attainable. By offering a chimera instead, Sanders has done the progressive movement no favors.

It's just absurd that the guy whose been in Congress for 30 years and has only managed to get 3 bills signed into law is somehow going to lead any revolution or get anything done. I hope other candidates point out his record of inaction.

[GAProgressive]

Anyone know if Bernie is doing the rope line at recent rallies?

[GoTfan]

It would seem that Clinton supporters on this site are still bitter towards Sanders even though it was Trump and not Sanders who defeated her. When she won the primary Sanders quickly supported her as he had promised, but that doesn't seem good enough for Clinton supporters.
It's quite sad really.

They seem to want to continue to be divisive which can only help Trump.

Ha, a Sanders supporter accusing others of being divisive!  Pot. Kettle. Black.

Seriously, though, your comment is the lamest kind of straw man. I can assure you that I and many, many others deeply dislike Sanders not only for what happened in 2016 but also for most of what he's done since.

What more could he have done for Hillary in 2016 besides vigorously endorse and campaign for her, as he did? And what has he “done” since then that’s so horrible, besides fix his sights on taking down Trump and creating a more progressive Democratic Party? I don’t expect any specifics from you, cause you have none.

A Sanders supporter criticizing someone for a lack of specifics!  That's cute.

Look, I'm not interested in rehashing 2016.  You think Sanders's support for Hillary was vigorous, and I remember it being resentful and tepid at best.  Neither of us is going to rewrite the other's memory, so no point in arguing about that.  But I will try to articulate why I disliked him then and why I still dislike him now. 

I think Sanders is basically running a con, and one with the potential to cause distinct damage to the progressive cause.  Sanders's explanation for everything he wants to do is that we need a revolution in this country.  But we're never going to get a revolution, and Sanders knows it.  You don’t build a revolution on top of an economy like ours.  If you want to get anything done, you’re going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: through slow, boring, hard work.  If you want to make a difference in this country, you need to be prepared for a very long, very frustrating slog. You have to buy off interest groups, compromise your ideals, and settle for half loaves—all the things that Bernie disdains as part of the corrupt mainstream establishment.  In place of this he promises his followers we can get everything we want via a revolution that’s never going to happen. And when that revolution inevitably fails, where do all his impressionable followers go? Do they join up with the corrupt establishment and commit themselves to slow, boring, hard work?  Or do they give up?  If you don’t want your followers to give up in disgust, your inspiration needs to be in the service of goals that are at least attainable. By offering a chimera instead, Sanders has done the progressive movement no favors.

So Sanders is a conman then?

Thanks for saying all his supporters are gullible f**ks. That's the way to win them over!

[Heebie Jeebie]

It would seem that Clinton supporters on this site are still bitter towards Sanders even though it was Trump and not Sanders who defeated her. When she won the primary Sanders quickly supported her as he had promised, but that doesn't seem good enough for Clinton supporters.
It's quite sad really.

They seem to want to continue to be divisive which can only help Trump.

Ha, a Sanders supporter accusing others of being divisive!  Pot. Kettle. Black.

Seriously, though, your comment is the lamest kind of straw man. I can assure you that I and many, many others deeply dislike Sanders not only for what happened in 2016 but also for most of what he's done since.

What more could he have done for Hillary in 2016 besides vigorously endorse and campaign for her, as he did? And what has he “done” since then that’s so horrible, besides fix his sights on taking down Trump and creating a more progressive Democratic Party? I don’t expect any specifics from you, cause you have none.

A Sanders supporter criticizing someone for a lack of specifics!  That's cute.

Look, I'm not interested in rehashing 2016.  You think Sanders's support for Hillary was vigorous, and I remember it being resentful and tepid at best.  Neither of us is going to rewrite the other's memory, so no point in arguing about that.  But I will try to articulate why I disliked him then and why I still dislike him now. 

I think Sanders is basically running a con, and one with the potential to cause distinct damage to the progressive cause.  Sanders's explanation for everything he wants to do is that we need a revolution in this country.  But we're never going to get a revolution, and Sanders knows it.  You don’t build a revolution on top of an economy like ours.  If you want to get anything done, you’re going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: through slow, boring, hard work.  If you want to make a difference in this country, you need to be prepared for a very long, very frustrating slog. You have to buy off interest groups, compromise your ideals, and settle for half loaves—all the things that Bernie disdains as part of the corrupt mainstream establishment.  In place of this he promises his followers we can get everything we want via a revolution that’s never going to happen. And when that revolution inevitably fails, where do all his impressionable followers go? Do they join up with the corrupt establishment and commit themselves to slow, boring, hard work?  Or do they give up?  If you don’t want your followers to give up in disgust, your inspiration needs to be in the service of goals that are at least attainable. By offering a chimera instead, Sanders has done the progressive movement no favors.

