Team Broken Glass (Open Thread)

It’s safe to say the vast majority of folks who comment on this site aren’t big fans of Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). I’m not either. During the 2016 campaign, I went from believing his candidacy would be a welcome opportunity to emphasize important issues like wealth inequality and the out-sized influence of wealthy donors on politics to wishing he’d shut the fuck up and concede the race already to blaming him in part for fracturing the party and contributing to Clinton’s defeat.

That said, if — dog forbid! — Sanders wins the 2020 Democratic Party nomination, hell yes I’ll vote for him. I would not only crawl over broken glass to do so, I’d swim through sewer pipes, climb a mountain of toxic waste, rappel down a cliff face made of rat shit and THEN crawl over broken glass to vote for Sanders.

Why? Here’s one reason: Trump was tacky and ghoulish enough to announce to cronies that he is “saving” a far-right religious nut judge named Amy Coney Barrett for Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat.

Now, I hope that when Trump finally drops dead, Ginsburg attends his funeral wearing a red dress and a mysterious smile and then goes on to live for a thousand more years. But the fact is, we’ll be lucky to hold Trump’s SCOTUS picks to the two disasters he’s already placed on the court. Whoever wins in 2020 will probably get to choose at least one and possibly two.

In 2020, I hope to Christ it doesn’t come down to a choice between Trump or Sanders, but there’s a non-zero chance it will. Sanders, for all his myriad faults, wouldn’t appoint a Gorsuch, Kavanaugh or Barrett to the SCOTUS. Trump has/would. So yeah, Team Broken Glass. Any questions?






186 replies
  1. 1
    Baud says:

    Rough gravel? Sure. Broken glass? Gotta think about it.

  2. 2
    Baud says:

    Almost forgot. Stop using the Supreme Court as blackmail.

  3. 3

    Being a FPer means never admitting that you are wrong. Carry on.

  4. 4
    raven says:

    Annie Lennox

    Now everyone of us was made to suffer
    Everyone of us was made to weep
    But we’ve been hurting one another
    And now the pain has cut too deep…
    So take me from the wreckage
    Save me from the blast
    Lift me up and take me back
    Don’t let me keep on walking…
    Walking on broken glass

  5. 5
    Amir Khalid says:

    Sanders, for all his myriad faults, wouldn’t appoint a Gorsuch, Kavanaugh or Barrett to the SCOTUS.

    Okay, so who would Wilmer name for the Supreme Court?

  6. 6

    @Amir Khalid: Anyone who can get Putin’s approval. Plus it will be transformative because he is a Democrat Socialist or so we were educated the other day.

  7. 7
    Chetan Murthy says:

    BC, Amen. Amen, amen. Love your turn of phrase. Team Broken Glass, indeed. It’d make a great t-shirt, if needs must.

  8. 8
    randy khan says:

    I am totally Team Broken Glass, even though there is essentially zero chance I’ll vote for Sanders in the primaries. (There are a couple of people I’d probably prefer him over, but I can’t see them surviving to the point where it would be one of them or Sanders.) I’d vote, contribute, and work for him if he’s the nominee.

  9. 9

    He will leave the country and the Democratic party a smoldering ruin. He has no policies, only soundbytes and no character. Not that different from the crazy haired tyrant in the WH.

  10. 10

    As I said downstairs: as always, in the general, I will vote for the major-party candidate who would make the better president. As always, it will be the Democratic Party’s nominee, whoever it may be. Even if they wouldn’t be a good president.

  11. 11

    @Baud:

    Stop using the Supreme Court as blackmail.

    Said Bernie-or-busters in 2016 as they voted for Jill Stein

  12. 12
    Betty Cracker says:

    @schrodingers_cat: You mean like this? Let’s see how good you are at admitting you’re wrong.

  13. 13
    burnspbesq says:

    Yes, if that’s what it comes down to, I will take 15 minutes off from looking for a job in Auckland or Dublin to vote for Wilmer. But I will do it with my eyes open. He has no more chance of winning than the Orioles.

  14. 14

    Since I have already said whatever I had to say, I will leave Team Broken Glass and go out for a walk, its nice outside.

  15. 15
    ruemara says:

    Well, I won’t be able to vote, since I got my most recent update for Immigration and they’re still not doing anything. But if I could, I’d not vote for him at all. I figure it’s not my problem and I’m tired of working to solve problems I didn’t create. If he’s the nominee, I focus on local candidates in battle ground states.

  16. 16

    @Betty Cracker: I have no problem admitting I am wrong. I was wrong about you never admitting that you are wrong. I stand corrected. Thanks for the link BTW.

  17. 17
    MJS says:

    I will vote for him if it comes down to him or Trump, but I pray it doesn’t come down to that. Old white man vs. old white man, cranky vs. bat shit insane, potentially compromised vs. absolutely compromised is not what we need going into the general election.

  18. 18
    Spider-Dan says:

    Vote blue, no matter who.

    That said, I fear that Bernie will select Tulsi as his BP. She hits all the right notes (for him):

    – woman of color, to placate all the identity politics people
    – Berners love her
    – she knows who “the real enemy” is: the Democratic Party establishment

    Tulsi as VP is a terrible prospect, but who else could Bernie pick… Nina Turner? Tim Canova?

  19. 19
    The Moar You Know says:

    Not on the team, and if Bernie is the general candidate I will not vote for him. Leave it blank.

    Dems reward hostage takers and that has got to stop.

    As for SCOTUS, that’s lost now for at least one generation. So quit using it as a sales point. It’s off the table.

  20. 20
    Mnemosyne says:

    I’m not worried about having to be on Team Broken Glass. I think the Mueller report and House investigation is going to tank Wilmer’s campaign and Gabbard is rightly spinning her wheels and will get no traction.

  21. 21

    @Spider-Dan: this raises a good point: what is his foreign policy? Is it Tulsi-esque? That would change the equation.

  22. 22
    Mnemosyne says:

    @ruemara:

    Wilmer in never going to win South Carolina or other states with lots of African American voters. Bank on it.

  23. 23
    trollhattan says:

    @Amir Khalid:
    Jill Stein.

  24. 24
    delk says:

    Betty—I saw butter lambs at my neighborhood butcher shop and thought of you. Are you making one this year?

  25. 25
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Major Major Major Major: Vox had an article about that the other day — link here. If Sanders is the nominee, Putin will squash him like a bug. But not with my help.

  26. 26
    tokyokie says:

    A long time ago, when I was in high school, I had a summer job at a sewer plant. And if you’re going to last more than a day on the job, you learn quickly to breathe through your mouth and not mind the stench. So yeah, I’m adaptable enough to vote for Wilmer in the general if it comes to that.

  27. 27
    Brachiator says:

    I went from believing his candidacy would be a welcome opportunity to emphasize important issues like wealth inequality and the out-sized influence of wealthy donors on politics to wishing he’d shut the fuck up and concede the race already to blaming him in part for fracturing the party and contributing to Clinton’s defeat.

    Yeah. I also would very reluctantly vote for Bernie if he ends up being the candidate.

    Unfortunately, I expect the fracturing of the Democratic Party to accelerate as he pursues the nomination. I have been torturing myself by watching Young Turks YouTube clips, and one consistent message of some of their hosts is that the Democratic Party is little more than a bastion of neo-liberal shills who have betrayed the progressive cause for the last 50 years. Presumably, all Democrats should vote for Sanders as an act of penance for their prior lack of faith.

    I don’t like Sanders or much trust him. But I realize that I cannot totally hold him responsible for the stupidity and zeal of some of this supporters. OTOH, Trump is a nightmare, and as noted by others, every Democrat vying for the nomination and even Bernie, would make a better president.

  28. 28
    Miss Bianca says:

    @Baud: No, not even rough gravel. I am holding my nose, voting, and doing absolute fuck-all beyond that. No campaigning, no donations, no nothing. Because if Sanders is the nominee, it means that the Democratic nomination process is as screwed up and corrupted as the Bernie-stans keep screaming that it is, and I will have no compunction about telling the Bernie-stans of my acquaintance that the nomination of their man is the proof. I will do nothing to aid and abet it beyond the bare act of voting.

    I am talking at the Presidential level. I will continue to support Democrats at the state level.

  29. 29
    MisterForkbeard says:

    In 2020, I hope to Christ it doesn’t come down to a choice between Trump or Sanders, but there’s a non-zero chance it will. Sanders, for all his myriad faults, wouldn’t appoint a Gorsuch, Kavanaugh or Barrett to the SCOTUS. Trump has/would. So yeah, Team Broken Glass. Any questions?

    Nope. This is my opinion as well. This isn’t the time for a “principled” or “pure” argument, or even about rewarding bad behavior. It’s about staving off incredibly corrupt theocratic and oligarchic rule for 3-4 decades that has no problem breaking the law to suit its own purposes. And saving women’s lives. And minority’s lives. And the planet.

