-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
Helpful list of posters to not take seriously. He literally wins the Dem primary every time he runs and is treated as a Democrat at all times. Literally the only reason to ever comment or complain about this is because you are irrationally hateful.
Not fond of this "Bernie isn't a democrat" debate tbh. It doesn't really matter that much. He votes with the party 95% of the time. Beyond that, the {I} branding for him is more to appear as anti-establishment from a political perspective than anything, but he is, in effect a rank-and-file dem. The label is a part of his brand that he sells to people.
It makes it harder to work with other dems, not to mention it smacks of the type of attention seeking that I hate in politics even if it's useful, but his relationship with the dems is better than Cruz's relationship with Republicans in either case.
It makes it harder to work with other dems, not to mention it smacks of the type of attention seeking that I hate in politics even if it's useful, but his relationship with the dems is better than Cruz's relationship with Republicans in either case.
Yeah, I honestly couldn't care less about the Democrat label especially when a lot of Democrats act more like centrists anywhere outside of the United States and I'm sure Bernie wants to distance himself from that. Bernie is as true of a leftist as we've had in the United States.
So we're ignoring the irritation this causes with the party itself? Why wouldn't people not be upset about that? It is that inconceivable that people in the party have different values than Bernie and they have genuine reasons to be angry for his behaviour?
How he performs in the primaries is besides the point.
Didn't we have this conversation weeks ago and you were arguing with me that he shouldn't be loyal to the Dems and that's ok?
Did you read my links?
This is a very cynical analysis of Bernie, but if you're right how is he any different from any opportunist politician? Isn't part of Bernie's brand that he's meant to be better than everybody else.
I hate this type of talk as much. Literally Bernie's voting record is only a couple percentage points outside the dem norm, and this includes bills he himself has proposed. Completely miss me with this "Bernie is the one true savior" shit.
That's my point. He pretty much is the definition of the opportunist politician and his followers are a great example of how people get when they fall for it. But beneath all that he's a very loud only slightly outside the norm dem.
OP
OP
I was arguing with you that your understanding of Bernie, the Democratic Party, and everything above was seriously in error.
As I said before, you might personally be aggrieved that Bernie doesn't call himself a Democrat, but, not to put too fine a point on it, I don't care, and I view having to read the same dumb post about people's dumb feelings six thousand times as a serious imposition. Take it to the Emotional Outbursts OT, this one is for primary discussion.
No politicians are "loyal" so obviously it's fine that Bernie isn't loyal. That doesn't make him different from any other Democrat.
The policies distinguish him. That's like the whole point.
Bernie is still human and there is no perfect presidential candidate, he does have a couple things that bother me, so I think you're reading something into my post that isn't there. Bernie is the best available option of the presidential candidates, that's not a "one true savior" strawman that you are arguing and people are trying to gatekeep based on whether he identifies as a Democrat or not. Elizabeth Warren is really good as well but I am a bit worried about whether she can avoid being baited by Trump, and she's also not quite as leftist as Bernie.
Bernie has done a lot to shift the overton window, and he's been ahead of the curve on some of these issues that a lot of people agree on like free college, medicare for all, raising minimum wage, early supporter of gay rights, getting money out of politics, there are some others.
How is he comprised of nothing but ego?
Where are the receipts?
Substantiate.
My point is that you're reading "true leftist" out of someone who would vote for all the same bills if they were on the floor as a "Centrist" dem and the "Centrist" dems would likely vote for the same bills he proposed as well. The "true leftist" argument is a stale one to me and just smacks of falling for the hype.
As I posted earlier I don't really care for the whole holding the (I) as him not being a democrat when all evidence to the contrary.
Anyway, what's your measure that Warren is "less left" than Bernie anyway? She has a lower Trump Score than Bernie. If anything she's to the left of him in aggregate.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-trump-score/
It's because he hasn't faded into obscurity like some had hoped.
I didn't want Bernie to run for awhile but I since have changed my mind.
Even if he doesn't win, I'd rather see progressive voices driving the party towards solid policy positions.
Warren was a republican, and is the peak neoliberal "LET ME RUN THE MACHINE, THEY ARE DOING IT WRONG" type of politician, with a history of boneheaded votes, unenthusiastic rhetoric, and oafish understanding of public relations (Warren 1/2020!).
