Sanders supporter publishes “hit list” of superdelegates, includes woman’s home address

A supporter of presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has published a “hit list” of Democratic super delegates, which includes the apparent home addresses of several superdelegates, including at least one woman. (Thayer is now claiming that he’s not a Sanders supporter — his Twitter feed suggests otherwise. More on that at the end of this story.)

The Sanders supporter, Spencer ThⒶyer — who uses the anarchist symbol to spell his name — is is urging fellow Sanders supporters to “harass” Hillary Clinton’s superdelegates, in order to get them to change their vote to Bernie Sanders.

The site, called “The Superdelegate Hit List,” includes the names, addresses, phone numbers, and social media accounts of the Democratic superdelegates.


You’ll note that the logo is a donkey with two arrows through its head.

UPDATE: Thayer just just gave a troubling answer in response to concerns that his site could lead to violence against superdelegates:super-delegates-hit-list

The superdelegates are in a spread sheet that permits people to give feedback on their contacts:


I checked the twitter accounts of several superdelegates in the “hit list,” and they did in fact have several people tweeting at them about supporting Sanders. One person quoted on the “hit list” Web site reported that the superdelegates were getting angry at the contacts. Thayer was elated:


Harassment was Thayer’s intent all along. Here is the tweet in which Thayer came up with the concept:



The harassment has gone so far as to include the alleged home address of Alabama Democratic party state chair, Nancy Worley. I easily found the address on Google maps, including an image of the home, which I won’t post. (The address has subsequently been removed from the database.) The list also included what claims to be Worley’s cell phone number.

Occupy Wall Street has already forwarded Thayer’s “hit list” to its members, via Twitter:


Thayer, the creator of the Super Delegates Hit List, has this to say about Marxism:


And this to say about capitalism:


And he had this to say about the use of violence in politics. First, about an Andrew Jackson statue on a college campus:


And this about violence in liberal politics more generally:


And this, about the need for “leftists” to arm themselves:


While I have found no direct connection between Thayer and the Sanders campaign, the Sanders campaign created a portal to make the Super Delegate information available to their supporters. Once their supporters got the message, and started harassing the superdelegates (one was called a “b*tch”), Sanders removed the portal, but the damage was done, the information was out there.

And keep in mind that Sanders and his own chief of staff have made clear that part of their strategy for victory is stealing Secretary Clinton’s superdelegates.

It appears that Sanders’ supporters got the message.


Update: Thayer is now trying to claim that he’s not a Sanders supporter. In fact, when Thayer first revealed the idea for his “hit list” on Twitter, he made clear that this was a partisan effort for Sanders by including the “FeelTheBern” hashtag.


Also note Thayer asking for help from other Sanders supporters to stop Hillary. Thayer adds: “I think this can really turn the tide.”


Then there this:

by default 2016-04-05 at 9.26.28 PM

Thayer also retweeted a partisan message from Occupy Wall Street and someone else:retweeting-partisan





Share This Post

993 Responses to “Sanders supporter publishes “hit list” of superdelegates, includes woman’s home address”

  1. Donna says:

    I know a lot about stalking, having worked with domestic violence victims for more than a decade. This is stalking, not “like stalking” and one, but not the only reason this is so, is because it involves harassment. Harassment is the use of aggressive pressure or intimidation. The legal definition for harassment is the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including threats and demands. The purposes may vary, including racial prejudice, personal malice, an attempt to force someone to quit a job or grant sexual favors, apply illegal pressure to collect a bill, or merely gain sadistic pleasure from making someone fearful or anxious. Such activities may be the basis for a lawsuit if due to discrimination based on race or sex, a violation on the statutory limitations on collection agencies, involve revenge by an ex-spouse, or be shown to be a form of blackmail (“I’ll stop bothering you, if you’ll go to bed with me”…..or as in this case: I’ll stop bothering you if you give in to my demands and say and do things the way I tell you to do them!

    These people have every right to experience privacy in their own homes, and civil and respectful treatment. Your statement “why CAN’T I call my state Rep. and say, please rethink your choice? I discuss other issues with my Sen. why not this?? ” tells a humongous lie. That is not what has happened or is happening. In his own words, Spencer Thayer states specifically: The only way @SenSanders could win is if we use the internet to harass the establishment.”

