Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign megathread v2 (pg 77 - declares victory in Iowa)

[libertpaulian]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TrinityMustache/status/1202782763553701890

Only. One. Campaign. Does. This.

Decade old Tweets?!  Oh my god you need a life.

If Pete's nearly-decade's old comments are fair game, so is this.  If Warren's speeches to the Federalist Society nearly 30 years ago are fair game, so is this.  If Biden's...well...everything is acceptable, so is this.

[Roblox]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TrinityMustache/status/1202782763553701890

Only. One. Campaign. Does. This.

Decade old Tweets?!  Oh my god you need a life.

If Pete's nearly-decade's old comments are fair game, so is this.  If Warren's speeches to the Federalist Society nearly 30 years ago are fair game, so is this.  If Biden's...well...everything is acceptable, so is this.

Serious positions candidates expressed =/= bad twitter jokes.

[John Dule]

Those Tweets sound like the type of things my gay roommate used to say. Stop whining.

[Sorenroy]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TrinityMustache/status/1202782763553701890

Only. One. Campaign. Does. This.

Decade old Tweets?!  Oh my god you need a life.

If Pete's nearly-decade's old comments are fair game, so is this.  If Warren's speeches to the Federalist Society nearly 30 years ago are fair game, so is this.  If Biden's...well...everything is acceptable, so is this.

Sanders staffers have been one of the worst aspects of both of his presidential campaigns, and I do think is says something about Sanders as a person that he has been dismissive of his own campaign organization. But comparing the Sanders campaign to comments directly from his fellow candidates is not exactly apples to apples. One speaks to beliefs or ideas that need to be addressed by the candidates that once held them, one speaks to a lack of judgment or oversight when it comes to campaign workers's previous statements.

[W]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TrinityMustache/status/1202782763553701890

Only. One. Campaign. Does. This.

Decade old Tweets?!  Oh my god you need a life.

If Pete's nearly-decade's old comments are fair game, so is this.  If Warren's speeches to the Federalist Society nearly 30 years ago are fair game, so is this.  If Biden's...well...everything is acceptable, so is this.

lol at the horrendous past decisions of buttigieg and warren being somehow placed level to some new kid sanders staffer being an idiot on twitter in 2010

[GeneralMacArthur]

I'm sure Bernie Sanders could get plenty of decent, respectable, professional people working for him.

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?  It goes from the lower levels of his campaign all the way up to the unholy trifecta of Sirota/Turner/Joy controlling his campaign messaging.

Like half of his damn campaign is Twitter hacks.  That's nice if your primary strategy is to elevate hot takes from the Bruenigs and Bhaskar Sunkara, not so great if your strategy is to organize and win.

There's a reason why you always see other candidates being friendly and supportive with each other, and Sanders is off on his own.

[Donerail]

If Pete's nearly-decade's old comments are fair game, so is this.  If Warren's speeches to the Federalist Society nearly 30 years ago are fair game, so is this.  If Biden's...well...everything is acceptable, so is this.

None of those things are comparable to a staffer's tweets from junior high.

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

[GeneralMacArthur]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Maybe this is why Sanders has the highest unfavorables of any candidate other than Gabbard.  It's also why he will get 0 delegates from his fellow candidates (except maybe Gabbard+Warren) in the event of a contested convention.

Pursuing a strategy of pissing everyone off is great if your goal is to piss people off.  It may also help excite your little 10% slice of the party.  If your goal is to get elected president, not so much.

[Bidenworth2020]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Maybe this is why Sanders has the highest unfavorables of any candidate other than Gabbard.  It's also why he will get 0 delegates from his fellow candidates (except maybe Gabbard+Warren) in the event of a contested convention.

Pursuing a strategy of pissing everyone off is great if your goal is to piss people off.  It may also help excite your little 10% slice of the party.  If your goal is to get elected president, not so much.

Your first point is objectively incorrect, and you clearly made it up as there is literally no poll that backs this up. In fact, MC has Sanders with the HIGHEST, not lowest favorables. This all comes from a Biden supporter.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Maybe this is why Sanders has the highest unfavorables of any candidate other than Gabbard.  It's also why he will get 0 delegates from his fellow candidates (except maybe Gabbard+Warren) in the event of a contested convention.

Pursuing a strategy of pissing everyone off is great if your goal is to piss people off.  It may also help excite your little 10% slice of the party.  If your goal is to get elected president, not so much.

Your first point is objectively incorrect, and you clearly made it up as there is literally no poll that backs this up. In fact, MC has Sanders with the HIGHEST, not lowest favorables. This all comes from a Biden supporter.

"People like me" in this conversation means "people who don't like rabid Twitter attack dogs."

Douchebags like Sunkara get lots of likes from their fellow leftists but take that sh**t to literally anywhere in public in a swing state and you'll be lucky to just get laughed out of the room.

