Whatever it is.
The top of his head?
I love it when Biden-stans get offended on behalf of their candidate. It really broadens my sense of the human experience to encounter someone who cares so deeply about warm vanilla ice cream.
Also, Joe Biden is 0-2 in Iowa, so losing that caucus is something he objectively has plenty of experience with.
Are they in disarray?
Yeah, Iām kind of disappointed in @irasdad there. Thatās a pretty intentionally disingenuous reading of that statement.
Your insult is also a lie.
So what are you going to do when heās the nominee?
Our voter base is totally committed to Biden so heās going to be the nominee. What will you do?
I do not believe that Bernie Sanders will be the Democratic Nominee for President.
Nor do you.
Having said that, both of us are aware that is not the real issue. The real issue is the Aftermath.
Iām a big fan of Kate Riga, but I see this as false equivalence. I read the Post piece pushing the same storylineāusing the word āaggressiveā multiple timesāand I found it egregious.
āDems in disarray/division/squabblingā is a tired media trope. And I know that Ms. Riga gets it. The Tuesday debate was substantive, positive, and civil.
What I see happening is that the Sanders people are ticked by what they perceive (probably correctly) as a skilled knifing from the Warren camp, and the obvious media bias against them as it played out. They are lashing out. It is happening at all levels but the sense of grievance is coming from the top.
Bernie has always been a division candidate. It has little to do with anyone else in the race.
Pretty accurate.
This feels like 2016 all over again. Same shit, different pile.
Hey, at least Sanders did not accuse Warren of speaking with a forked tongue.
Thats true, they can buy up the airwaves
And unfortunately for the country, many Bernie supporters are more than willing to take their ball and go home if they donāt get their way.
This is hard for all of us because none of the candidates is perfect. But, perfection is the enemy of progress.
No matter who, vote blue.
Truer words were never spoken.
Your offense is self-inflicted.
Pointing out factual differences in policy, and highlighting peopleās actual records while they were in power, are not āpersonal attacks.ā
How has that strategy been working out for us lately? Running uninspiring candidates depresses turnout and loses us elections.
Anyone who cares enough about politics to read TPM, let alone comment, is already in the bag for the Dems no matter what. We need to focus on the people who wonāt turn out for another centrist, the 4.4M registered Dems who stayed home in 2016.
But lying about Bidenās stance on Social Security is most assuredly a personal attack.
And that is what Bernieās campaign has done.
Vote for him, of course, and probably send him some walking-around campaign money. If we did ranked-choice voting in the primary, Joe would already be slotted in as my no. 2 pick.
Name me a policy that Joe voted for or supported as VP that actually became law that cut social security? Answer: he didnāt. So Bernie passing that off as something Biden supported is misleading and is the kind of cheap politics that he got away with last time but isnāt getting away with now (psst. itās easier to smear a female politician or a POC pol than it is to smear a white male pol. the white male media are all to eager to promote a smear against someone who doesnāt look like them b/c of their visceral fear of losing privilege).
I can name the number of times Bernie voted with the NRA, voted to deregulate credit default swaps, voted against comprehensive immigration reform and so on and so forth. He has a glass houses problem and itās worse for him than it is for Biden.