So Sanders is a conman then?

Thanks for saying all his supporters are gullible f**ks. That's the way to win them over!

I'm not so silly that I think posting some comments on an Internet forum is going to "win anyone over."  I'm just curious to see how a Sanders supporter responds to my criticisms.  But as is typical of a Sanders supporter, you don't address the critique at all. 

Anyway, yes, I think Sanders is either a naive idiot or a self-aggrandizing conman, and most of his supporters are gullible and/or immature--more interested in virtue signaling than actually doing the hard work of making people's lives better.  But I guess I'm not supposed to say that.  I guess I'm supposed to coddle you infantile bozos?

[Xing]

It would seem that Clinton supporters on this site are still bitter towards Sanders even though it was Trump and not Sanders who defeated her. When she won the primary Sanders quickly supported her as he had promised, but that doesn't seem good enough for Clinton supporters.
It's quite sad really.

They seem to want to continue to be divisive which can only help Trump.

Ha, a Sanders supporter accusing others of being divisive!  Pot. Kettle. Black.

Seriously, though, your comment is the lamest kind of straw man. I can assure you that I and many, many others deeply dislike Sanders not only for what happened in 2016 but also for most of what he's done since.

What more could he have done for Hillary in 2016 besides vigorously endorse and campaign for her, as he did? And what has he “done” since then that’s so horrible, besides fix his sights on taking down Trump and creating a more progressive Democratic Party? I don’t expect any specifics from you, cause you have none.

A Sanders supporter criticizing someone for a lack of specifics!  That's cute.

Look, I'm not interested in rehashing 2016.  You think Sanders's support for Hillary was vigorous, and I remember it being resentful and tepid at best.  Neither of us is going to rewrite the other's memory, so no point in arguing about that.  But I will try to articulate why I disliked him then and why I still dislike him now. 

I think Sanders is basically running a con, and one with the potential to cause distinct damage to the progressive cause.  Sanders's explanation for everything he wants to do is that we need a revolution in this country.  But we're never going to get a revolution, and Sanders knows it.  You don’t build a revolution on top of an economy like ours.  If you want to get anything done, you’re going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: through slow, boring, hard work.  If you want to make a difference in this country, you need to be prepared for a very long, very frustrating slog. You have to buy off interest groups, compromise your ideals, and settle for half loaves—all the things that Bernie disdains as part of the corrupt mainstream establishment.  In place of this he promises his followers we can get everything we want via a revolution that’s never going to happen. And when that revolution inevitably fails, where do all his impressionable followers go? Do they join up with the corrupt establishment and commit themselves to slow, boring, hard work?  Or do they give up?  If you don’t want your followers to give up in disgust, your inspiration needs to be in the service of goals that are at least attainable. By offering a chimera instead, Sanders has done the progressive movement no favors.

So Sanders is a conman then?

Thanks for saying all his supporters are gullible f**ks. That's the way to win them over!

I'm not so silly that I think posting some comments on an Internet forum is going to "win anyone over."  I'm just curious to see how a Sanders supporter responds to my criticisms.  But as is typical of a Sanders supporter, you don't address the critique at all. 

Anyway, yes, I think Sanders is either a naive idiot or a self-aggrandizing conman, and most of his supporters are gullible and/or immature--more interested in virtue signaling than actually doing the hard work of making people's lives better.  But I guess I'm not supposed to say that.  I guess I'm supposed to coddle you infantile bozos?

How mature of you. Rather than dismiss you the way you’ve dismissed Sanders supporters, I’ll try to give you a serious response. Democrats have been singing the same “incremental change” tune for decades. Maybe it kind of worked in 1992, but how well has it worked for us lately? Frankly, on many issues, especially climate change, incremental change just won’t cut it. We need enormous, sweeping changes to have a chance of mitigating the damage at this point, since avoiding any consequences of climate change is no longer even possible. You may not like Bernie’s style, but he’s pointed out massive issues that exist in America, and small changes over time aren’t going to fix these if we get two years of a Democratic trifecta to make said incremental changes before the voters get tired of the status quo and hand at least one chamber of Congress to the Republicans, who have no interest in compromising with any Democrat, regardless of how “bipartisan” they may fancy themselves. At the very least, Bernie has made the idea of sweeping changes to health care, education, and income inequality mainstream, even if they’re not getting passed with a Republican majority in the Senate.