    If it’s Bernie, he gets my vote. He’s said and proposed some good things (and a lot of dumb things), but he’s far, FAR better than the alternative.

  30. 30
    MisterForkbeard says:

    Incidentally, did anyone else think “Team Broken Glass” was about breaking the glass ceiling? Because I’m ALL about that.

    Kamala/Warren for the win.

  31. 31
    FlipYrWhig says:

    I have a lot of issues with Sanders, but if I voted happily for Michael Dukakis I can vote more or less happily for Bernie Sanders. At least the think tanks who’ll run his appointment processes aren’t *entirely* evil . His worst picks will be his communications shop, because that’s where he hires only the most abrasive possible people, like Sirota. But on policy he’ll be fine.

    On the other hand I think Team Sanders is going to be quite surprised when the fans of other candidates start to coalesce behind a particular Anyone But Bernie candidate and he goes from getting 25% in a 16-way race to getting 30% in a 2-way race. That’s when the Extremely Online crazies will start ranting about Neera Tanden and The Establishment all over again.

  32. 32
    Miss Bianca says:

    @MisterForkbeard: He’s not “far, FAR better than the alternative.” He is, at best, just barely better than the alternative. But that will have to be enough for me.

  33. 33
    Betty Cracker says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    So quit using it as a sales point.

    Nope. SCOTUS picks are still critically important. We’ve got two justices — both appointed by Democrats — who are in their 80s.

  34. 34
    Betty Cracker says:

    @delk: I’m making THREE this year!

  35. 35
    trollhattan says:

    This editorial by a Hoover-Institute issue country club Republican contains clues of how Republicans intend to slyly undermine Democrats by supporting Bernie. “He’s inevitable!”

    Oh, yeah?

  36. 36
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Brachiator: Point taken but I think I’ve said before that IMHO a reasonable proxy for the core, diehard Bernie-or-bust sector is the people who said that they thought Obama was too *conservative*. And from memory that was something like 8% *of Democrats*. That’s an extremely small number to command so much attention.

    Also, wasn’t Uygur himself a Republican until relatively recently?

  37. 37
    Enhanced Voting Techniques says:

    I don’t see Sanders winning, it would just be two crazy old white guys yelling at each other over something and Trump does crazy old white guy better.

  38. 38
    chopper says:

    just because i’ll crawl over broken glass to vote in 2020, and just because that vote would be for wilmer if he’s the nominee, doesn’t mean i’m crawling over broken glass to vote for him.

  39. 39
  40. 40
    Fair Economist says:

    @Brachiator:

    I have been torturing myself by watching Young Turks YouTube clips, and one consistent message of some of their hosts is that the Democratic Party is little more than a bastion of neo-liberal shills who have betrayed the progressive cause for the last 50 years.

    I can’t imagine why people funded by Republicans would say that.

  41. 41
    Agorabum says:

    Team Broken Glass all the way. Baffling that people in 2019 would ever say otherwise. At a minimum, an end to kids in cages.

  42. 42
    Spider-Dan says:

    @The Moar You Know: Most of us were not lying when we said in 2000 and 2016 that “fixing the Democratic Party” (or whatever the complaint is) takes a distant second to keeping the GOP out of the Oval Office. Let’s have some consistency.

    And “SCOTUS is already lost so who cares” is not an argument. Right now, we are a Clarence Thomas heart attack from controlling the court, and they are two heart attacks from controlling it for the rest of our lives.

  43. 43
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Brachiator: If Sanders is the nominee, his stans will spend the general-election campaign gloating and spiking the ball, needling “establishment Democrats”, and basically daring us not to vote for him. (My evidence: they’ve already started doing this, under the assumption that Bernie has it in the bag now.) I’m going to vote for him anyway.

    If he isn’t the nominee, they’ll spin conspiracy theories about the party and generally do a replay of 2016. I’d have thought Sanders would have learned but the fact that the higher-ups in his campaign include a bunch of Twitter trolls and Jill Stein Busters is not promising.

    This is the main reason I suspect we may have already lost the 2020 election: the only possibilities are nominate Bernie Sanders or don’t nominate Bernie Sanders, and both seem like disasters in the making.

  44. 44
    Brachiator says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    Dems reward hostage takers and that has got to stop.

    What does this mean?

    As for SCOTUS, that’s lost now for at least one generation. So quit using it as a sales point. It’s off the table.

    So, would you and yours be immune from adverse Court rulings, or would you just be willing to take being hurt with a grim smile?

    And is your general statement of principal that if you cannot get your preferred candidate elected, then a Republican, even if actively harmful to the nation, is acceptable?

  45. 45
    Spider-Dan says:

    I used to be a big Young Turks fan. After 2016, I unsubscribed and said I would not come back until Jordan Chariton, Michael Tracey, and Jimmy Dore were all fired.

    Chariton was fired in 2017, Tracey in 2018, and Dore was just dustbinned last week. I am giving them another shot.

  46. 46
    rikyrah says:

    @Fair Economist:

    I can’t imagine why people funded by Republicans would say that.

    Uh huh
    Uh huh

  47. 47
    Bill Arnold says:

    @Fair Economist:
    From that link, this is LOL funny. Bold mine:

    The investment of $4 million, with an option to go up to $8 million, came out of a conversation Roemer and The Young Turks Network founder Cenk Uygur had backstage before speaking at a conference about money in politics last year. The relationship between the conservative Louisiana politician and the founder of the progressive media outlet stemmed from both making the removal of money’s influence on politics their signature issues.

  48. 48
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @The Moar You Know: I’ve already had this same argument with people saying the same damn thing about Joe Biden. The only way we can win this is by keeping a coalition together, and I don’t like either of these guys but they’re well within the range of ideological positions I’d consider acceptable within a coalition. If some big fraction of the electorate is going to bolt on the basis of whoever we nominate, we’re really screwed.

  49. 49
    ruemara says:

    @Mnemosyne: Oh, I’m sure of that. Just making it also plain that POC have done gravel, broken glass etc. And we’ve been told by the Sanders wing that not only are we too conservative and holding back progress, but our concerns aren’t of concerns to voters. Good luck, I think white people as a majority have proven they like their white supremacy straight, neat, no ice. Benign white supremacy with economic liberalism is too dilute. I don’t want to be an obstacle to the glorious revolution, if it’s Bernie, so I’ll stay out of the way.

    @Spider-Dan: The rot starts with Cenk and filters down to everyone else.

  50. 50
    Betty Cracker says:

    @Matt McIrvin: I worry about that a lot too. But I think the Bernie people are overestimating their clout. They count everyone who voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary as among the hardcore supporter base who won’t vote for anyone else, and I think that’s wrong. It’s anecdotal, but a lot of the folks I know who voted for Sanders in the primary last time are either undecided even though Sanders is running again or supporting someone else. Some polling I’ve seen bears out the notion that Sanders’ support is soft. I wish to Christ he hadn’t decided to run again — it’s a complication that will possibly be disastrous. But maybe we’ll come through alright.

  51. 51
    Cacti says:

    Latest polling shows:

    Only 51% of current Bernie supporters voted Clinton in the 2016 general election.

    7% voted Trump, 23% for a third party candidate, and 19% didn’t vote.

    The Bernie cult is poison to the Dem Party.

    No link handy, but it’s from the current Emerson poll.

  52. 52
    Brachiator says:

    @Fair Economist:

    I can’t imagine why people funded by Republicans would say that.

    A right wing group has invested in TYT (and accepting the cash seems dumb), but this is not the same thing as saying that this group has a controlling interest.

    @Matt McIrvin:

    This is the main reason I suspect we may have already lost the 2020 election: the only possibilities are nominate Bernie Sanders or don’t nominate Bernie Sanders, and both seem like disasters in the making.

    Yeah, Sanders’ supporters, maybe Sanders himself, is willing to be a spoiler. But I don’t know how hard he would be willing to work for electing someone should he not end up with the nomination.

  53. 53
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Agorabum: Wasn’t there some mild hubbub about how Sanders in his Fox News town hall endorsed building more detention centers on the border?

  54. 54
    Monala says:

    While I agree with you, and will do the same if it comes to that, I saw a great comment on Twitter last night. Paraphrased: “We were told in 2016 that Clinton was owed no one’s vote, that she had to earn it. Why then are there all these demands now that we say we’ll vote for Bernie no matter what? Why doesn’t he have to earn our votes?”

  55. 55
    Kirtaf says:

    I don’t see Sanders winning the primaries but if he does become the nominee, I’ll vote for him. I won’t be thrilled but literally anyone would be better than a second term of Trump. I think Sanders would be ineffective as President. He has very few allies in congress and his abrasive nature isn’t likely to help him there so he wouldn’t accomplish much but at least he might keep the Republicans from continuing on their downward trajectory to an unregulated oligarchy/dictatorship. Let’s just keep working to get a better nominee for the country.