Beto is a child. Kamala is an ice-blooded cop. Biden is a #MeToo pervert and "fuck the millennials".
There is only Bernie, still polling as the most popular politician in AMERICA, and with an uncompromising history of economic justice.
But if all you want is to feel "normal" and don't give a shit about the working class (the majority of which are POC, in case you are a moron), then just stan for the same "third-way" republican-as-a-donkey who would feel bad for barring trans people their dignity, but is completely fine with telling them they need to go back to school or die.
Beto is a child. Kamala is an ice-blooded cop. Biden is a #MeToo pervert and "fuck the millennials".
There is only Bernie, still polling as the most popular politician in AMERICA, and with an uncompromising history of economic justice.
But if all you want is to feel "normal" and don't give a shit about the working class (the majority of which are POC, in case you are a moron), then just stan for the same "third-way" republican-as-a-donkey who would feel bad for barring trans people their dignity, but is completely fine with telling them they need to go back to school or die.
I'm not misunderstanding anything, it's clear as day what Bernie's doing and how the party itself operates. I've given you links which back up my thesis with credible sources which you're ignoring - even now. Which is disappointing but not unexpected.
People react emotionally to candidates is primary discussion, including when the party alters itself structure strictly for this candidate so he has to run as a Democrat when he wins. I don't take that as proof the party is perfectly happy Bernie is a loyal soldier, and I certainly don't see a large pattern of Democrats doing that in elections nations wide to view what they did in Vermont as an exception. Nor am I the only poster in the thread worried about other candidates, and I'm not talking about Tulsi. A few weeks back there were a few heated threads over non-Beto candidates which the leftists were adamant in their resistance to, so your attempt
https://www.resetera.com/threads/nbc-news-inside-bernie-worlds-war-on-beto-orourke.89023/
https://www.resetera.com/threads/th...obama-and-thats-the-last-thing-we-need.89391/
https://www.resetera.com/threads/th...obama-and-thats-the-last-thing-we-need.89391/
https://www.resetera.com/threads/nyt-kamala-harris-joins-democratic-presidential-field.94785/
Or is that acceptable?
Back to that old canard, to justify abandoning the party when things don't go as well as you'd like. Ignoring loyalty in the party won't stop being it being a weakness for Bernie, history tells us doing that doesn't guarantee his nomination or help his relationships within the party itself. Which are very important if you want to be POTUS one day.
What's amusing is that it's not me or the politicians I support who will get the negative consequences like this, I was trying to make you feel more welcome to the party as one of us but if you choose not to be theres' not much I can do about that.
This was a greater distinction in '16, but not now. Now nearly everyone is taking his lead with aping or being inspired by his policies, as well as having Warren herself out there. Bernie's popularity was not merely about his policies, no politician is. That's putting him in a vacuum so we don't have to discuss his personality, and history, strengths and weaknesses which included iconic memes that appealed to younger voters and were energised by the style of his speeches emotionally not as policy wonks. Policy wonkery is Warren's niche.
There are progressive voices driving them toward those directions, inside and outside the primaries (Warren, Tulsi, Justice Democrats). Bernie himself isn't needed any longer, but he didn't want to pass the torch he still wants to be in the limelight. He probably regrets not doing more through his career as a politician, rather than wait for when he's in his 70's he could have been doing this for decades.
Congrats. The majority of people who did not like Bernie before this post now like him even less. Acting like you can't make a similiar single-sentence dismissal of Bernie is hilarious.
This is useful information but even AOC is listed at 25% in alignment with Trump. I think some important context could be missing in these statistics. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie are very similar though, both are among the lowest in the senate and just over a percentage point difference, and Kristen Gillebrand is the lowest! Would people suggest that she is the most leftist candidate then? It's not just about voter record, obviously that's important but shifting the overton window is also really important. Things like $15 minimum wage, free college, and free healthcare were considered completely absurd a few years ago but Bernie Sanders has done a lot to make those positions much more acceptable and a lot of Americans want these things now.
As for Bernie vs Warren, Bernie just has a bigger critique of Capitalism as a system than Warren does. They are very similar though no doubt. Michael Brooks goes into this quite a bit:
I think he's still a valuable voice.