Can Bernie achieve literally everything he’s campaigning on in four years, or even eight? Of course not, I’m not an idiot. But he’s our best hope of moving the needle substantially instead of slightly, and changing political norms on these issues. He can lay the groundwork for even more changes further down the road, and bring more people into the political process. Not to mention, the fact that he does inspire legions of people shouldn’t be undersold. That’s how you win elections, like it or not. Don’t like how his supporters talk? Maybe try to understand them and why they’re disillusioned with the political process rather than labeling all of them as uninformed buffoons. If I judged every major candidate by their most obnoxious and least informed supporter, I’d have to conclude that every candidate is horrible.

[GoTfan]

It would seem that Clinton supporters on this site are still bitter towards Sanders even though it was Trump and not Sanders who defeated her. When she won the primary Sanders quickly supported her as he had promised, but that doesn't seem good enough for Clinton supporters.
It's quite sad really.

They seem to want to continue to be divisive which can only help Trump.

Ha, a Sanders supporter accusing others of being divisive!  Pot. Kettle. Black.

Seriously, though, your comment is the lamest kind of straw man. I can assure you that I and many, many others deeply dislike Sanders not only for what happened in 2016 but also for most of what he's done since.

What more could he have done for Hillary in 2016 besides vigorously endorse and campaign for her, as he did? And what has he “done” since then that’s so horrible, besides fix his sights on taking down Trump and creating a more progressive Democratic Party? I don’t expect any specifics from you, cause you have none.

A Sanders supporter criticizing someone for a lack of specifics!  That's cute.

Look, I'm not interested in rehashing 2016.  You think Sanders's support for Hillary was vigorous, and I remember it being resentful and tepid at best.  Neither of us is going to rewrite the other's memory, so no point in arguing about that.  But I will try to articulate why I disliked him then and why I still dislike him now. 

I think Sanders is basically running a con, and one with the potential to cause distinct damage to the progressive cause.  Sanders's explanation for everything he wants to do is that we need a revolution in this country.  But we're never going to get a revolution, and Sanders knows it.  You don’t build a revolution on top of an economy like ours.  If you want to get anything done, you’re going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: through slow, boring, hard work.  If you want to make a difference in this country, you need to be prepared for a very long, very frustrating slog. You have to buy off interest groups, compromise your ideals, and settle for half loaves—all the things that Bernie disdains as part of the corrupt mainstream establishment.  In place of this he promises his followers we can get everything we want via a revolution that’s never going to happen. And when that revolution inevitably fails, where do all his impressionable followers go? Do they join up with the corrupt establishment and commit themselves to slow, boring, hard work?  Or do they give up?  If you don’t want your followers to give up in disgust, your inspiration needs to be in the service of goals that are at least attainable. By offering a chimera instead, Sanders has done the progressive movement no favors.

So Sanders is a conman then?

Thanks for saying all his supporters are gullible f**ks. That's the way to win them over!

I'm not so silly that I think posting some comments on an Internet forum is going to "win anyone over."  I'm just curious to see how a Sanders supporter responds to my criticisms.  But as is typical of a Sanders supporter, you don't address the critique at all. 

Anyway, yes, I think Sanders is either a naive idiot or a self-aggrandizing conman, and most of his supporters are gullible and/or immature--more interested in virtue signaling than actually doing the hard work of making people's lives better.  But I guess I'm not supposed to say that.  I guess I'm supposed to coddle you infantile bozos?

Just keep insulting Sanders supporters. Like it or not, you kinda need them to win. They stay home, Democrats are going to lose big-time. And insulting them endlessly is not going to do that, but if you do, then they won't vote, then you'll go around blaming everyone but yourselves for losing.

Kinda like everything you've been doing since 2016.

[Heebie Jeebie]

It would seem that Clinton supporters on this site are still bitter towards Sanders even though it was Trump and not Sanders who defeated her. When she won the primary Sanders quickly supported her as he had promised, but that doesn't seem good enough for Clinton supporters.
It's quite sad really.