  56. 56
    rikyrah says:

    @ruemara:

    Just making it also plain that POC have done gravel, broken glass etc. And we’ve been told by the Sanders wing that not only are we too conservative and holding back progress, but our concerns aren’t of concerns to voters.

    Yeah…that….

  57. 57
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Betty Cracker:

    They count everyone who voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary as among the hardcore supporter base who won’t vote for anyone else, and I think that’s wrong. It’s anecdotal, but a lot of the folks I know who voted for Sanders in the primary last time are either undecided even though Sanders is running again or supporting someone else.

    Yup, they do this CONSTANTLY. IMHO we need to separate out the lefty vote for Sanders, the anyone-but-Clinton vote for Sanders, and the who’s the new guy? vote for Sanders. And maybe there are more types too.

    My hunch is that a lot of the Buttigieg and O’Rourke vote is coming from people (especially young people) who were excited about Sanders ’16 because they thought Hillary Clinton was old news. This time around if you’re looking for new news you have a lot of options besides Sanders.

  58. 58
    Cacti says:

    @Spider-Dan:

    As far as SCOTUS goes, McConnell gamed the current rules to keep a right wing majority in place.

    Our new goal should be changing the rules. If the party of Trump wants to whine about tradition and decorum, it should be greeted with the scorn it deserves.

    Changing the number of SCOTUS Justices just requires amending the Judiciary Act, and only takes a simple legislative majority. Nothing in the Constitution sets the number at 9.

  59. 59
    Spider-Dan says:

    @Monala: Yes, the Berners are telling us to do something they were unwilling to do. That’s because in 2016, they were wrong and we were right.

    Vote blue, no matter who. Party problems can be fixed afterward.

  60. 60
    rikyrah says:

    Tell it 👏👏
    THIS

    Propane Jane™ (@docrocktex26) Tweeted:
    If you think minorities will be energized to vote for a party that looked the other way because it was too afraid of the institution of White supremacy to avenge the voter suppression and robbery of 2016 plus the #crimingwhilewhite of the last 2 years, I have news for you. https://t.co/sBDE3XIOG2

  61. 61
    rikyrah says:

    @Cacti:
    How many you want?
    11?
    13?

    I like 13..and have 4 new justices ready to be approved of in succession.

  62. 62
    Brachiator says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Point taken but I think I’ve said before that IMHO a reasonable proxy for the core, diehard Bernie-or-bust sector is the people who said that they thought Obama was too *conservative*. And from memory that was something like 8% *of Democrats*. That’s an extremely small number to command so much attention.

    They are certainly noisy about it, so I hope that they are small.

    Also, wasn’t Uygur himself a Republican until relatively recently?

    Hmm. Didn’t know much about his background. His Wiki page says he was a Republican before 2000, and Independent from 2000 to 2016, and Democratic since 2016.

  63. 63
    Cacti says:

    The greatest trick that Russia played in 2016 was convincing a plurality of Americans that voting for one of two septuagenarian white males was a revolutionary act.

  64. 64
    plato says:

    The thread should be named team broken heart. A choice between two old shouty corrupt white guyz is not a choice at all.

  65. 65
    Cacti says:

    @rikyrah:

    13 sounds good. Maybe even 15, but that may be a reach.

  66. 66
    Spider-Dan says:

    @Cacti: I’m open to that too. But if Thomas croaks in the interim, you don’t need to build a shoe factory if you can just go buy a pair of shoes instead.

  67. 67
    Enhanced Voting Techniques says:

    Trump been on the rampage on the Twitter Machine and my MAGA friends were mocking Trump last night and laughed when I said I can believe the Russians though Trump was too stupid to conspire with. So I think the worm as really turned. Might be 2020 is Pence verses Sanders.

  68. 68
    Monala says:

    @Spider-Dan:

    Oh, I agree about voting blue no matter what. But there haven’t even been any primaries yet. It is far from given that Sanders will win the nomination. If he becomes the nominee, then demands that we vote for him will be appropriate. But now? Why doesn’t he have to earn our votes now?

  69. 69
    VeniceRiley says:

    @FlipYrWhig: Yes. Sanders said he basically wants nicer detention camps on the border. Plusher … faster … better. he is definitely to the right of the party on immigration. His white base and the trump voters he craves won’t object.

    As for the main question, ask me around Nov 2nd 2020. I’ll be busy working for down-ballot Democrats. And we would all need to under this horrible scenario. Because Bernie has no coattails, doesn’t fundraise for the party and other candidates, etc. He’s selfish and self involved. We’re going to have to do it ourselves if we want to save the party from him and his grifter family and their horrid cabal and camp followers. Until then, I refuse to give him any air to breathe while in the middle of primary season. The message during this primary contest should be that Sanders is entirely unacceptable in every conceivable way and would be a spectacularly stupid pick.

  70. 70
    Brachiator says:

    @rikyrah:

    Propane Jane™ (@docrocktex26) Tweeted:
    If you think minorities will be energized to vote for a party that looked the other way because it was too afraid of the institution of White supremacy to avenge the voter suppression and robbery of 2016 plus the #crimingwhilewhite of the last 2 years, I have news for you.

    I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. But it’s also Friday, and it’s been a long week.

  71. 71
    Walker says:

    I will vote Sanders if selected, but I will worry a lot about POC turnout. And I will not blame them for not turning out.

  72. 72
    Cacti says:

    @Spider-Dan:

    Does Thomas have health problems? He’s old, but not one foot in the grave old (turns 71 this year).

  73. 73
    James E Powell says:

    Republicans are working feverishly to turn this whole Mueller Report thing into a one week story. Who’s to say they won’t succeed?

    The press/media, Democrats, and most of the internet seem to be forgetting that a great deal of Trump’s conduct that is arguably impeachable, maybe criminal, and certainly worthy of further investigation has nothing to do with the Mueller investigation. For example, why isn’t there a special investigatory committee on the way Trump & family are using the presidency to line their pockets. Why is nobody combing over every possible connection with NYC organized crime? Cf. Whitewater.

  74. 74
    Hungry Joe says:

    The Moar You Know has the luxury — as I do — of living in California. We can leave the Pres spot blank on the ballot, and it’s a legit protest non-vote: No way the GOP carries the state. But if it came to that I suspect I’d cave and vote Bern, if for no other reason than seeing Trump’s name on the ballot. Whoever it is, I plan to crawl over broken glass all the way to another state — probably Arizona or Nevada — for at least a few days to canvass Blue. As I keep saying (though Mr. Byrne said it first): This ain’t no party/This ain’t no disco/ This ain’t no fooling around.

  75. 75
    rikyrah says:

    “In an unprecedented decision, Israeli authorities are denying hundreds of Palestinian Christians the right to travel to Jerusalem for the holiday, while barring all movement between the West Bank and Gaza.” https://t.co/PDTqTUUC8b

    — Linda Sarsour (@lsarsour) April 19, 2019

  76. 76
    kindness says:

    If Bernie is the nominee I will vote for him. I’m going to work to make sure Bernie isn’t the nominee though.

    Sorry Bernie, you aren’t my cup of tea. And BernieBros: Go away. I want nothing to do with you horrible people.

  77. 77
    zhena gogolia says:

    @Matt McIrvin:

    Depressing but possibly true.

    I believe he’s getting Russian help to win the primary because he’s a cinch to lose the general.

  78. 78
    rikyrah says:

    BREAKING: Trump revises ACA to reduce subsidies for families buying ACA coverage by $1 Billion, cutting 70,000 more from the exchanges.https://t.co/T8PQ2oUrY1

    — Andy Slavitt (@ASlavitt) April 19, 2019

  79. 79
    Brachiator says:

    @rikyrah:

    “In an unprecedented decision, Israeli authorities are denying hundreds of Palestinian Christians the right to travel to Jerusalem for the holiday, while barring all movement between the West Bank and Gaza.”

    I thought evangelicals were pro-Christian. This makes for a neat test.

  80. 80
    Doug R says:

    Wilmer CAN’T win.

  81. 81
    Spider-Dan says:

    @Monala: Vote for whoever you want in the primary. You owe nothing to anyone. But early in the primary is the best possible time to reinforce everyone’s commitment to vote for the primary winner. This “If [x] wins, I’m voting third-party” stuff is dumb and counterproductive, especially now.

  82. 82

    #TEAMBROKENGLASS all the way!

  83. 83
    Mike in DC says:

    I think Tulsi Gabbard is the only nominee I might sit on my hands for. Fortunately she has zero chance of winning. Since Biden is apparently jumping in the race, I expect a lot of firepower to be directed towards Sanders from many candidates, major and minor. There will be three debates this summer and about 8 or 9 before the first contest. That’s a lot of opportunities to knock holes in frontrunners, and Sanders will be a frontrunner for a while.