  2. CJ66 says:

    Are those people ashamed? To be a “delegate” is to be, in essence, a public figure, in public “office” so to speak. They should be able to be reached by their constituents. AND to be held accountable for their votes. AND voted out when required, if the people who voted them in are not happy.


  3. UCF_Engineer says:

    Lol, no you didn’t spot me at all. You act like I’m part of the ruling class or something, if I were only so lucky. But again, if you had read my comment, I said I live in reality and know we could never ban guns entirely in this country. It is too ingrained in our culture. And it’s funny that you think citizens armed with handguns, shotguns or even AR-15’s could stand up to the military if it were to ever come to that. If this country ever went in that direction no amount of guns for ordinary citizens would make a dent in the trained soldiers, sailors and marines with drones, tanks, bombers and carriers. I’ve seen the precision at which these planes can strike now. They can hit a target through a window in a house from miles away if they wanted. This isn’t the 1800’s anymore where we were all a level playing field with muskets and flintlock pistols. Sounds like you’re the one in need of a reality check.

    And even though this country is a hybrid of a Democratic Republic and an Oligarchy, of course the military needs to be armed to protect us from foreign threats. And no I’m not talking about ISIS or other terrorist groups (where good police work is the best protection), but w/out a military, the other countries of the world with military’s would have no problem imposing their will on us now would they?

  4. TechZilla says:

    They are attempting to control us with Tone… both parties are policing the tone.. They know they created an empire of inequality, and don’t want to be called on it.

  5. TechZilla says:

    That’s nonsense and you know it, the small funders delivered… we would do it again bigger than ever for the party… if we had one, but we don’t. You want that party to be clean and protected from a potential outsider??

    GREAT, I agree… Lets get a multi-party parlimentary system and you can be the PASOK of the USA.

  6. TechZilla says:

    I know you never said the word prohibition, you didn’t need to say it, that’s how I roll… I can separate the interested, from the legitimately concerned, that’s how I already knew your position…. and lets unroll it shall we?

    “If no one has them, no one gets hurt. Police wouldn’t need (or have) them.”

    But nobody would give them up, so police would always have to have them… BUT lets assume your imaginary world that cannot exist, WHY should the military of an undemocratic empire alone be armed?!?!?

    Have you not been paying attention to literally anything? OR maybe you have been paying attention, and aren’t a rube at all… you benefit from the present order, want it more, and don’t want any pesky citizens deciding that the undemocratic authoritarian corporatist state is illegitimate?

    The very concept of popular sovereignty, in which the government serves it’s citizens social well being… instead of trans-national capital makes you ill?

    Because you know that we’d use the guns eventually, and the US empire would have to go Kent state on all of us to maintain hegemony… and that’s the tears of concern your shedding for us? Your serving your economic interests, and blaming the victims of your exploitation and oppression for what you’d have to do to them when they fought back??? Really?

    Seriously, I’m not trying to get a rise out of you, I just want to know…. Did I actually spot you correctly?

  7. UCF_Engineer says:

    I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. I never said gun prohibition even once. I said gun control measures. But while we’re on the subject, I would love to see prohibition of guns. If no one has them, no one gets hurt. Police wouldn’t need (or have) them. The only people that should have guns are the military. However, I live in reality and know that would never happen, so the best we can do is try to make it harder for criminals to get them, through background checks and things of that nature. I enjoyed reading your rant though, good stuff lol.

  8. TechZilla says:

    First off your a hypocrite, with all the death that happens constantly to only care when the result is gun prohibition is pure bullshit. Bloomberg favours gun prohibition, he just loving us to death? Ol’ stop and frisk Bloomberg shares our interests? Gun prohibition is only about protecting the national security interests, and will do literally nothing for the problems you don’t even give two shits about. Not to mention all prohibition is a massive punishment on the working people, I’m no libertarian, I’m a leftist… but Gun prohibition isn’t about victims, it’s about removing guns from wingnuts. Why should we be giving more incentives to attack the working people, when they have so much already? The same police that harass people for your drug prohibition, we want that for guns also? And to finish, your government is not a democracy, and we’re looking more likely to need those guns… not less. Your gun prohibition is as hypocritical as pro-lifers, you don’t give two shits about working people, you don’t care about death, you eat us for lunch… and you don’t want us armed. Your constitution isn’t constitutional, why not marinate on that for a while.