They seem to want to continue to be divisive which can only help Trump.

Ha, a Sanders supporter accusing others of being divisive!  Pot. Kettle. Black.

Seriously, though, your comment is the lamest kind of straw man. I can assure you that I and many, many others deeply dislike Sanders not only for what happened in 2016 but also for most of what he's done since.

What more could he have done for Hillary in 2016 besides vigorously endorse and campaign for her, as he did? And what has he “done” since then that’s so horrible, besides fix his sights on taking down Trump and creating a more progressive Democratic Party? I don’t expect any specifics from you, cause you have none.

A Sanders supporter criticizing someone for a lack of specifics!  That's cute.

Look, I'm not interested in rehashing 2016.  You think Sanders's support for Hillary was vigorous, and I remember it being resentful and tepid at best.  Neither of us is going to rewrite the other's memory, so no point in arguing about that.  But I will try to articulate why I disliked him then and why I still dislike him now. 

I think Sanders is basically running a con, and one with the potential to cause distinct damage to the progressive cause.  Sanders's explanation for everything he wants to do is that we need a revolution in this country.  But we're never going to get a revolution, and Sanders knows it.  You don’t build a revolution on top of an economy like ours.  If you want to get anything done, you’re going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: through slow, boring, hard work.  If you want to make a difference in this country, you need to be prepared for a very long, very frustrating slog. You have to buy off interest groups, compromise your ideals, and settle for half loaves—all the things that Bernie disdains as part of the corrupt mainstream establishment.  In place of this he promises his followers we can get everything we want via a revolution that’s never going to happen. And when that revolution inevitably fails, where do all his impressionable followers go? Do they join up with the corrupt establishment and commit themselves to slow, boring, hard work?  Or do they give up?  If you don’t want your followers to give up in disgust, your inspiration needs to be in the service of goals that are at least attainable. By offering a chimera instead, Sanders has done the progressive movement no favors.

So Sanders is a conman then?

Thanks for saying all his supporters are gullible f**ks. That's the way to win them over!

I'm not so silly that I think posting some comments on an Internet forum is going to "win anyone over."  I'm just curious to see how a Sanders supporter responds to my criticisms.  But as is typical of a Sanders supporter, you don't address the critique at all. 

Anyway, yes, I think Sanders is either a naive idiot or a self-aggrandizing conman, and most of his supporters are gullible and/or immature--more interested in virtue signaling than actually doing the hard work of making people's lives better.  But I guess I'm not supposed to say that.  I guess I'm supposed to coddle you infantile bozos?

Just keep insulting Sanders supporters. Like it or not, you kinda need them to win. They stay home, Democrats are going to lose big-time. And insulting them endlessly is not going to do that, but if you do, then they won't vote, then you'll go around blaming everyone but yourselves for losing.

Kinda like everything you've been doing since 2016.

I love how the response to "You all need to grow up and commit to hard work" is "Don't be mean or we'll sulk and stop participating."  All you Sanders supporters are so precious. 

[Heebie Jeebie]

Maybe try to understand them and why they’re disillusioned with the political process

That's exactly what I'm doing, and my conclusion is that they're disillusioned because political charlatans like Bernie Sanders keep making promises they have no intentions of keeping.  Sanders presents no real plan for anything--just a bunch of vague gestures and inchoate sputterings from his high horse.  He's done his best to convince a whole generation that politics is some kind of dumb morality play where the real heroes are those who don't compromise.  It's such a childish way of seeing the world, and I don't see why I have to pretend otherwise.

[Xing]

Maybe try to understand them and why they’re disillusioned with the political process

That's exactly what I'm doing, and my conclusion is that they're disillusioned because political charlatans like Bernie Sanders keep making promises they have no intentions of keeping.  Sanders presents no real plan for anything--just a bunch of vague gestures and inchoate sputterings from his high horse.  He's done his best to convince a whole generation that politics is some kind of dumb morality play where the real heroes are those who don't compromise.  It's such a childish way of seeing the world, and I don't see why I have to pretend otherwise.