As for Sanders' favorability, I'm talking general election.  He has the highest unfavorables of the major candidates.  I don't have the poll in my back pocket though.  He also has the highest unfavorables in the primary, as well as the highest "would definitely not support" numbers.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Maybe this is why Sanders has the highest unfavorables of any candidate other than Gabbard.  It's also why he will get 0 delegates from his fellow candidates (except maybe Gabbard+Warren) in the event of a contested convention.

Pursuing a strategy of pissing everyone off is great if your goal is to piss people off.  It may also help excite your little 10% slice of the party.  If your goal is to get elected president, not so much.

Your first point is objectively incorrect, and you clearly made it up as there is literally no poll that backs this up. In fact, MC has Sanders with the HIGHEST, not lowest favorables. This all comes from a Biden supporter.

It is no doubt the case Bernie has the most people who wouldn't consider backing him in the primary. His favorables are irrelevant in this specific context.

[Bidenworth2020]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Maybe this is why Sanders has the highest unfavorables of any candidate other than Gabbard.  It's also why he will get 0 delegates from his fellow candidates (except maybe Gabbard+Warren) in the event of a contested convention.

Pursuing a strategy of pissing everyone off is great if your goal is to piss people off.  It may also help excite your little 10% slice of the party.  If your goal is to get elected president, not so much.

Your first point is objectively incorrect, and you clearly made it up as there is literally no poll that backs this up. In fact, MC has Sanders with the HIGHEST, not lowest favorables. This all comes from a Biden supporter.

"People like me" in this conversation means "people who don't like rabid Twitter attack dogs."

Douchebags like Sunkara get lots of likes from their fellow leftists but take that sh**t to literally anywhere in public in a swing state and you'll be lucky to just get laughed out of the room.

As for Sanders' favorability, I'm talking general election.  He has the highest unfavorables of the major candidates.  I don't have the poll in my back pocket though.  He also has the highest unfavorables in the primary, as well as the highest "would definitely not support" numbers.

I'll take your word on the GE and def wouldn't support numbers, but the fact of the matter is that Bernie does not have the highest unfavorables among Democratic Primary Voters. Not even necessarily to say to disagree with your overall point, but I just wanted to make that clear.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Maybe this is why Sanders has the highest unfavorables of any candidate other than Gabbard.  It's also why he will get 0 delegates from his fellow candidates (except maybe Gabbard+Warren) in the event of a contested convention.

Pursuing a strategy of pissing everyone off is great if your goal is to piss people off.  It may also help excite your little 10% slice of the party.  If your goal is to get elected president, not so much.

Your first point is objectively incorrect, and you clearly made it up as there is literally no poll that backs this up. In fact, MC has Sanders with the HIGHEST, not lowest favorables. This all comes from a Biden supporter.

It is no doubt the case Bernie has the most people who wouldn't consider backing him in the primary. His favorables are irrelevant in this specific context.

This isn't true, either, Timmy Boi.  And you won't be able to back that up. 

[GeneralMacArthur]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TrinityMustache/status/1202782763553701890

Only. One. Campaign. Does. This.

Decade old Tweets?!  Oh my god you need a life.

If Pete's nearly-decade's old comments are fair game, so is this.  If Warren's speeches to the Federalist Society nearly 30 years ago are fair game, so is this.  If Biden's...well...everything is acceptable, so is this.

lol at the horrendous past decisions of buttigieg and warren being somehow placed level to some new kid sanders staffer being an idiot on twitter in 2010

The Sanders campaign just fired this staffer, so I guess they didn't agree with HockeyDude that being homophobic doesn't matter.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/06/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-staffer-out/index.html

[YE]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Maybe this is why Sanders has the highest unfavorables of any candidate other than Gabbard.  It's also why he will get 0 delegates from his fellow candidates (except maybe Gabbard+Warren) in the event of a contested convention.

Pursuing a strategy of pissing everyone off is great if your goal is to piss people off.  It may also help excite your little 10% slice of the party.  If your goal is to get elected president, not so much.

Your first point is objectively incorrect, and you clearly made it up as there is literally no poll that backs this up. In fact, MC has Sanders with the HIGHEST, not lowest favorables. This all comes from a Biden supporter.

It is no doubt the case Bernie has the most people who wouldn't consider backing him in the primary. His favorables are irrelevant in this specific context.

Tulsi Gabbard?

[Donerail]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Normal people with normal brains do not spend their Friday evenings obsessively researching the nine-year-old tweets of low-level campaign staffers, so no, I don't think most of the electorate is "people like you."

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TrinityMustache/status/1202782763553701890

Only. One. Campaign. Does. This.

Decade old Tweets?!  Oh my god you need a life.

If Pete's nearly-decade's old comments are fair game, so is this.  If Warren's speeches to the Federalist Society nearly 30 years ago are fair game, so is this.  If Biden's...well...everything is acceptable, so is this.

lol at the horrendous past decisions of buttigieg and warren being somehow placed level to some new kid sanders staffer being an idiot on twitter in 2010

The Sanders campaign just fired this staffer, so I guess they didn't agree with HockeyDude that being homophobic doesn't matter.