He speaks in very plain and direct language. When he speaks, he speaks about policy positions. And right now, I think that's valuable. I know it's par for the course. But I want to hear less about your personal life growing up and how you want to fight for this country's values and to retake our country back. I want to hear about positions.
And right now, he checks the boxes and I know where he stands without having to go back and check and search. Hopefully that changes less over time with the other candidates. And his rhetoric never shies away from reminding the American people how big industry and the billionaire class are doing everything they can to impede progress.
But in terms of some of my key issues:
-Climate Change: I think he would be supportive of some of the most drastic measures to curb carbon emissions. He speaks very plainly about the forces against climate change and the drastic changes we need to implement.
-He's very plain about Medicare for all. Many other candidates are, too. But he never uses terms like, "Universal access" or "Quality affordable care for all"
-Unabashed about expanding Social Security
-15 dollar an hour minimum wage
There are plenty of candidates with great policy positions. But the manner through which he frames a lot of issues is still my favorite. He may not be the best guy for the job. But I think his input in invaluable.
And I would watch the Michael Brooks Show video posted above. Michael Brooks from the Majority Report can articulate himself very well.
And yes what I like a lot about Bernie is that he is willing to critique capitalism as a whole much more than other candidates.
While I love Warren, her campaign video really highlights the difference between her and Bernie. Warren says "If you work hard and play by the rules you're supposed to do well. But that's clearly not the case."
I think the plain and direct language resonates with people. Much like the case with AOC. She doesn't mince words and has a more powerful critique of the system as a whole. And she's doing it so well.
He speaks in very plain and direct language. When he speaks, he speaks about policy positions. And right now, I think that's valuable. I know it's par for the course. But I want to hear less about your personal life growing up and how you want to fight for this country's values and to retake our country back. I want to hear about positions.
And right now, he checks the boxes and I know where he stands without having to go back and check and search. Hopefully that changes less over time with the other candidates. And his rhetoric never shies away from reminding the American people how big industry and the billionaire class are doing everything they can to impede progress.
But in terms of some of my key issues:
-Climate Change: I think he would be supportive of some of the most drastic measures to curb carbon emissions. He speaks very plainly about the forces against climate change and the drastic changes we need to implement.
-He's very plain about Medicare for all. Many other candidates are, too. But he never uses terms like, "Universal access" or "Quality affordable care for all"
-Unabashed about expanding Social Security
-15 dollar an hour minimum wage
There are plenty of candidates with great policy positions. But the manner through which he frames a lot of issues is still my favorite. He may not be the best guy for the job. But I think his input in invaluable.
And I would watch the Michael Brooks Show video posted above. Michael Brooks from the Majority Report can articulate himself very well.
And yes what I like a lot about Bernie is that he is willing to critique capitalism as a whole much more than other candidates.
While I love Warren, her campaign video really highlights the difference between her and Bernie. Warren says "If you work hard and play by the rules you're supposed to do well. But that's clearly not the case."
I think the plain and direct language resonates with people. Much like the case with AOC. She doesn't mince words and has a more powerful critique of the system as a whole. And she's doing it so well.
Last edited:
User Banned (3 Days): Inappropriate Commentary
Maybe appealing to an entire generation of americans by giving clear, material reasons and solutions to the shittyness of their lives is not enough for the party's woke-capitalists. Until he has squirting fangirls like Beto, I fear you might be right.
Bernie's problem isn't "woke capitalists".
His problem is the base of the Democratic Party. You know who decides the nominee of the party? Soccer moms and African Americans.
This is why Hillary crushed him (the final vote % wasn't even close). She appealed to soccer moms and African Americans. He did not.
The soccer mom demo is a hell of a lot bigger and more important than the socialist one. Bernie fans failure to grasp that is why they were furious and confused when they lost in 2016, and they seemingly have yet to accept this reality.
It's weird that appealing to an entire generation of Americans hasn't translated to any significant electoral victory, unless I missed the significant number of Bernie endorsed candidates who managed to flip R-held seats.
He managed to get Amazon to blink.
The HE IS NOT EVEN A DEMOCRAT crowd are an interesting bunch. The most desirable trait a democrat have, apparently, is that they are a democrat, that they support its infrastructure by paying dues. It's essentialy "party over country" because this critique of him doesn't consider policy at all. Another example is that one of the reasons why people are cooling on Beto is because he wasn't contributing to the DCCC. A lay person living paycheck to paycheck, trying to figure out how to pay rent and buy groceries, they do not care about that. They care about how a politician will improve their lives, not if a politician is loyal to the party. They want to know if the politician is loyal to THEM.