  9. TechZilla says:

    Writing off trump is one of the reasons its so safe to ignore us, we need to reconsider him BIGTIME. His policies on economics are far closer to Bernie, he is less beholden to special interests.. and although he flip flops… unlike Hillary, he flips to his gut and lies to the doners. Trump is to the left of Hillary, he only has the character of a right wing populist…. he is running in the R party as an outsider, but he’s not a neo-liberalist, and has favoured single payer in the past. He’s certainly less right-wing than Hillary, and they want to tell us he’s too outrageous to consider… There really is worse things than sometimes crude demagogue, for example, neo-liberal warmongers who have proven themselves a trusted servant of the trans-national capitalist class. They wanna talk lesser-evil, FINE… I wanted Bern, he’s everything the party should have been… but isn’t. They made sure he lost, they rigged the process. The lesser evil isn’t Hillary, it’s the donald (assuming he keeps fighting paul ryan, and the old GOP establishment).

  10. TechZilla says:

    That’s why he’s not a piece of garbage like the rest. Study American foreign policy, it’s horrible for working people across the globe, and it doesn’t serve working people here either. Your argument could convince only the koch brothers, and people who literally have no clue about the nature of the empire.

  11. TechZilla says:

    Well to anyone who is served by the established social/political order, yes it would appear the public has lost their marbles. In reality, its simply a matter of differing interests, and both sets of people know how actual politics works. IN fact, You say he’s losing, but nobody who says it deserves to be considered credible. As the elections are run by an establishment that lacks a constituency that still wants democracy. The voters want it sure, but that’s not how politics works around here. Of course all you can say to my very respectful analysis, and legitimate concerns, is invalidation and ad hominem attacks. Your best bet is to just keep silencing dissent, as the working class public will no question agree with these sentiments the second they consider them carefully.

    BTW, is Jimmy Carter also crazy?

    guess so, anyone who questions the legitimacy of our soft authoritarian system must be insane.

  12. Leroy Simi says:

    If they are whore’s

  13. Leroy Simi says:

    A lot of people when they are harassed might not go over to Bernie’s side out of spite.What needs to be done is to shine the light of if the are bought whore’s of the Clinton’s like the last episode of Redacted did on the super delegate that bought the women’s house that purged the 126,000 voter’s in Brooklyn.

  14. SonofLiberty7 says:

    And today we murder unborn babies. Still feeling so much wiser?

  15. Slap says:

    you are a jackass

  16. Slap says:

    BS is losing the math game as well as his marbles — you have already lost your marbles.

  17. Slap says:

    you are an idiot. BS is not carrying the popular vote at all. it is math. no matter what you think, BS is BEHIND AND LOSING IN THE POPULAR VOTE.

    Your lies, no matter how much you repeat them, will never be true.


  18. Slap says:

    you are an idiot. you can’t just make up crap and call it truth because you typed it. that is not how the truth works.

    You are nothing more than a right wing trolling propagandist – Joseph Goebbels is so proud of you.

  19. Zincoshine says:

    perhaps you didn’t get the memo but what happens in the US presidential elections affect the whole world. with great superpower status comes great responsibility.

  20. Ari says:

    Thank you :-)

  21. Nicolai Alatzas says:

    You’re suppose to remove the underscore from your #hillbot scripts.

  22. Nicolai Alatzas says:

    A closed primary where 45% of the votes have gone to the establishment outsider yet only 7% of the Superdelegates carried as speaks to an entrenched corruption and faux democracy. Not some BS hypocrisy.

  23. Nicolai Alatzas says:

    This article is nothing more than a hit piece on behalf of HRC.

    First of all Hillary Clinton hired $1 million in internet trolls that spammed child porn to supporter pages of Bernie Sanders.

    Superdelagates should be held accountable for voting against the interests of the people. If they do not want to be put under fire and held accountable they should resign their position.

    And lastly Liberal Violence is a contradiction of terms. Thoughtful articulate discourse is what is needed to defeat the corrupt establishment. If that makes phone calls, emails and letters are harrasment so be it.

    When 45% of the people vote in favor of Sanders and only 7% of Superdelagates follow the will of the people every red blooded American should be angry not just the Sanders camp.

  24. sandre says:

    64.4% versus Hillary’s 35.6%

  25. sandre says:

    If you live in Norway, what the hell are you doing campaigning for a US presidential candidate in a US presidential election??!?!??!

  26. sandre says:

    Right. At their office. Not at their home. Not calling them a “b*tch.”

  27. sandre says:

    In colonial times, slavery was also legal.