You’ve got the chicken and egg backwards. Bernie’s message resonates with many young people because they were already very disillusioned with politics, not the other way around. Is he setting their hopes too high? Perhaps, but the idea that we need to champion incremental change and be bipartisan in the era of Trump and the current Republican Party is, to me, extremely troubling. It’s time to stand our ground and fight back, even if it means being “stubborn”, and not always compromising. In my view, he’s convinced a generation to get involved and vote for a government that will represent their interests, rather than simply pay lip service to change while failing to address fundamental problems in society. The mantra that we need compromise and bipartisanship is frankly old, not fitting in the current political climate, and often itself is intellectually lazy if the only proposed plan to actually get anything done is to “reach across the aisle.”

Also, where do you get your assertion that he has “no plans”? From his rallies? Most candidates don’t go into detail about exactly how they’ll enact their policies in campaign rallies.

Look, I want to believe that you care about enacting change that will benefit people and simply believe that Sanders is going about it in the wrong way. If that’s what you do believe, fine, we don’t have to agree. But I think you have yet to really understand what motivates his core of supporters, rather than his most obnoxious ones on Twitter.

[Rookie Yinzer]

It would seem that Clinton supporters on this site are still bitter towards Sanders even though it was Trump and not Sanders who defeated her. When she won the primary Sanders quickly supported her as he had promised, but that doesn't seem good enough for Clinton supporters.
It's quite sad really.

They seem to want to continue to be divisive which can only help Trump.

Ha, a Sanders supporter accusing others of being divisive!  Pot. Kettle. Black.

Seriously, though, your comment is the lamest kind of straw man. I can assure you that I and many, many others deeply dislike Sanders not only for what happened in 2016 but also for most of what he's done since.

What more could he have done for Hillary in 2016 besides vigorously endorse and campaign for her, as he did? And what has he “done” since then that’s so horrible, besides fix his sights on taking down Trump and creating a more progressive Democratic Party? I don’t expect any specifics from you, cause you have none.

A Sanders supporter criticizing someone for a lack of specifics!  That's cute.

Look, I'm not interested in rehashing 2016.  You think Sanders's support for Hillary was vigorous, and I remember it being resentful and tepid at best.  Neither of us is going to rewrite the other's memory, so no point in arguing about that.  But I will try to articulate why I disliked him then and why I still dislike him now. 

I think Sanders is basically running a con, and one with the potential to cause distinct damage to the progressive cause.  Sanders's explanation for everything he wants to do is that we need a revolution in this country.  But we're never going to get a revolution, and Sanders knows it.  You don’t build a revolution on top of an economy like ours.  If you want to get anything done, you’re going to have to do it the old-fashioned way: through slow, boring, hard work.  If you want to make a difference in this country, you need to be prepared for a very long, very frustrating slog. You have to buy off interest groups, compromise your ideals, and settle for half loaves—all the things that Bernie disdains as part of the corrupt mainstream establishment.  In place of this he promises his followers we can get everything we want via a revolution that’s never going to happen. And when that revolution inevitably fails, where do all his impressionable followers go? Do they join up with the corrupt establishment and commit themselves to slow, boring, hard work?  Or do they give up?  If you don’t want your followers to give up in disgust, your inspiration needs to be in the service of goals that are at least attainable. By offering a chimera instead, Sanders has done the progressive movement no favors.

So Sanders is a conman then?

Thanks for saying all his supporters are gullible f**ks. That's the way to win them over!

I'm not so silly that I think posting some comments on an Internet forum is going to "win anyone over."  I'm just curious to see how a Sanders supporter responds to my criticisms.  But as is typical of a Sanders supporter, you don't address the critique at all. 

Anyway, yes, I think Sanders is either a naive idiot or a self-aggrandizing conman, and most of his supporters are gullible and/or immature--more interested in virtue signaling than actually doing the hard work of making people's lives better.  But I guess I'm not supposed to say that.  I guess I'm supposed to coddle you infantile bozos?

Just keep insulting Sanders supporters. Like it or not, you kinda need them to win. They stay home, Democrats are going to lose big-time. And insulting them endlessly is not going to do that, but if you do, then they won't vote, then you'll go around blaming everyone but yourselves for losing.

Kinda like everything you've been doing since 2016.

You insult Sanders’s critics like he doesn’t need us to win. LOL.

[Canis]

It's 12:00. Didn't Sanders say that his tax returns would be out by noon today?