  84. 84
    FelonyGovt says:

    I don’t know why this “would you vote for Bernie” question is so prevalent right now. I do think his support is a lot softer than he makes out.

    Anecdotally (and I know one person proves nothing), my Bernie-craziest friend from 2016, a Latina in her 50’s, is now gaga over Marianne Williamson (!) and is also quoting Elizabeth Warren with approval.

  85. 85
    VeniceRiley says:

    Sanders in South Carolina a few weeks ago, “My opponents say ‘Vote for me! I’m a woman!’ NO! ‘Vote for me. I’m a Latina!’ NO!”

    He is toxic and MUST be defeated in the primary. This is our sole job right now. I’m in CA as well and have the luxury of never having to contemplate him for 2020. And yes, good luck getting POC to turn out. Sad for purple staters who are being forced to even contemplate this question at such an early date. He is not inevitable and is, in fact, very vulnerable. Let’s act like it. No fear.

  86. 86
    rikyrah says:

    @VeniceRiley:

    Sanders in South Carolina a few weeks ago, “My opponents say ‘Vote for me! I’m a woman!’ NO! ‘Vote for me. I’m a Latina!’ NO!”

    lips pursed

    He is toxic and MUST be defeated in the primary. This is our sole job right now.

    yep

  87. 87
    Kay says:

    I’ll vote for him. I reserve the right to be insufferably smug when he gets viciously attacked in the general, though, and it won’t be coming from The Democratic Establishment. I won’t be defending them because they didn’t defend my candidate in the 2016 general. I’m not their unpaid employee. This is supposed to be reciprocal.

    For such committed Leftists Bernie people seem to have a lot of trouble with the notion of “solidarity” and “strength in numbers”. I’m sick of people with huge egos and a complete inability to work with others. I don’t think it’s admirable. I think it’s childish, vain and short-sighted.

  88. 88
    Eljai says:

    I volunteered during the 2018 midterms and the people who showed up to make calls, register voters and canvass were low-drama. They were determined and excited about getting our younger, diverse bench of Democratic candidates elected to the House. These are the people who will show up for the primaries and I’m not at all convinced that Bernie has an advantage with them. I will, of course, vote for the Democratic nominee.

  89. 89

    @FelonyGovt:

    I don’t know why this “would you vote for Bernie” question is so prevalent right now.

    Probably his supporters are pushing it.

  90. 90
    Kay says:

    I think it’s incredibly stupid and naive and driven by irrational hatred of Hillary Clinton for them to believe Bernie won’t get the same treatment from Trump and his collection of thugs and crooks that Clinton got. The moment he’s the nominee they go for him and by then they will have completely alienated every ally outside their club. They want Trump, dumbasses, not Bernie. They’ve as much as said so 50,000 times now.

  91. 91
    Peale says:

    @The Moar You Know: because having to wait for three conservative justices to retire makes more sense than waiting on 2?

  92. 92
    snoey says:

    Bernie has gotten one of the greatest free rides in the history of American politics.

    There is a mountain of oppo research on him that HRC couldn’t use because she needed his supporters in the general.

    Somebody on the Moulton Hickenlooper etc. list should take one for the team and dump some of it on him before Trump dumps all of it.

  93. 93
    Geeno says:

    @Cacti: Screw it. Go big, or go home, Add 92 justices to make it 101. Basically dare the R’s to add more

  94. 94
    Spider-Dan says:

    @Kay:

    I won’t be defending them because they didn’t defend my candidate in the 2016 general. I’m not their unpaid employee. This is supposed to be reciprocal.

    Winning the election is what matters. Everything else is secondary.

    That said, I prefer my haughty “told ya so” to come in the form of doing everything we said they should have done in 2016, while reminding them that this is how a winning coalition works.

    Yes, the Bernie-or-Busters were idiots in 2016. That doesn’t mean we get to emulate them. We have to be better and lead by example.

  95. 95
    Humdog says:

    I’ve been wondering about the general mood of the electorate. Do they want fight or do they want hope. I believe junkies like us want, or even need, a fight. We want a Kamala type who will punch back. But we junkies will show up to vote blue, it is what we do.
    But the hopers, they may just want to feel good about the country again. They don’t want continued fighting. I think that may be part of the Mayor Pete buzz (tho it would apply to Booker too). People felt good about the country when we didn’t vote the racist way many feared in 2008. We were hopeful and felt comforted that someone smart was looking out for the whole country, not just one party. Since we politics junkies are expected to show up regardless, I can see others making the decision to clinch the hope vote by once again voting in someone who the politico class thinks we are too bigoted to, a gay man.
    Gah, it’s not up to me, I want fighters, but I have no confidence left that I can guess how the vote washes out.

  96. 96
    bemused says:

    @Enhanced Voting Techniques:

    I like the sound of that! Hope the magas in my area are heading in the same direction.

  97. 97
    WhatsMyNym says:

    Doesn’t Sanders look like he’s aged since 2016? I’m concerned about his health.
    Really not kidding. I live in a town with many retirees, and if I saw an older friend look like that at his relatively young age, I would be very concerned.

  98. 98
    Nelle says:

    Jumping to the end of the thread to say that a loss for Bernie in Iowa would be quite nice, right. So, even though I’m a newbie here, come on over. Help us out here.

  99. 99
    Ksmiami says:

    @plato: I suggest you all do what I do and basically tell the dnc that Bernie doesn’t deserve the Democratic Party support and they won’t get a cent or our support if he’s the nominee- for Chris sake he thinks birth control and women’s rights is a special interest and sorry I will not vote for him

  100. 100
    stan says:

    @Kay:

    For such committed Leftists Bernie people seem to have a lot of trouble with the notion of “solidarity” and “strength in numbers”. I’m sick of people with huge egos and a complete inability to work with others. I don’t think it’s admirable. I think it’s childish, vain and short-sighted.

    this. Thank you.

  101. 101
    Barbara says:

    @VeniceRiley:

    “My opponents say ‘Vote for me! I’m a woman!’ NO! ‘Vote for me. I’m a Latina!’ NO!”

    Which opponents have said that? None, especially since the last time I checked there is no Latina even running. Why doesn’t he just come right out and say it: “Vote for me, I am not a woman or Latino or black. I am the only one running (so far) who counts as a default, non-special interest person in the U.S.”

  102. 102
    Cacti says:

    @snoey:

    In retrospect, the kumbaya approach with Bernie didn’t work because:

    He’s not a Dem, doesn’t play well with others, and never has. Like many a lifelong leftist crank, he’s great at being against things, and atrocious at actually building consensus.

    It’s well past time for the real Dem candidates to take the kid gloves off and put Bernie on blast.

  103. 103
    West of the Cascades says:

    I can be Team Broken Glass. As much as I loathe Bernie and say so occasionally and anonymously on the internet, I am trying to refrain from saying that in person to Bernie supporters, and instead trying to get pledges of mutual support for whoever prevails in the Democratic primary.

  104. 104
    eemom says:

    @FelonyGovt:

    I don’t know why this “would you vote for Bernie” question is so prevalent right now.

    Amongst other reasons, because we on this blog are a bunch of obsessed neurotics who never met a useless hypothetical question we didn’t spend 8,000 threads beating into the finest of dusts before finally prying our collective head out of our collective ass and realizing the fucking forest got mowed down and isn’t even there to see anymore.

  105. 105
    Brachiator says:

    @snoey:

    Bernie has gotten one of the greatest free rides in the history of American politics.

    There is a mountain of oppo research on him that HRC couldn’t use because she needed his supporters in the general.

    Yawn. The GOP probably has oppo research on every Democratic Party politician, and probably creates a new file whenever a Dem wins any political office in the nation, down to town dog catcher.

    What matters is how you fight back against this nonsense.

  106. 106
    VeniceRiley says:

    @Barbara: Exactly. Literally none of his opponents have said any such thing. Bernie was (falsely) setting up an “identity politics!” straw man, then knocking it down, to the cheers and approval of his white bro base. IN SOUTH CAROLINA!

    Also framing Democratic women running as “opponents” instead of something less awful … competitors, maybe? I found it offputting, sexist, racist, and a lie.

  107. 107
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @VeniceRiley: Holy hell, he’s getting worse.

    @FelonyGovt:

    I don’t know why this “would you vote for Bernie” question is so prevalent right now.

    Because Bernie’s supporters are looking at some primary polls in which he’s in the lead and decided to give the people who pleaded and yelled for them to vote for Hillary a taste of their own medicine. They’re taking the “please vote for the nominee no matter what” memes from earlier in the cycle and making resentful parody versions, because they think Bernie has the nomination sewn up; saw one that ended with “whatever made you think this was about you?”