  28. sandre says:

    Stop being an apologist. Every time someone says points out something about Bernie, his campaign, or his supporters that is less than kosher, shady, or downright dishonest, you always have some justification for it.

  29. sandre says:

    Oh, poor you. Like Hillary supporters haven’t been called dismissive and patronizing names. Like Hillary HERSELF hasn’t been called far, far worse: b*tch, c*nt, you name it. But of course, that nothing compares with the pain and unfairness of a Bernie supporter being called a “BernieBot.”

  30. sandre says:

    Hillary slandered you as a BernieBot? Also, do you know what slander means? According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

    transitive verb

    : to make a false spoken statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of someone

    Keyword FALSE. You support Bernie, yes? How is it slander?

  31. sandre says:

    A car’s stated purpose is not to raze down people; it is to provide transportation. A gun’s stated purpose is to injure, main, and/or kill a person or an animal. Big difference doll.

  32. sandre says:

    “true progressives don’t believe Republican bullshit that a $15 wage will tank our economy.”

    lolololololol. WOW you truly know ZILCH about economics and basic math, huh?

  33. sandre says:


  34. sandre says:

    Exactly this. He is self-serving.

  35. sandre says:

    Yes, it is stalking. Stalking has nothing to do with how or where you obtained the contact information of a person.

    According to Marriam-Webster Dictionary:


    : to follow (an animal or person that you are hunting or trying to capture) by moving slowly and quietly
    : to go through (a place or area) while hunting
    : to follow, watch, and bother (someone) constantly in a way that is frightening, dangerous, etc.

    intransitive verb

    : to pursue quarry or prey stealthily
    : to walk stiffly or haughtily

    transitive verb

    : to pursue by stalking
    : to go through (an area) in search of prey or quarry
    : to pursue obsessively and to the point of harassment

    It says nothing about how one has obtained the means or information necessary to stalk.

  36. sandre says:

    They want the evil 1% (whatever that means… they’ve demonized “the 1%” a la Voldemort or Sauron in their infantile minds) to pay for everything. In fact, here is a Sanders supporter exemplifying this very kind of infantile, starry-eyed, call-to-fairytales logic in his laughable attempt to convince people that Sanders winning about 65% of the remaining delegates at the DNC is more realistic than Clinton winning 35%: “It will be a fierce battle, probably very much like the one between Rohan and Saruman at Helms Deep — but it can be won.” – johnlaurits(.)com /2016/04/29/ math-vs-media-part-two/ (take away parenthesis and spaces)

  37. sandre says:

    Appalling and disgusting. The neckbeard misogynistic internet-dwelling has clamored out of mommy’s basement and is throwing dangerous hissy fits. Who would have thought?

  38. Caleb says:

    He’s just a professional protester. Not prez material. He’s already got a gov job which he uses to write all the bills he promotes on his platform. Guess what? He’s been ineffective in getting them through. Over 350 bills written and almost all of them given ‘fat chance’ of passing. 2 of the 3 he got passed are for renaming Post Offices in Vermont. He’s ineffective as far as making PROGRESS in the government. Would be a WASTE of taxpayer money to have professional protester as prez who gets none of them passed by congress.

  39. SWS says:

    Aren’t you a Debbie Downer. The parties shouldn’t define what democracy is, but neither should the delusional Bernie Sanders. He doesn’t have the clout nor the support to dictate to anyone what the agenda should be for a party nor for the country.

  40. TechZilla says:

    1. The parties will never get to define what is democracy, regardless of what their rules claim.
    2. Due to systemic economic-political inequality, their is no ruling constituency which defends democracy even in concept. So who is defending it on the inside now? I don’t need a smoking gun to show that insiders hold the public in contempt, enough to do whatever they need to maintain the results they deem necessary. Where are the international democracy watching groups? If it’s just a wackjob conspiracy, why wasn’t it conspiracy in any other election neo-liberals were risking loss? Was it conspiracy in Venezuela? Yea, we need them now, if you want anyone but yourself to actually eat the bullshit that the public willingly preferred HRC.
    3. The parties know that they are the final choice, and the votes were merely for show. A Sanders victory would be considered a national security threat, by definitions consistently enforced by both parties world wide. He threatens the established social order, why would they EVER let him win in the first place?
    4. The entire system is illegitimate, it exists on force alone, and is in no way democratic.