It's 9:00 in real America

[Heebie Jeebie]

Maybe try to understand them and why they’re disillusioned with the political process

That's exactly what I'm doing, and my conclusion is that they're disillusioned because political charlatans like Bernie Sanders keep making promises they have no intentions of keeping.  Sanders presents no real plan for anything--just a bunch of vague gestures and inchoate sputterings from his high horse.  He's done his best to convince a whole generation that politics is some kind of dumb morality play where the real heroes are those who don't compromise.  It's such a childish way of seeing the world, and I don't see why I have to pretend otherwise.

You’ve got the chicken and egg backwards. Bernie’s message resonates with many young people because they were already very disillusioned with politics, not the other way around. Is he setting their hopes too high? Perhaps, but the idea that we need to champion incremental change and be bipartisan in the era of Trump and the current Republican Party is, to me, extremely troubling. It’s time to stand our ground and fight back, even if it means being “stubborn”, and not always compromising. In my view, he’s convinced a generation to get involved and vote for a government that will represent their interests, rather than simply pay lip service to change while failing to address fundamental problems in society. The mantra that we need compromise and bipartisanship is frankly old, not fitting in the current political climate, and often itself is intellectually lazy if the only proposed plan to actually get anything done is to “reach across the aisle.”

Also, where do you get your assertion that he has “no plans”? From his rallies? Most candidates don’t go into detail about exactly how they’ll enact their policies in campaign rallies.

Look, I want to believe that you care about enacting change that will benefit people and simply believe that Sanders is going about it in the wrong way. If that’s what you do believe, fine, we don’t have to agree. But I think you have yet to really understand what motivates his core of supporters, rather than his most obnoxious ones on Twitter.

Re:  "the idea that we need to champion incremental change and be bipartisan"  Nobody's arguing for that.  In fact, I think just the opposite.  We need aggressive but attainable goals, and strident partisanship is the only vehicle we have to accomplish those goals.  Sanders, unfortunately, shows no interest in either.  Like I said, he's got no plan to accomplish anything beyond shallow "political revolution" sloganeering, and he shows an undisguised contempt for the party organization actually trying to realize progress.

Re:  "he’s convinced a generation to get involved and vote for a government that will represent their interests"  A government that will represent (and has represented) their interests is a Democratic government, and Sanders is nothing but contemptuous of the Democratic party.  His whole appeal is premised on the idea that the party has betrayed the people, and as a man who has donated a lot of my own money, time, and energy to the party I find that insulting.  When he spits on the Democratic party, he spits on me.

Re:  "detail about exactly how they’ll enact their policies"  Every speech doesn't need to be a detailed policy proposal, but you've got to show some indication of how you'll get things done, especially if you're proposing a series of wildly expensive new programs.  Sanders won't even entertain ending the Senate filibuster.  He won't put minimal effort into outlining funding options for his proposals.  There's nothing serious about his proposed agenda, and no indication he'll be able to deliver on anything he promises.  Do I have to explain why it's dangerous to make promises you have no intention of keeping?

[QAnonKelly]

It’s tax day, where are they?

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

It’s tax day, where are they?

He kept them in Notre Dame... unfortunately.

[Cashew]

It’s tax day, where are they?

They were just released.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-sanders/bernie-sanders-releases-10-years-of-tax-returns-details-millionaire-status-idUSKCN1RR2CJ
Bernie Sanders releases 10 years of tax returns, details millionaire status

Sanders, a U.S. senator who routinely rails against the “millionaires and billionaires” he says have rigged the system to protect their wealth and power, had an adjusted gross income of $561,293 in 2018, $1,131,925 in 2017 and $1,062,626 in 2016, the returns showed.

Wow. It's a lot of money.


Bernie can now buy those super-duper effective Russian Trolls and win 2020 BIGLY.

[Matty]

Good for sanders for selling a book that consumers wanted, but it really is a bit hypocritical to campaign against the 1% and claim their wealth is illegitimate while ignoring yourself

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-sanders/bernie-sanders-releases-10-years-of-tax-returns-details-millionaire-status-idUSKCN1RR2CJ
Bernie Sanders releases 10 years of tax returns, details millionaire status

Sanders, a U.S. senator who routinely rails against the “millionaires and billionaires” he says have rigged the system to protect their wealth and power, had an adjusted gross income of $561,293 in 2018, $1,131,925 in 2017 and $1,062,626 in 2016, the returns showed.

Wow. It's a lot of money.

That's all information that was already available in his Senate financial disclosures.  Yawn.