Effectively, Bernie is a democrat. While he doesn't support the Democratic Organization, he fulfills the Democratic Ideal. I think the latter should be valued above all else. After all, we should be supporting the people, not the party.
MasterofPastures said:
Warren was a Republican for 5 years in the mid-90's, while spending over 2 decades as a steadfast Democrat who has been a champion for progressive values ever since. She personally spearheaded the creation of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, a political feat I haven't seen matched by Bernie and she did this early in her career as a senator.
Beto nearly beat Cruz in Texas, in a tight race that's something Bernie never accomplished in his career. He's charismatic, and became a rock star in his own right over night from his campaign. This is not something every politician can do, and it's extremely important for a candidate to have when against Trump in the general.
Kamala is a candidate with contradictions, she has done horrid things like fought to keep innocent people in prison yet has done good things like creating programs to prevent recidivism. She's not a Republican, you're confusing her with Tulsi Gabbard. This isn't about telling you anything, you should not have to be put in that decision but there is more to politics than simply Good vs Evil. I seriously don't get why many people don't understand that politics can genuinely try to compromise with the system to get the best results they can but are fine defining that trait as a thing only people do to pick the absolute worst mercenary choices in politics. As if there isn't any nuance there, shitty terrible nuance that I wish didn't exist, but nuance none the less. This is why she's a compromise candidate for me. She's the default front runner unless Biden or Beto enter the race, you may not like it but that's reality. It'll be up to Bernie to defeat her for the nomination, except it's all on him to make sure this won't be a repeat of '16, ands far I haven't seen anything remotely showing he's altered his strategies enough to overcome a candidate like Warren, never mind Kamala.
An interesting fact about Kamala is that on their voting records she disagrees with Bernie by 7%.
Fuck Biden.
Polling is a useful measurement, but it's not an exact science and things can change when they're in flux - which the primary is right now. The environment will likely be very different in '20 compared to now. There are polls where Bernie's not the leader in, as well.
Bernie's uncompromising history is the reason why he hasn't accomplished much in politics. These days he's managed to tilt the Overton window more to the left, yet it's outside congress and nothing concrete has come from it in passing bills. It's maintained by progressive politicians and groups he has no control over, which he has no interest in leading. Without all those people pushing it forward what pressure he did have would likely would have faded as those contributions to keep the push left relevant. This is why Bernie's pivot to another primary run is so short sighted, it's time to pass the torch but he won't because of his ego.
Why is it so hard for you to believe we do care about those issues but don't have the means to make it happen? We're stuck with the same candidates you are, I'd love for the Dems to have a candidate which could accomplish more for the transgender community but that's not on the cards at the moment. I wish it was. Bernie has an impressive record on LGBT rights, however, when I looked at his website I saw nothing strictly about the transgender community, which is disappointing. I like how he defended the transgender community against discrimination. Now, the negatives. Bernie is one of the worst positioned "Democrats" running who will be able to act within the system to give the transgender community the help they deserve. Making him POTUS won't change that fact. As you know words aren't what you need, it's action in the real world. That's the never ending problem with him, the system is inherently tough to change but unlike the average politician he'll be weaker still due to his incapability of working with people and being stubborn, which isn't always a good thing when you don't have the political might to force the right result.
Thats true, now what? Did he get that bill into law? I don't remember him doing that and without a bill this is going to be a blip on Jeff Bezos' radar, not a resounding defeat.
It's a desirable trait for a Democrat to have, not a defining one. Every organisation on Earth does that, if Bernie doesn't want to pay his dues he's welcome to leave. Except he wants all the perks of being a Democrat without the brand, since he needs them more than they need him. It has nothing to do with party over country, the reason we want him in is to work with us to help the countries and have a smoother relationship requires going all in like everybody else. Being a loner is not something which has helped him in his career, and he knows it.
Part of being in a group is cooperation, trust and compromise. You don't simply take what you want from the group, leave then come back and expect everyone to welcome you with open arms. This applies everywhere. He'd be getting grief had he done this with Labor in Australia and the UK, as well. None of their politicians routinely skips out of their party most of the time to run for leadership positions, as far as I know. Including Corbyn, UK's equivalent to Bernie.