  108. 108
    Betty Cracker says:

    @eemom: Harsh but fair! ;-)

  109. 109
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Cacti: I’m going to go ahead and say this information isn’t dispositive that they’re a danger. IF accurate (and I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these people wouldn’t vote for Bernie in the General) that means he’s pulling in voters that Hillary didn’t.

    He’s also going to LOSE a bunch of voters that Hillary had, so I hope the first number is bigger than the second, for all our sakes.

  110. 110
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @VeniceRiley: Did he actually say that? What a complete and utter dick (if true)

  111. 111
    Cacti says:

    @WhatsMyNym:

    Age is a legit concern with both Sanders and Biden, as both would be in their 80s at the end of a first term. Warren is right on the edge of uncomfortably old.

  112. 112
    Ruckus says:

    @Monala:

    Why doesn’t he have to earn our votes?”

    Probably because they think he earned them last time, even though he got his ass beaten. And if he earned them they can’t be taken away. It’s like money in the bank. Logic and reality are not his supporter’s strong suits. The reality is that he’s a shitty candidate. He was a shitty candidate last go round – he hasn’t improved with age – which he has a lot of. Would he be better than 4 yrs of DT? How could he be worse? Well there are ways but you have to want to see them. But when you are in a fight for your lives, sometimes you have to take what you can.
    OTOH my feeling is that people saying that they will support him, at this time is harmful. Because it’s possible that he’d loose to DT – for some better the shit you know that the shit you don’t. And because it will encourage him. Like Biden only on a far worse scale, if you encourage him, it empowers him, even if it doesn’t help him win. We have momentum right now, we have the real possibility of impeachment that would actually work in the nearish future, we have real choice in candidates with skills, intelligence and ideas, why are we so sure we have to bank on this looser now?

  113. 113
    James E Powell says:

    I don’t know Alex Pareene as well as everyone else seems to. He may have a history or issues that explain the negative rip I get when I bring up his name sometimes. But that aside, I completely agree with everything he says in this opinion piece and very much agree with the final paragraph:

    Once again, we can celebrate a modern example of bipartisanship: a deep conviction, on both sides, that the only legitimate force in American politics is white grievance.

    Also too. I think I hated Steny Hoyer before it was cool to hate Steny Hoyer.

  114. 114
    Captain C says:

    @Brachiator:

    A right wing group has invested in TYT (and accepting the cash seems dumb), but this is not the same thing as saying that this group has a controlling interest.

    “As an old junk pusher told me, ‘Watch whose money you pick up.’” — William S. Burroughs

  115. 115
    Cacti says:

    @Ruckus:

    It’s almost like he thinks it’s a coronation and he’s next in line. ;-)

  116. 116
    VeniceRiley says:

    @MisterForkbeard: Yes it is true. I saw it with my own eyes and heard it with these here ears. He was in a university auditorium of some kind on stage. Might’ve been the same time he took that first trip down

  117. 117
    Emma says:

    To those of you who say “we need to be better” and “we need to lead by example”: answer me this. Why?
    I have seen no signs that Bernie Bros would be shamed or inspired by any example, fact, or request. They have the emotional range of a six year old in a temper tantrum and the conviction of a True Believer. Nothing anyone says will have any effect on their adamantine intellectual carapaces. They would rather destroy the country than cooperate.
    We need to be courting the undecided/lazy and stepping up our efforts against vote suppression of any sort. We need to support voting legislation that plug the holes in our electoral system. Let the Bernistas do what they do and don’t cut them any procedural breaks.
    Please note I’m not talking about the primary/general voters that did the right thing. By their actions they have shown themselves to be true thinking voters.

  118. 118
    ruemara says:

    @Emma: It’s the same magical thinking that leads to wooing Trump voters seems like a good idea.

  119. 119
    rikyrah says:

    @MisterForkbeard:

    He’s also going to LOSE a bunch of voters that Hillary had, so I hope the first number is bigger than the second, for all our sakes.

    Hillary beat him by 4 million in 2016.

    I dare say that the second group is far bigger.

  120. 120
    C Stars says:

    I can’t possibly read all the comments. But yes, I agree. Bernie’s not my first choice, hell, he’s not my 5th, but if he’s THE choice against Trump, I’ll vote for him. And you know what? It won’t be the worst thing in the world. He’ll empower folks like Pelosi and people with the chops to actually get stuff done. Same goes for Biden. Right now there are a bunch of pretty amazing Dem candidates and I’d much rather focus on them than start freaking out and attacking our own side (which is what I see happening on social media in a big and disturbing way, likely aided by the GOP/russians). Eyes on the ball, people! Baby in the bathwater!!

  121. 121
    Uncle Cosmo says:

    @Matt McIrvin: I’d take BFD Joe with all his faults over BS in a New York nanosecond. One, he’s not a Rooski asset. Two, he actually knows something about how to govern – at least enough to appoint officials who know how, & stay out of their way. Three, he has a much better chance of beating the Cheetoh off Benito. And four, pace Erszebet Saltine, SCOTUS.

  122. 122
    snoey says:

    @Brachiator: Rape fantasy porn goes down real well, and Sandinista support is just the thing to appeal to those disaffected steel workers.

    None of our other candidates has this level of shit waiting for them.

  123. 123
    zhena gogolia says:

    @West of the Cascades:

    This is going to be my new strategy with anyone who expresses interest in Bernie. I’ll send them this Kurt Eichenwald article and ask them to read the second section.

    https://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

    I already did it today with the people I had dinner with last night, and I got a heartening reply from one of them who felt she’d had her eyes opened. Remember, this stuff doesn’t make it to NPR and CNN.

  124. 124
    rikyrah says:

    @Emma:

    Why?
    I have seen no signs that Bernie Bros would be shamed or inspired by any example, fact, or request. They have the emotional range of a six year old in a temper tantrum and the conviction of a True Believer. Nothing anyone says will have any effect on their adamantine intellectual carapaces. They would rather destroy the country than cooperate.

    say it for the bleacher seats.

  125. 125
    Citizen_X says:

    @Kay: @stan: I don’t know about them being “committed leftists.” A lot of the Bernistas may claim to be democratic socialists, but they’re actually the authoritarian type. They’re Bolsheviks: they believe in taking power by hook or by crook, by any means possible, and to hell with what the people actually want.

    The Neocons pulled the same shit. They, and Bannon, and many of the other Trumpists today, openly proclaim that they are using Bolshevik methods. It’s been a plague upon world politics for years, and needs to be stamped out. Let’s have actual democracy, first and foremost by protecting the vote from racist suppression attempts.

  126. 126
    Ruckus says:

    This has been bothering me for a while.
    Why are we talking about this now?
    Aren’t we skipping over a few dozen steps?
    Primaries start in just under a year and the election is 19 months away. We are in a seemingly panic about this way too soon. Right now we need to discuss the real candidates, not a shitty fall back position. Sure, it’s not wrong to have that backup in mind, but should we be adding to the concept of a fight that is so already lost that all we are discussing is that shitty backup?
    We are taking sides in a battle that can’t start for, in political terms, a very long time, with a lot of battles to be fought and won before that. It’s like trying to land in France or invading Japan in 1942. Or invading Iraq ever.

  127. 127
    NotMax says:

    Distinction needs to be made between broken glass crawling and jumping the shark.

    With so many other excellent choices, why are we giving Wilmer the time of day (and so much front page acreage)?

  128. 128
    Kay says:

    @Citizen_X:

    but they’re actually the authoritarian type.

    I think so too. It’s what always has put me off. I hate the self-consciousness too- the elaborate examination of their lives. I just don’t care if they go to Wal Mart. I don’t even want to know. There’s this prissiness, where I know I have violated one of the 10,000 social rules and I weirdly enjoy that so am like “i’m getting in my huge car now- not a care in the world!” I don’t even care about cars, per se, but they make me feel like rebelling :)

  129. 129
    Death Panel Truck says:

    The GOP would destroy Sanders in the general election. Every campaign ad would have as a backdrop the hammer and sickle flag of the Soviet Union and an unflattering head shot of Bernie at his shoutiest. They’d start with

    “Did you know Bernie Sanders honeymooned in the Soviet Union?”
    “Really? That must be where he got his ideas about communism!”
    “He’s a socialist!”
    “Communism, socialism…what’s the difference?”

    They’d spend months equating socialism with communism, and by election day they’d have him looking like the second coming of Khrushchev.

    Laugh now. But wait and see. If he’s the nominee, we’re doomed.

  130. 130
    rikyrah says:

    Kamala in there, doing the work

    chris evans (@notcapnamerica) Tweeted:
    The Queen has arrived and she’s got a dora milaje

    https://t.co/xzS5v6wTZN https://twitter.com/notcapnamerica/status/1119291637392392192?s=17

  131. 131
    eemom says:

    @NotMax:

    With so many other excellent choices, why are we giving Wilmer the time of day (and so much front page acreage)?