  41. static rage says:

    To clarify, when it comes to super delegates, yes simply by way of their party rules they are less democratic in spirit. That’s what I said. That’s all I said. No need to infer more

  42. MaryLF says:

    So you’re saying that the Democrats are a reater threat to our democracy than the Republicans. Got it.

  43. UCF_Engineer says:

    All issues have different weight for different people. Try telling the Sandy Hook families that gun issues aren’t important. Gun control measures have about as much chance of making it through congress as does a single payer system or college tuition paid for with taxes. In other words, none of it stands to pass as long as Republicans at least have a simple minority. Until you have something like 70% Democrat/liberal in congress, the major reform this country needs won’t happen. It’s just the way this divided government is set up through the constitution.

  44. UCF_Engineer says:

    I think you’re getting confused with “Bernie Bro”. Politics aside, being labeled a bot implies you follow/support something and completely ignore its flaws or attempt to defend them even if they are indefensible.

  45. static rage says:

    Republican Party superdelegates are obliged to vote for their state’s popular vote winner under the rules of the party branch to which they belong. So yes the democratic party is less democratic in spirit sadly than the republicans. Wisconsin democratic super delegate and senator Tammy Baldwin for example has pledged her vote for Clinton even though Bernie overwhelming won the primary there thus proving that the democratic primary is a meaningless pageant.

  46. Alphenex says:

    I as an independent that hasn’t decided have a question, why on one hand is Hillary and the DNC counting on the support and enthusiasm of Bernie supporters to come to them during the General yet during the primary speaking like this to someone who happens to disagree with you is acceptable but the opposite doesn’t seem to be true. You have to realize by continuing to ostracize these people you are going to lose potentially not just many Congressional local and national races but potentially the White House since there are a great number of Bernie supporters who have never before affiliated with the Democratic party, yet counting those votes and the enthusiasm to come the DNC way seems pretensions, especially if you treat them so bad, why would they go out of their way to vote Democratic party. You risk losing a great chance in front of you. The more times they are called Bernie Bots, Bernie Bros, or having leading feminists say that any woman that considers supporting (including Susan Surandon who although i don’t agree with on many things has at least put her money and her time where her mouth is) does not seem productive, but rather counter intuitive. Some will go to Trump if he is the nomination, some will go green, and some will stay home, none of witch benefits Hillary or DNC in having a chance to take back senate or reduce the lead in the house, not to mention the overwhelming losses that have piled on by some brilliant, although to me morally ambiguous (although due to the system entirely legal and used by both parties) strategies to dominate on a local and state level, outing more Democrats and taking more seats than at any other time in history in the past 7 years. I would try and focus on uniting, but that’s an outsiders perspective, I personally believe all the candidates are flawed, as all people are and i will not agree with them on everything. General election and how many issues get flipped on and how far the run to the center becomes between the two candidates to me will dictate more in the end for who i will vote for. If Hillary goes back on TPP many will rush to Trump if he is the nominee as he would be the only one who is advocating against the TPP. Anyways good luck, i hope you can figure it out but i doubt it as i truly hope that each party splits into at least 2 separate powers because of this election, variety equals competition which hopefully equals better choices.

  47. SWS says:

    To say its time to “take Democracy back from the DNC” but you are over 2.5 Million votes behind the frontrunner and way behind in delegates; and when you harass superdelegates committed to the frontrunner, then you are a hypocrite. Superdelegates, whether people agree with having that kind of system or not, is part of the process; but Democracy isn’t the issue. Sanders would like everyone to believe that he is losing because of Superdelegates and that simply isn’t the truth. He would also like people to believe that Super Pacs are the reason he is losing, but that also isn’t the truth since he has been outspending the frontrunner. Hillary has spent $1 million on getting her name out there on the internet. Sanders spent $16 million to get his name out there on the internet. 66% of Sanders’ own supporters say they are not willing to pay more than $1,000 more in taxes per year to pay for all of the “free stuff” Sanders has been promising, which is way short of what would be required. Sanders supporters aren’t willing to pay for his “revolution” so why would anyone else? At some point Sanders needs to realize that his “revolution” is failing and not because Democracy has been snatched from his grasp nor from superpacs, but because he has failed to convince Democrats (and 66% of his own supporters) that he has viable plans for the country.

  48. eze60 says:

    very well put.

  49. Samuel Jennings says:

    Yes it is, because you Democrats and Republicans have constructed the current system to make it impossible for an independent candidate to be taken seriously.