One of the reasons Beto's faded is because he's doing nothing of interest to anyone. He's blogging about going on a road trip, which hasn't excited people. The second he enters the primary - all bets are off.
Which are values every voter in the party wants, not simply leftists. Loyalty goes both ways, if they're not in the party why should have a voice. That is the drawback to having no political allegiance, you don't get a say in how they elect their leaders or how they govern. This is why they should join us and make us stronger as a group.
There is no unofficial Democrat standard outside the party, there is no need to because the ideal Democrats already are in the party. However, if Bernie chooses to refine that to the entire party he needs to join in to do it. He doesn't get the final say of what an ideal Democrat is, as he is not a faithful Democrat to begin with. But we'd like him to be.
The people are the party, can't have one without the other in politics. There is no party if no-one joins it, and no people joining the Dems means the GOP don't have competition. The entire reason we have the party is to help the people, as we can do more together than alone. Without that there is fewer connections to politicians who need allies and they won't get any money reinforcements when they badly need it in tough elections where they're outspent 10-1 by the Koch Brothers. Ideals are nice and necessary for politics, but they won't pass bills or get politicians elected by themselves.
Last edited:
Well, those are obviously weird aberrations. Most of them are kids! In a few years, they will grow out of this "fair wages" and "universal healthcare" idealism, and go back to depending on good 'ol "market solutions".
Bernie needs to go home. As an Aussie who votes legitimately socialist / green parties in my elections I just wonder what it is about Americans which make you want to keep picking ancient fossils as your serious candidates.
Bernie is just too old. It doesn't matter what his policies are, do you want another senile fool in the oval?
Bernie is just too old. It doesn't matter what his policies are, do you want another senile fool in the oval?
Imagine thinking this about Bernie. Maybe the only candidate running for President who isn't a careerist. Someone who was nothing more than a punchline just a few years ago because he dared to call himself a socialist.
People with an irrational hatred of Bernie will never come around so there isn't much point in seriously engaging them. Luckily they mostly only exist online considering his real poll numbers.
Last edited:
The point is that he got a multinational multimillion juggernaut to do something without even needing to pass the bill with his Senatorial seat.
All of these words just to say "party over country." I personally cannot understand being annoyed with Bernie because he's not a Democrat. He effectively is already one, but the sticking point is that he's not paying dues to the party and only using it to get the nomination. It literally doesn't matter to me. From what I've seen, this only matters to extremely loud, extremely online liberals.
Bernie isn't a career politician? He's been in the job longer than many on this forum have been alive and it's the only job he's had in his life.
It's not irrational, many of us have given genuine arguments against him - some including credible sources and many trying to find common ground and in good faith. You don't have to agree with us, but c'mon. '16 proved we outnumber Bernie voters at the voting booth, it remains to be seen whether Bernie can turn those polls into votes in the next primaries. It's strange that you're denying that there are millions of people in the party who aren't all on Bernie's side, including former Bernie voters.
Again, so? Do you want to pull Bezos off his ivory tower or let the status quo reign? Bernie isn't doing jack about creating real change.
Leftists aren't the only left leaning voters in America who define what fighting for your country is for, it undermines their legitimacy in the coalition. Like you can do all this without us, yet if that was true Bernie wouldn't need the Democrats because we are the Democrats. Leftists can help define what it is to be a Democrat to an extent, but first you need to realise you're the new people here and this is further complicated by the constant need to be the outsider within the party. Why would outsiders define anything? They don't run it, they're not members in it, they don't maintain it. But they can if you join us, I want you to be a part of the Democrats. Help us grow stronger, help reform the party and be our allies. Except to that requires to be part of the team, not exploit and discard us as if we're not equals. The centrists did this in the 90's, I'd rather not go through that again just when the centrists have started to get a clue about liberals not being their disposable foot soldiers.
This isn't about you or me, this is a conversation about your candidate in the primaries, and how people who are not his supporters view him. Millions of people voted against him, there were numerous explanations of anger and discontent from the from pundits, reporters, political operatives, staff members in the party, politicians and ordinary voters like me who come into this. Think about all of them, because they're going to have a big impact on whether Bernie gets that nomination. He didn't turn everyone into a Bernie follower once Hillary lost to Trump. Not every disagreement people in the party have with Bernie is unjustified. I know, the candidates I like in the primaries are severely flawed, I wish they didn't have them but I'm not going to ignore when critics bring them up as legitimate complaints.
