Nope. I’ll take the living legend over this particular flavor of the week. Clyburn has more gravitas and support than the former mayor of Providence.
I sense that your animosity towards Clyburn is, in no small part, based on how successful he was in thwarting the Presidential ambitions of the failed candidate from Vermont in 2016 and 2020.
That seems pretty effective to me.
1964, not 1954.
What about his pick of Biden? He didn’t get run over and even though he was down my list of favorites in the primaries I think he’s turned out to be an exceptionally competent President.
Come on. It was Biden or Bernie, those were his choices. No one expected him to pick Bernie.
Sanders was never going to get the AA vote in enough numbers, but I take your point.
No, that’s Boomer II, whatever that means.
I think some of you are in over your heads already. Good luck.
Bernie is definitely a boomer, btw.
You partly right. I actually forgot about the cheap shot (on civil rights) Clyburn took at Bernie in 2016. But no, for me its simply about making room for the younger future party leaders. There’s plenty of ambitious smart younger members that can do Clyburn’s job. The man’s 82! Think about it.
And the junior Senator from Vermont is 81 and yet you wanted him to be President despite younger and more qualified candidates running against him in 2016 and 2020.
Clyburn’s comments about Sanders were spot on. Bernie got arrested in the early 60’s and then moved to the whitest state in the country. He was a stranger to African American communities until he wanted their vote in 2016. Black voters rightfully treated him with suspicion.
When you call for Sanders to retire, then we can take comments about Clyburn’s age seriously.
Oh God, now I remember you (sigh). Where were you, “away”? Sorry, can’t waste my time.
Whatever. But you must admit he had a major impact on who was nominated. And I am very glad he did.
Yep. When logical argument fails, then leave.
That he would pick Biden was obvious. But what mattered was how he picked Biden. His pick essentially delivered South Carolina (and with it the nomination) to Biden.
Whatever. But you must admit he had a major impact on who was nominated. And I am very glad he did.
Yes it did (in hindsight) and Biden has been extremely productive these past two years. That does not mean Bernie would have been a ‘wrong’’ choice.
Technically Clark is in the boomer II category (mid 1963). But cusps don’t fit in either category anyway. I’m a late Gen X with GenY siblings. I had no internet in high-school they were online all off theirs.
I was mostly being snide anyway. These categories are too broad brush anyway
The leadership was too old. Agreed.
That said, I like the idea of Clyburn sticking around another term. It’s a measure of continuity.
The problem, which ought to be obvious, is that you shouldn’t throw out an iconic leader like Jim Clyburn because he doesn’t fit into a particular race, gender, religious, or sexual orientation category.
I was a Bernie or Warren supporter, depending on who was still obviously in the race, but spouse was for Biden early on because of his perceived delectability, and was correct.
I disagree.
Yes Clyburn had an impact on SC. But Covid panic put Joe as the obvious leader. This happened as SC was voting and accelerated from there.
I voted Bernie in NH in 2020. By March I probably would have been with Joe.
That much changed in that time frame
but spouse was for Biden early on because of his perceived delectability,
So your spouse saw him … ‘that way’? Whatever works.
Yes.
Wasn’t Bernie arrested for demonstrating against the war? Or was it civil rights? In any case without the qualifying detail you make him sound like a common criminal.