    So, we’re going to invade your party, hijack it, and turn it to our own purposes, and there’s nothing you can do about it except cry crocodile tears.

  50. Bill_Perdue says:

    I’m not defending BS, He was for a civil uniohs for a long time, and CUs make us second class citizens.

  51. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Welp, now I know you’re worthless to listen to.

  52. Anne Rogers says:

    Agreed- Gamergate is a movement about ethics, an area Bernie knows nothing about.

  53. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I seriously wish you had the wherewithal to notice that you just tried to say that being a racist or a bigot is okay because people were ignorant in the past and that you can’t read the part of the constitution that gives us the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, which in short: gives us the right to demand a better and higher standard of living.

    Plus the constitution actually has those pesky amendments that dissolve things like the bigotry you claim to be “enshrined” in the constitution. Our forefathers weren’t so ass backwards as to presume they couldn’t have been wrong about things. Which is WHY the system for amendments exists in the first place.

  54. Anne Rogers says:

    Because Bernouts will magically harass enough people to give him a blowout in the remaining primaries, despite polls suggesting he is behind in California and Pennsylvania?

  55. Anne Rogers says:

    So protectionism and no wars (except ones like the Afghanistan quagmire that St Bernie supported)?

  56. Anne Rogers says:

    Apparently you don’t understand either. Bigotry? Enshrined in the Constitution. Corporate enslavement? Where are unions, minimum wage, universal healthcare, etc. mentioned in the Constitution? You worked for what they were willing to pay, or you quite likely died while trying to find other work.

  57. Anne Rogers says:

    How does that crystal ball look now? Bernie manages to keep on losing.

  58. Anne Rogers says:

    And Bernie opposed gay marriage as well. My favorite though was when he supported storing nuclear waste from a Vermont power plant in a poor Texas community. Gotta love that NIMBY approach he takes-can’t have those green mountains glowing.

  59. Anne Rogers says:

    So it’s okay to vote for a quagmire as long as everyone else is? Either Bernie didn’t have the balls to stand against a war that was guaranteed to be a mess, or he’s cool with destroying a country because a couple of buildings in New York collapsed. How many dead Afghan civilians vs dead in New York?

    Bernie opposes liability for Remington targeting military-grade weapons for civilians- sounds like he would fit in perfectly with the ‘our guns!’ NRA.

    Okay- Pop’s Pizzeria is paying $10/hour. His wage expenses just jumped 50%. Does he 1) cut hours, 2) cut jobs, or 3)raise prices to cover the cost? “True progressives” seem to think every place paying less than a ‘living wage’ are Walmart or some other giant company. Look up American Samoa tuna canneries- progressives got the wages raised and the canneries shut down because it was no longer profitable. Instead of making 4-5/hour, now they make 0/hour. At least they’re no longer being exploited, right?

  60. Anne Rogers says:

    Or fail-as the results keep showing. Bernie doesn’t appeal to Democrats- why not start your own party? I know why-because that’s too hard.

  61. Anne Rogers says:

    Read his twit messages-I’m sure a Bernout like you has the page bookmarked.

  62. Samuel Jennings says:

    No, but I don’t call them at home, so….

  63. Samuel Jennings says:

    Spoken like a true conservative, advocating for voter ID laws and whining about possible voter fraud…

  64. Samuel Jennings says:

    You’re talking about the “Amendment King” of the Senate? Maybe he just doesn’t care about the limelight, but I’ve never heard from any of his fellow Representatives or Senators that he was an ineffective Congressman. After all, he is the most popular US Senator…

  65. Samuel Jennings says:

    You must have a hard time finding Congresspeople to vote for that didn’t vote for Afghanistan, then. Bernie doesn’t support the NRA, and true progressives don’t believe Republican bullshit that a $15 wage will tank our economy.

  66. Samuel Jennings says:

    [citation needed]

  67. Samuel Jennings says:

    Damn right, and us evil Independents are going to keep trying to hijack your corrupt party until we succeed, and you neo-liberals go fuck off to the caves you crawled out of.

  68. Samuel Jennings says:

    If voter problems in AZ helped Bernie, why is it that Bernie was winning amongst day-of ballots?

    Two other things:

    1) If you want closed primaries, go ahead. It’s your party. I won’t stop you. However, if you want my vote in the general election, and you have closed primaries, then you’re just not going to get it. Ignoring the largest political group in this country, the Independents, is idiotic. Either let me have a voice, and let people like me have a voice, in the political system that your party has hijacked, or don’t expect our support or participation.