    What, you don’t like my theory? 😢

  132. 132
    Citizen Alan says:

    @Baud:

    Stop using the Supreme Court as blackmail.

    Every single lefty who said that unironically back in 2016 should be spat upon.

  133. 133
    Citizen Alan says:

    @Amir Khalid:

    My guess would be someone so far to the left wing as to be unconfirmable. Possibly even someone who’s never actually served as a federal judge, since in my lifetime, it’s been impossible to get anyone on the bench at any level who thinks the Constitution imposes any limits on Capitalism. Some lawyer who’s high up in the ACLU maybe?

  134. 134
    Tim in SF says:

    I think we are a long way from this conversation needing to happen. Talk about unity should happen after the debates, closer to the primary. These are the seasons to fall in love with your candidate(s) and throw some shade at the other ones.

    I was and am a Bernie Supporter (though Warren and Pete are above him in my list of preferences). *I* would rather people talk up their favorites than to talk down the others. I don’t need reasons to not support someone, I need reasons to support someone. I imagine many people are like that.

  135. 135
    Tim in SF says:

    @Citizen Alan: @Citizen Alan: Yes, please. Lots of spit.

  136. 136
    eemom says:

    @zhena gogolia:

    This is going to be my new strategy with anyone who expresses interest in Bernie. I’ll send them this Kurt Eichenwald article and ask them to read the second section.

    Eggzfuckingzactly. I’ve had that article on speed dial since the day it was published. I have linked to it many times. I have explained till I’m blue in the face that republicans are literally pissing their pants in anticipation of unleashing that tsunami of skeletons residing in St. Bernard’s closet.

    It boggles the mind how anybody with two brain cells to rub together doesn’t get that. Boggles. The. Mind.

  137. 137

    The debates start in June, I think. We’ll see whether that shakes anything out.

    In the meantime, I’m looking forward to hearings about Trump. I want him weakened for whoever our nominee is.

  138. 138
    Ruckus says:

    @Kay:
    This.
    I walk a lot. Saves gas, good exercise for me, one less car on the road. But there are people who have, if not tried to run me down, have not given two shits that they almost have, or they look at me while completely blocking the crosswalk. The worst of them have yelled at me that i must be poor because I’m walking. In fact I own a nicer car than any of the assholes who have yelled at me. There must be something wrong with me that I’m walking. Fucking wankers.

  139. 139
    Percysowner says:

    if Bernie is the only option, I’ll vote for him. I won’t give him money, I’ll just go Act Blue for every Democrat running in every race. I’ll register voters. I’ll probably even phone bank, although I’ll do it for Senate and House candidates and grudgingly for Bernie if i HAVE to. I resent the HELL out of him for his entitled, self-centered, white males are the only ones who should run beliefs, but Trump is too damned dangerous and so is any other Republican. Sorry Bill Weld, you MIGHT be okay, but I can’t risk it.

  140. 140
    AxelFoley says:

    I wouldn’t even piss on Bernie if he was on fire, much less vote for him.

  141. 141
    Citizen Alan says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    As for SCOTUS, that’s lost now for at least one generation. So quit using it as a sales point. It’s off the table.

    Disagree. As bad as things are in the judiciary, there’s still a big difference, IMO, between John Roberts being the swing vote and Clarence Thomas being the swing vote. Thomas basically doesn’t believe Congress can pass any laws based on its Commerce power at all beyond building roads and airports, which means no environmental regs, no minimum wage or worker protection, no anti-discrimination laws beyond barebones civil rights (and only for men because the 14th amendment didn’t mention women). As impossible as it seems in this darkest timeline, things could always get worse.

  142. 142
    Brachiator says:

    @Death Panel Truck:

    “Did you know Bernie Sanders honeymooned in the Soviet Union?”

    Oh,wait. Isn’t that where Trump made his pee tapes?

    Trump is a lot more vulnerable than people seem to understand. This gives a potential advantage to every Democratic Party candidate who is good on his or her feet and can dish out the barbs faster than Trump can use Twitter.

    And Sanders ain’t my guy, but he is a cantankerous old cuss who can handle verbal jabs fairly well.

  143. 143
    NotMax says:

    Question for the jackal hive mind before I resort to calling the $$$ plumber. Landlady’s gas water heater unit’s pilot light went out and I cannot seem to get a spark from the igniter no matter what I try. Today being a state holiday the gas company is closed and their emergency number switches me over to a busy signal. Any handy tips?

    @Ruckus
    Jealous. Gammy leg precludes the same. A circuit of Costco pretty much does me in for the rest of the day.

  144. 144
    gwangung says:

    @Tim in SF: I think that’s one more thing we all agree on.

    Sanders is at the lower end of my preference list….but with the number of people in the race now, SOMEONE has to be there. Still time for candidates to win my favor.

  145. 145
    rikyrah says:

    Trump can’t let go of his preoccupation with Obama
    04/19/19 02:48 PM
    By Steve Benen

    Donald Trump didn’t have a whole lot to say about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report yesterday afternoon, though the president did get around to sharing a predictable thought via Twitter: he blamed his predecessor.

    “Anything the Russians did concerning the 2016 Election was done while Obama was President. He was told about it and did nothing! Most importantly, the vote was not affected.”

    Nearly everything in Trump’s tweet was wrong. The vote was affected. Barack Obama did a lot more than “nothing,” and he would’ve done more were it not for Mitch McConnell’s opposition. The “anything the Russians did…” suggests Trump may still have some doubts as to the nature of the Russians’ attack, which is an issue that does not lend itself to skepticism.

    But routine nonsense is less interesting to me than Trump’s ongoing preoccupation with the president who preceded him. I thought it was at least possible that the Republican, in time, would stop obsessing over the recent past, but by some measures, Trump fixates on Obama nearly as much as Hillary Clinton.

  146. 146
    janesays says:

    @Baud: Sarcasm?

    Because Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are proof positive why using SCOTUS as blackmail is an absolutely valid tactic.

  147. 147
    Brachiator says:

    @snoey:

    Rape fantasy porn goes down real well, and Sandinista support is just the thing to appeal to those disaffected steel workers.

    Trump: probable actual rapist.

    Sandinistas: really? Who gives a shit? Trump: fucks over actual Central American refugees.

    None of our other candidates has this level of shit waiting for them.

    Trump will make up shit and Fox News and the right wing media machine will happily go along.

    People need to stop with this tired shit. The GOP no longer even pretends to have any scruples. They will be as unfair and nasty as it takes to keep the White House. But the Dems have an advantage in that the GOP has actually governed poorly. They need to bank that strength and go after these asswipes with everything they’ve got.

  148. 148
    janesays says:

    @schrodingers_cat: And he would still be a vast improvement over the current occupant.

  149. 149
    Sab says:

    @Ruckus: I got honked at this morning by the Ramtough pickup behind me because I didn’t run down the guy with the cane and obviously horrible back problems in the crosswalk when I wanted to turn right. Gave the guy behind me the finger. Someday I will get shot doing that.

    Good luck to the defendant trying to defend shooting a church-going grandmother over a traffic incident. I will be dead (not in eldercare) and he will be in the state pen. Works for me.

  150. 150
    Spider-Dan says:

    @Emma: Two reasons. But both are tied to the same concept: it’s not for them.

    1) Establishing the importance of voting for the primary winner is critical for the young voters just coming into politics now.
    2) “Vote for the primary winner, but only if it’s someone I like” is transparently cynical and fundamentally unsustainable. If the rest of the Democratic primary electorate chose someone, swallow your pride and get behind them.

    “I’m not going to vote for Bernie if he wins” is not just a shot at Berners. It’s also validating PUMAs, and telling anyone who strongly backs a particular candidate that backing the primary winner is optional depending on who wins.

  151. 151
    janesays says:

    @The Moar You Know: No, SCOTUS is not now lost for a generation. It’s seriously damaged for a generation. The ACA will probably survive as it works its way through the courts in the current lawsuit, ONLY because Roberts will probably vote with the liberals, as he did the last time the ACA was brought before him. Take away one of the liberals, and the ACA is as good as dead, even if Roberts did the right thing again. Swing-voter Kennedy was terrible, and swing-voter Roberts is even worse, but they’ve both been potentially gettable votes in some SCOTUS cases. Replace Ginsburg with Barrett, and it doesn’t matter what Roberts does anymore. Every single vote after that goes 5-4 or 6-3 against us. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. That’s not the case…yet.

    If the choice is between losing most SCOTUS cases but occasionally eking out a crucial win, or guaranteeably losing every single case of consequence for the next 10+ years, I choose the former every time.

  152. 152
    Brachiator says:

    @zhena gogolia:

    This is going to be my new strategy with anyone who expresses interest in Bernie. I’ll send them this Kurt Eichenwald article and ask them to read the second section.