"Effectively" means nothing, either you're a Democrat or not, there is no third option. Usually Bernie picks the latter. It's one of his defining traits. He's not a joiner, he's a loner. This is how the Vermont Democratic Party were created. The most natural allies in the world for him, made from his own staff when he ran for mayor but he refuses their endorsements and has nothing to do with them.
The sticking point is that joining the Democrats means acting like a Democrat. Respecting their institution, customs, rules and when they do want to reform it (everyone does) do so without breaking the party in the process. There is a role for those who want to shake things up, of course, but the requires being able to do so without destroying their political careers in the process or making it ten times harder to get your goals done. Bernie prefers to make it as hard as possible for the Dems to be allies, so of course he hasn't much luck changing things like he wants. Reforming the party and the government is not a one man job, even if they're the POTUS. It's like any organisation.
Since you're a socialist I'll use the Democratic Socialists of America as an example.
https://www.dsausa.org/about-us/structure/
Seems well organised, leadership structure, rules for how things go. Damn, they have an impressive constitution and bylaws list! What Bernie is doing is signing up for standard deal but pretends he's getting all the perks for the life time membership without paying, he wants to participate in the leadership structure but won't follow the instructions from the national staff about the day-to-day work and openly tells everyone he hates the entire organisation, wants to reform everything to the point of calling everyone corrupt and admits to using them for his own political goals to a higher office and comes and goes as he pleases without paying his dues.
Please, don't take this personally. It's a blatant example for what Bernie is doing with the Democrats. This is why people, voters and political alike, don't trust him. I'm doing this we don't misunderstand each other. This isn't about agreeing, it's about communication so we're on the same page. Yes, I know you get this already but I wanted to extra clear here, because I've found it difficult to find common ground with socialists despite the fact I should have found plenty by now.
You're not understanding liberals and centrists mindsets, we aren't identical to the leftist mindset in how they do things. I think this is where we're getting miscommunication. At least it is from this side of the conversation.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sanders-long-independent-streak-comes-back-haunt-him
These aren't loud, online liberals. They're staff and politicians within the party and they're not the only ones. There are more articles like this upthread.
I don't get this denial about Bernie having conflicts with the Democrats, as if ignoring that is going to help him win the primaries. This is not going to help him win.
I'm trying here. I know we have many disagreements but we're not two seperate alien species with nothing in common.
Last edited:
Has he given any indication of being senile or a fool, or do you prefer having an outed racist fascist moron?
We are supposed to! Its a primary! Arguing amongst ourselves to choose the candidate is what we are supposed to be doing!
The number of people saying this stuff drives me wild. If everyone got along there would be no reason for politics to exist in the first place. Conflict is unavoidable and is not even inherently bad.
Anyone who says this is actually saying 'He dared to run against Hillary instead of letting her run unopposed'
Yeah i also hope that hes learned from his shortcomings. If he has then maybe he'll take the nomination.
I wonder what the conversation would look like if Bernie got the nom and chose Tulsi as a running mate.
My problem with Bernie are his diehard supporters. Brogressives like Kulinski and Sirota would rather Kamala Harris or Beto lose to Trump to prove a point.
You know I like Kulinski but I feel the same way and it's kinda turning me off to him as of late.
Bernie's not my first choice, but if he won, I'd be happiest with him winning, even if I wished he wouldn't run. I just don't think he can win, and that he'll split the progressive vote, and Warren can win.
If you're just going to quote Matt Christman you should attribute it.
We Obama backers did and were real mad about it. Bernie took even longer and didn't do the concilatory stuff. Hence why a lot of us got real pissed!
I don't think I could even hold my nose to vote Bernie if he won the nom. What to do as a left of center Dem....
Citation needed. He still remains one of the most popular politicians.
He acts like a democrat in ways that affect me materially. I don't give a fuck about him not respecting the norms and "rules". For me, it comes down to policy, not how he treats the Democratic Party.
Because the DNC shafted him. The districts overwhelmingly wanted him, and the DNC ignored them in favor of Hillary.
- Status