    2) If you think caucuses aren’t democratic, you haven’t been to caucuses. The only real difference between a caucus and a primary is that you actually have to show up and talk to your neighbors to participate in a caucus. It lets people change their minds and speak to each other rather than just casting a vote and leaving without really participating.

  69. Zincoshine says:

    Hey, I don’t see you judging trump by the stupid stuff he says on a daily basis so don’t judge Bernie by one of his rare ones.

    Mixed economy is the country I live in, Norway, and we’re the actual #1 according to various indexes.

  70. Anne Rogers says:

    So he’s too stupid to label himself correctly, yet you want him as President.

    Mixed economy-is that one where the government controls ever-larger swathes, while the President complains about the number of deodorant options available?

  71. Zincoshine says:

    He can call himself what he likes, his policies don’t match with socialism. He is about as socialist as FDR (god, just typing FDR and thinking of the NY loss is enough to bring me close to tears). He is a social democrat. He believes in a mixed economy, the system that created the world’s most developed countries.

  72. Anne Rogers says:

    Too bad Bernie’s still losing, eh?

  73. Anne Rogers says:

    Bernie calls himself as a socialist-why would you support someone that dumb (by your own words)?

  74. Anne Rogers says:

    In other words you oppose both freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.

  75. Anne Rogers says:

    Is it also your right to call them at their home?

  76. Anne Rogers says:

    Do you oppose registration in principle? Should I be able to fly to Seattle, walk into a polling station, and be allowed to vote? I don’t want to betray my convictions by putting myself in yet another government database.

  77. Anne Rogers says:

    He has no credibility as a Democrat either-didn’t his years in Congress result in a whopping two post offices being renamed?

  78. Anne Rogers says:

    True progressives don’t vote for an Afghanistan quagmire. True progressives don’t support the NRA. True progressives don’t plan to tank the economy by demanding a 15/hour minimum wage without taking local costs of living into account.

  79. Anne Rogers says:

    Not to mention he plans to raise the minimum in Haiti and reduce the number of criminals in prison. Apparently Bernie doesn’t understand that Haiti is not part of the US and the vast majority of criminals are in state prisons, not federal.

  80. Anne Rogers says:

    I presume that “Spencer Thayer” has made his name and address publicly available?

    As for the potential harm-does that mean you supported posting the address of George Zimmerman’s parents? It’s not like they had to flee their house because of threats-oh wait, they did.

  81. Lisa K. says:

    For those opposed to posting information EASILY accessible on the internet, explain why it is like stalking? It’s like using an old fashioned telephone book! Was that stalking? When people call to sell stuff to you, they get your information freely enough and no one feels “threatened”. This is the age of information and if it frightens you, good luck trying to get YOUR info off the internet. If a super delegate posted before the primary and the “tide is turning”, why CAN’T I call my state Rep. and say, please rethink your choice? I discuss other issues with my Sen. why not this?? I discuss choices with friends, family and strangers, alike. Seems the only ones objecting to this are HRC supporters, so hey – say what you like, but this is what elections are about. The more you learn about a candidate, the better equipped one is to vote for the reasons near and dear to their ideology. Rep. don’t want to offend those they work with, so they’ll “play it safe”. Maybe when they see their colleagues changing their support from HRC to Bernie Sanders, they’ll get their nerve up to do the same! I say make the call as your RIGHT in the Democratic process. People who don’t call their Reps and then complain about how they handled a vote need to know they can make a difference if they speak out. No one need be hurtful, rude or bullying. Just make a request and share your thoughts. That IS the American “WAY”!

  82. alternator66 says:

    If Sanders is so against big money, if he gets the nomination, is he going to reject the estimated $1 billion the Dem Party would have to raise (much from corporations, wall street, rich, etc) to run a general election? Or is he going to run it only on his small donor donations?

    Sanders is a hypocritical parasite who (like Trump) is trying to hijack a major political party because they need the big money donations (the same they claim to be against) to run a general election.

  83. alternator66 says:

    The voter problems in Arizona (the type of big diverse state with
    demographics favorable to Hillary) actually prevented her from running up the score on him there like she did in Florida (+30)

    If it weren’t for caucuses – which are highly undemocratic (the anonymous ballot being the foundation of western democracy) dominated by white activists, low turnout, etc – Bernie would’ve been out of the race a long time ago.