    Good article. I particularly liked this section:

    Trump won slightly fewer votes than Romney did in 2012—60.5 million compared with 60.9 million. On the other hand, almost 5 million Obama voters either stayed home or cast their votes for someone else. More than twice as many millennials—a group heavily invested in the “Sanders was cheated out of the nomination” fantasy—voted third-party.

    We need to bring the spirit of the mid-terms to the 2020 election. Can we get out the vote and dump Trump? Yes, we can.

  153. 153
    eemom says:

    @The Moar You Know:

    That is so horribly, sickeningly wrong I can’t even quote it. Wake the fuck up.

  154. 154
    janesays says:

    The intractable Wilmerites who refused to budge because they didn’t like the nominee and ultimately cost us the election were monumental pieces of shit. If you behave exactly like them by being intractable and refusing to vote for a nominee you can’t stand and it ends up with us getting a second term of Trump as a result, you’re just as much a piece of shit.

  155. 155
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Monala: They see it as payback: they’re ordering us to vote for Bernie *because* we ordered them to vote for Hillary. “Taste of your own medicine,” poetic-justice-as-fairness, etc. Because they think they’re winning.

  156. 156
    gwangung says:

    @Matt McIrvin: If he earns it and wins the nomination, fine. He’s proven he deserves it.

    But in my book, he has a lot of poor performances (ranging from immigration stances to his leaving Kiah Morris hanging in the wind) to make up for.

  157. 157
    Chyron HR says:

    Messiah Bernie arguably killed billions of people out of spite over not getting the Democratic nomination in 2016. I dismiss out of hand any argument that he would inherently be a more just and wise ruler than Trump just because he’s a “leftist”.

  158. 158
    Spider-Dan says:

    @Matt McIrvin: But there’s an easy response to that: “Like any responsible, sane adult, I’ll vote for whoever wins the Democratic primary.”

    If you choose to take their trolling as some sort of payback, that’s on you. You can shut that down in an instant by committing to vote for the nominee and asking them if they will do the same.

    This kind of trolling is only a problem for people who didn’t actually believe that you should vote for the nominee even if you don’t like them, but said so in 2016 because it was politically expedient. And to be honest, those people deserve to be trolled.

    When it comes to the White House, vote blue, NO MATTER WHO. Seriously.

  159. 159
    Emma says:

    @Spider-Dan: See, you’re assuming that people need validation of their political moves. I’ve never found it to be true. People vote their guts, their values, and their prejudices. Mostly they find reasons to support their original prejudices and values.

  160. 160
    Spider-Dan says:

    My political prejudices and values were primarily shaped by the 2000 election, and reinforced by the 2016 election. I’m sure you can guess how.

  161. 161
    janesays says:

    @MisterForkbeard: What he said is pretty bad, but here’s the full verbatim quote for context…

    “It’s not good enough for somebody to say ‘hey I’m a Latina vote for me’ that is not good enough. I have to know whether that Latina is going to stand up with the working class of this country and is going to take on big money interests. It is not good enough for somebody to say, ‘I’m a woman, vote for me.’ No That is not good enough. What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industries.”

  162. 162
    Brachiator says:

    @Chyron HR:

    Messiah Bernie arguably killed billions of people out of spite over not getting the Democratic nomination in 2016.

    Bullshit.

    I dismiss out of hand any argument that he would inherently be a more just and wise ruler than Trump just because he’s a “leftist”.

    I dismiss out of hand any argument that implies in any way, shape or form, without evidence, that Bernie (or any Democrat) would be as cruel, racist, or incompetent as Trump.

  163. 163
    ItinerantPedant says:

    @Miss Bianca: I also plan to do something similar BUT if he loses, every SINGLE time someone left of me bitches about Trump, I’ll reply “Bernie woulda Wo-…oh, wait.”

    And in the unlikely event he wins I plan to point out how little he’s getting done because 1) he can’t even get to 50 Senate votes, and 2) because he refuses to work and play well with others.

    I’ll vote for him just so I can do those things continually.

  164. 164
    janesays says:

    @Chyron HR: Billions?

    A fan of absurd hyperbole much?

    You do realize that billions (meaning at least 2 billion) is no less than 25% of the entire human race, right? More specifically, the ENTIRE population of the United States – times SIX.

    You pretty much said you think Bernie Sanders is at least 30 times more evil than Adolf Hitler. Chew on that for a minute.

  165. 165
    Brachiator says:

    @janesays:

    “It’s not good enough for somebody to say ‘hey I’m a Latina vote for me’ that is not good enough. I have to know whether that Latina is going to stand up with the working class of this country and is going to take on big money interests. It is not good enough for somebody to say, ‘I’m a woman, vote for me.’ No That is not good enough. What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industries.”

    Democrats should have fun shooting this shit down.

    Saint Bernie loves to suggest that he is the only person in the world who stands up to Wall St or who stands up with the working class. That shit was stale in 2016. It is far past its sell-by date now.

  166. 166
    Barbara says:

    @janesays: How about someone who stands up to the NRA?

  167. 167
    chopper says:

    @Chyron HR:

    that’s an interesting take.

  168. 168
    artem1s says:

    when you are pushing ‘team broken glass’ as hard for a woman of color, or say Hillary rejoining the race, get back to me. If this is the baseline argument you are using to gain support before the race has even started, doesn’t that tell you something about who that candidate is? where are the weekly, daily, posts about crawling over broken glass to get Kamala elected? to get Pelosi back in the speaker’s chair?

    there is something inherently dishonest about this argument and how it is being used to clear the field for a guy who doesn’t give a rats ass about this country or the Democratic Party. It’s the only way the GOP can drag us down with them and play on their level.

    Please stop posting this same post over and over again. There are plenty of quality issues to be discussed instead of this daily Kool-aid test.

  169. 169
    LivinginExile says:

    @NotMax: Sometimes it can simply be a grounding problem. The problem is finding out where the corrosion problem is.

  170. 170
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @janesays:

    [quoting Sanders] “It is not good enough for somebody to say, ‘I’m a woman, vote for me.’ No That is not good enough. What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industries.”

    So, Liz Warren, gotcha.

  171. 171
    Chyron HR says:

    @janesays:

    Yes, I sincerely believe that:
    A) 2016 was a major inflection point for human civilization, and that we went–perhaps irreversibly–down the “Bad End” route. In the next century billions of people are almost certainly going to die in disasters and wars caused by climate change which we have not only stopped trying to prevent but are now actively spurring on under Republican rule.
    B) Bernie wanted Trump to win, either to punish the Democratic party for failing to throw out the primary results and declare him the nominee by fiat (not to be confused with a “coronation”), or out of a cold-blooded political calculation that he couldn’t afford to wait eight years for another Democratic primary.

  172. 172
    Betty Cracker says:

    @artem1s: What in the wide world of fuck? You not only think this is a pro-Bernie post, you believe there are daily posts here at Balloon Juice imploring you to vote for Bernie? Okay. Hope the weather is fine in your parallel universe.

  173. 173
    UncleEbeneezer says:

    One of the best formulations I’ve heard for why Team Broken Glass is at the end of the day, the best moral approach to voting was eloquently stated by Rod on TheBlackGuyWhoTips podcast about a week ago (it starts around the 17 minute mark.) Rod has dealt tons of bullshit from Bernie-Bros after he started the #BernieSoBlack joke on Twitter and has voiced numerous rants about Bernie’s shitty perspectives on race over the past 3 years. But he’s 100% onboard to vote with him, even enthusiastic to do so (which surprised the hell out of me.).

    TLDL: no matter who you are or what you’ve done, somebody out there (a LOT of somebodies actually) have even less privilege than you (people with disabilities, people stripped of their right to vote etc.) And those people are relying on your vote to help minimize the shit that will be much worse for them under 4 more years of Trump than under even the worst/least-favorite Dem candidate.

  174. 174
    Chris Johnson says:

    @janesays:

    “What we need is a woman who has the guts to stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industries”

    So drop out and endorse Warren, for fuck’s sake. I’m waiting.

  175. 175
    Melusine says:

    @Spider-Dan: You might want to rethink that. The other they ran part of the clip of Pelosi’s “glass of water” comments re solidly blue districts, and immediately spun it as smearing AOC. And when the guest host pointed out that she clearly was speaking about the importance of the gains made in the general election, and that Dems really need to not fall for this fake divisiveness shit, the chryon under him said something like “Pelosi continues to disparage AOC” and the other two hosts went right back to shredding her for not giving AOC credit for winning against an incumbent, and when he again pointed out that Pelosi wasn’t talking about that election and that she praised AOC, they just disregarded it and dissed her for being shady.

    It was sooooo Faux News. They took her words out of context, spun the offense they wanted out of them, and refused to acknowledge the reality of what she’d actually said.