Just because you can be a terrible person with zero consequences on AAD doesn't mean that's true in the real world, buddy.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/06/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-staffer-out/index.html

I argued that decade old tweets from teenagers don't matter, not that homophobia doesn't matter.  I've reported your slander.  Such a pattern with you.  It's time for the mods to act.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I argued that decade old tweets from teenagers don't matter, not that homophobia doesn't matter.

James Gunn wants to have a word with you.

[James Monroe]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TrinityMustache/status/1202782763553701890

Only. One. Campaign. Does. This.

Decade old Tweets?!  Oh my god you need a life.

If Pete's nearly-decade's old comments are fair game, so is this.  If Warren's speeches to the Federalist Society nearly 30 years ago are fair game, so is this.  If Biden's...well...everything is acceptable, so is this.

lol at the horrendous past decisions of buttigieg and warren being somehow placed level to some new kid sanders staffer being an idiot on twitter in 2010

The Sanders campaign just fired this staffer, so I guess they didn't agree with HockeyDude that being homophobic doesn't matter.

Just because you can be a terrible person with zero consequences on AAD doesn't mean that's true in the real world, buddy.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/06/politics/bernie-sanders-campaign-staffer-out/index.html

I argued that decade old tweets from teenagers don't matter, not that homophobia doesn't matter.  I've reported your slander.  Such a pattern with you.  It's time for the mods to act.

You still haven't apologized for the misogynist slander you throw towards Hillary in the 2016 election. Just think that economic issues are prioritized more than social justice when it's the flip side for true and blue Democratic voters.

[GoTfan]

I argued that decade old tweets from teenagers don't matter, not that homophobia doesn't matter.

James Gunn wants to have a word with you.

He was rehired. Next customer, please.

[Landslide Lyndon]

I argued that decade old tweets from teenagers don't matter, not that homophobia doesn't matter.

James Gunn wants to have a word with you.

He was rehired. Next customer, please.

Yeah, and in the meantime his movie was delayed for two years.
You're welcome.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

I argued that decade old tweets from teenagers don't matter, not that homophobia doesn't matter.

James Gunn wants to have a word with you.

He was rehired. Next customer, please.

Don't bother arguing with them. When MacArthur, Lyndon, and Monroe act out (especially with the latter), it's never about them. MacArthur couldn't be at fault for slandering HockeyDude, just like the Harris campaign wasn't wrong for disrupting Bernie's speech at the CADP convention. If they were ever wrong, it never happened.

And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was, it's not a big deal. You were just overreacting.

And if it is, it's not their fault. You had it coming because you're a piece-of-**** Bernie Bro who was part of the Hillary slander in 2016.

Never have I seen a cabal of people utterly devoid of personal accountability on this forum. Any sort of wrong they do is justifiable because of 2016 and Bernie Bros and whatever straws they can grasp at to absolve themselves of any responsibility for their actions. But then again, considering how their candidate's been acting in the news lately, it's no wonder they act like this.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Which begs the question of, why does he instead continue to hire people whose sole qualifications are being rabid, deplorable attack dogs for him on Twitter?

Cuz it pisses off people like you?

Outside of the Atlas bubble, most of the electorate is people like me.

Maybe this is why Sanders has the highest unfavorables of any candidate other than Gabbard.  It's also why he will get 0 delegates from his fellow candidates (except maybe Gabbard+Warren) in the event of a contested convention.

Pursuing a strategy of pissing everyone off is great if your goal is to piss people off.  It may also help excite your little 10% slice of the party.  If your goal is to get elected president, not so much.

Your first point is objectively incorrect, and you clearly made it up as there is literally no poll that backs this up. In fact, MC has Sanders with the HIGHEST, not lowest favorables. This all comes from a Biden supporter.

It is no doubt the case Bernie has the most people who wouldn't consider backing him in the primary. His favorables are irrelevant in this specific context.

Tulsi Gabbard?

If most credible polling that asks the question puts Tulsi first in this metric, I'll happily admit myself to have been incorrect and instead I should have said that Bernie has the second largest percentage of people as opposed to the most.
But in general Bernie's more "Puritan-y" campaign (for lack of a better word) certainly sounds like it would garner the highest numbers in the "Will not consider" metric. No one likes to hear or be made to feel their favorite candidate is a corporate shill.
Really it's not an insult to say Bernie is highest in this metric - in politics what matters isn't not making enemies inherently but making the right enemies. He's still well-liked by well over half of primary voters, and he can win the nomination while winning exactly none of people who dislike him.

[GoTfan]

I argued that decade old tweets from teenagers don't matter, not that homophobia doesn't matter.

James Gunn wants to have a word with you.

He was rehired. Next customer, please.

Yeah, and in the meantime his movie was delayed for two years.
You're welcome.

Why do I bother trying to argue with you?

[Cinemark]

Was watching the Teemster town hall last night. Bernie was last up out of all the candidates. He got by far the best reaction out of all the candidates present. I think its partly because there were some pretty strong Sanders supporters already in the audience, but its still a good sign for him.