    I used to really enjoy watching Anna Kasparian but she’s getting as bad as Cenk when it comes to spinning the truth about Dems she doesn’t like.

  176. 176
    Melusine says:

    @eemom: 😂

  177. 177
    J R in WV says:

    @Cacti:

    Does Thomas have health problems? He’s old, but not one foot in the grave old (turns 71 this year).

    I don’t think Uncle Clarence likes being a Supreme at all. He doesn’t participate in oral arguments, his opinions are seldom signed on to by other justices, he seems underwhelmed by everything about it, except for the powers to stomp on people of color, immigrants, etc.

    Maybe he wants to take Virginia and the big RV and just drive into the Sunset? Not for the summer, but for the rest of their lives together…

    Having the evening’s cocktail, in my case a Gin and Tonic with lots of fresh lime squeezed into the gin before adding the tonic. Ummm good. Will share a bottle of fine French sparkling Champagne with wife, who’s birthday is today. She is enjoying a Zataca Rum and tonic, also with a big squeeze of fresh lime juice.

    Lobster bisque, big salad, something else to be determined after the cocktail hour. Our fish shop provides lobster bisque periodically. Not every day, or even every week. But it’s Good Friday, and they have a ton of Catholic customers for Friday seafood. We were lucky enough to show up before it was all gone… umm good! I do add some cognac and hot sauce to our batch in the double boiler hearing period.

    Will NOT assist Sanders in election work of any sort. Will support multiple Congressional candidates nation wide. Will probably vote for Sanders in the general as I prepare requests for asylum in a nation to be determined. Portugal probably. I think I could learn Portuguese , though probably not Finnish nor Swedish.

  178. 178
    J R in WV says:

    @Spider-Dan:

    .
    “Vote for the primary winner, but only if it’s someone I like” is transparently cynical and fundamentally unsustainable. If the rest of the Democratic primary electorate chose someone, swallow your pride and get behind them.

    “I’m not going to vote for Bernie if he wins” is not just a shot at Berners.
    .

    How about “Vote for the [Democratic] primary winner if they are NOT a Russian Stooge!” for a slogan. ‘Cause I’m not voting for the Russian candidate just because they’re on the Democratic ballot, even though they are NOT a member of the Democratic Party!

    If the primary system provides two Russian Stooges, one from each party, I will not be voting for either of them. Might as well just invite Putin to come over to take the oath of office, instead of either the R or D Russian Stooge.

  179. 179
    Spider-Dan says:

    @J R in WV:

    ‘Cause I’m not voting for the Russian candidate just because they’re on the Democratic ballot, even though they are NOT a member of the Democratic Party!

    If the Democratic primary electorate has chosen them as the candidate, your personal qualms with them need to take a backseat and you need to vote to support the coalition.

    Again, this isn’t rocket science. It’s the same thing we said to PUMAs in 2008 and Bernie-or-Busters in 2016. It’s not something that’s only true when a candidate that you like wins.

  180. 180
    Chris says:

    @Matt McIrvin:

    This is the main reason I suspect we may have already lost the 2020 election: the only possibilities are nominate Bernie Sanders or don’t nominate Bernie Sanders, and both seem like disasters in the making.

    By far the best thing he could’ve done is not run. Once he’s run, you’ve got three possibilities;

    1) He runs and loses the primary. At which point the “corrupt neoliberal DNC establishment stole the election! AGAIN!” narrative comes back with even more rage than ever, leaving whoever does win the nomination hurting on the unity front just like Hillary was, only more so.

    2) He runs and wins the primary. At which point he suddenly finds himself having to run a real campaign for the first time in decades, where the MSM and GOP open up on him with both barrels, all the opposition research that wasn’t used on him in the primaries comes out, and, since he has no idea how to respond to that except by whining that things aren’t fair, he goes down in flames.

    3) He runs and wins the primary and, by some freak accident, the general. At which point he suddenly has to govern, which means being able to bring different groups together, negotiate, compromise, horse-trade – you know, all the things he’s never done before and doesn’t know how to do because his brand is based entirely on “I want, you give, and then I am happy.” At best, we end up with a Jimmy Carter 2.0 presidency.

    The only happy ending I can foresee is if he never gets enough traction in the primary to be more than an also-ran, meaning the “corrupt DNC” narrative basically loses. There’s some hope for that, especially if Tulsi Gabbard siphons away enough of his crazy supporters, and Liz Warren siphons off enough of his sane ones. But if he gets anything like the traction he got last time… there are no happy endings.

  181. 181
    Chris says:

    @Brachiator:

    I don’t like Sanders or much trust him. But I realize that I cannot totally hold him responsible for the stupidity and zeal of some of this supporters.

    Oh hell yes you can.

    Here’s the thing: any candidate could do what Sanders has done. Primaries are always acrimonious, there are always people who are really really attached to their particular pony, there are always hard feelings at the end of them – remember Clinton/Obama – and I don’t think there’s ever been a time when a losing candidate couldn’t have threatened to take his/her ball and go home, taking just enough core supporters with him/her to cost the winner the general election. Hillary could’ve done it. Obama, had he lost, could’ve done it. The difference is that they didn’t. Hillary lost in 2008, and then… got over it, locked it up, and soldiered on for the party’s nominee, and when the general election kicked into high gear by the end of the summer all the Dems were on the same page. A fringe of Hillary malcontents could’ve happened if she’d wanted it to, but without her to give them any leadership or encouragement, that was dead in the water.

    Sanders could’ve done the same.

  182. 182
    Chris says:

    @VeniceRiley:

    @FlipYrWhig: Yes. Sanders said he basically wants nicer detention camps on the border. Plusher … faster … better.

    One fairly important point I picked up from a poster at LGM is that when crafting policies on police/security issues, you should always ask yourself “what is the most half-assed, lazy, dysfunctional, abusive outcome that this decision could possibly lead to?” Because that’s what you’re going to be getting. Contractors aren’t going to spend one cent more on the needs of the inmates than they absolutely have to. Guards aren’t going to spare any more thoughts to the safety of the inmates than they absolutely have to. In other words, any camps you’re going to set up on the border will not be plusher and more humane.

    he is definitely to the right of the party on immigration. His white base and the trump voters he craves won’t object.

    Sanders reminds me of nothing so much as the “moderate” Yankees of the 1870s who were tired of all this “Reconstruction” shit and insisted that we needed to throw these obnoxious whiny blacks under the bus so that white Northerners and white Southerners could hug it out and get over our differences. (That worked out well). His faction taking over the party would be a fucking disaster for anyone who cares about the U.S. as anything other than a white nationalist regime.

  183. 183
    janesays says:

    @Chyron HR: You are insane. That is all.

  184. 184
    Chris says:

    @VeniceRiley:

    Sanders in South Carolina a few weeks ago, “My opponents say ‘Vote for me! I’m a woman!’ NO! ‘Vote for me. I’m a Latina!’ NO!”

    I never actually hated the guy during the 2016 election, though I was getting mighty tired of him by the end of the primary. But literally the day after Trump won, he popped right back up on TV to say “this is why we can’t just tell people ‘vote for me I’m a woman?'” and I’ve wanted to beat his smug bigoted ass ever since. The fact that he thought the election of a straight-up fascist to the presidency of the United States was the perfect time for him to whine about (and lie his ass off about) leftie idpol proved, if it were necessary, that he’s the very last person anyone left-of-center should want leading the opposition.

  185. 185
    AxelFoley says:

    @artem1s:

    when you are pushing ‘team broken glass’ as hard for a woman of color, or say Hillary rejoining the race, get back to me. If this is the baseline argument you are using to gain support before the race has even started, doesn’t that tell you something about who that candidate is? where are the weekly, daily, posts about crawling over broken glass to get Kamala elected? to get Pelosi back in the speaker’s chair?

    there is something inherently dishonest about this argument and how it is being used to clear the field for a guy who doesn’t give a rats ass about this country or the Democratic Party. It’s the only way the GOP can drag us down with them and play on their level.

    Please stop posting this same post over and over again. There are plenty of quality issues to be discussed instead of this daily Kool-aid test.

    This. All of this.

  186. 186
    Qui-Gon Jinn says:

    ‘Purity Tests’: How Corporate Media Describe Progressives Standing Up for Principles

    In the political world, the term “purity test” has a very specific meaning, largely used by elites to chastise and attack the left, or to gaslight them into supporting more centrist or right-wing policies. Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi (4/24/17), for example, bemoaned the ideological “activists” infiltrating the Democratic Party, undermining “more pragmatic party leaders everywhere” with their “purity tests.” She highlighted the supposed “danger” in “pushing the party too far to the left and imposing rigid orthodoxy,” warning that they are creating a “one-size party suitable only for zealots.”

Comments are closed.