    Closed primaries are really the only way it should be – as it allows registered rank-and-file Democrats (not Independents or Republicans or “fad voters”) to vote on the nominee of the Democratic Party, and allows the highest possible turnout, benefitting minorities, working people, older voters, disabled, etc.

    The fact is, Hillary is winning a much more diverse electorate in bigger states all across the country, including the swing states of Florida (+30), Ohio (+14), North Carolina (+15), Virginia (+30), Arizona (+17).

    She has a 200+ pledged delegate lead, a 400+ superdelegate lead, and a 2.5 million popular vote lead. IOW, she has demonstrated strength in winning over the elements of the Democratic Party (the voters, the delegates and the superdelegates) that it takes to win the Democratic nomination.

    Sanders, in all reality, was eliminated from the race on March 15th, but stayed in because he had a bunch of caucuses he could win, but that hasn’t changed the underlying dynamic of the race:

  84. Samuel Jennings says:

    The BernieBot insult isn’t sexist in and of itself, but it is dismissive and patronizing. What makes “BernieBot” sexist is the common narrative early in the campaign that Sanders’ support arose solely from male circles.

  85. Samuel Jennings says:

    If the superdelegates aren’t beholden to anyone, why bother even reporting on their commitments? Bernie’s been dismissed since the start of the process, and has been facing large difficulties getting one of his most important blocs of voters – independents – able to vote in primaries and caucuses where they should have been able to. See the debacle in Arizona, for instance, where people had to wait several hours to vote in person – votes which heavily favored Bernie, as opposed to early voters or absentees – and when they arrived, commonly found that their party affiliations had suddenly changed.

    I also think it’s rather hilarious to heavily weight the early part of the schedule towards states which have nearly never voted Democrat in the general election, thus giving their votes greater credence than liberal bulwarks such as Washington, California, New York, et cetera. Hillary’s major supports have come from large victories in states where she would have had no chance in the general election – yet we let the South Carolinas, Georgias, Texases set the early momentum of the nomination?

    Add in media attitude during the early part of the campaign and the tone set by most members of the Democratic leadership, plus the anemic early debate schedule, and it becomes clear that the party intended Clinton to run with token opposition and obtain the nomination without controversy.

    As to your point about popular vote totals, you’re just taking the raw counts, which count a single precinct delegate in a caucus state as one “vote.” So, you’re misinformed. There is no number out there that can accurately represent the popular vote, because caucus states, in which Bernie does very well, do not report popular vote totals, but instead report precinct delegate totals, which are then interpreted as “votes” towards state delegates.

  86. Samuel Jennings says:

    Bernie has always been a moderate on guns, and it’s an issue that he doesn’t feel strongly on, obviously. The gun control measures suggested by Democrats would do little or nothing, and would never pass. They’re simply a distraction to the issues that really matter – income inequality, money in politics, honesty in politicians.

    Go ahead – dig. Find me major ideological differences between Sanders of today and Sanders of, say, 2004.

    I can do that with Clinton pretty damned easily.

  87. 1bestdog says:

    you don;t understand election law and you don’t change it to suit your politics

  88. 1bestdog says:

    mob mentality a bunch of punks

  89. Carolee Masterson says:

    also, in his so-called disavow of Paul Song’s “whore” statement, BS should have strode on stage and spokeN up, like Sen. John McCain DID when he called for respect for his opponent after a woman at
    his event said that she didn’t trust Obama and that he was an “arab.”

    BS chose instead to thank paul song for his introduction…. so any later mea culpa’s are meaningless, offered only to dispel the mounting proof of his MISOGYNY…

    I plan to Vote for Future President Hillary Rodham Clinton 2016, 2020…enough of these OLD RICH WHITE MEN calling women HO’S and worse…ENOUGH!

  90. Carolee Masterson says:

    ..any man who would publish a woman’s street address, hotel room number, or phone number ON LINE for anyone in the world to see should be brought up on charges..this is unconscionable and BS should put a stop to it immediately…both he and Dumpf are making it unsafe for any woman who disagrees with them to be safe…in public or at home….

    …are these two RICH WHITE MEN so afraid of women that they would set them up online to be harassed, stalked, even murdered?…and for the wife of BS to go along with his frightening support of these actions, are beyond my comprehension, however, they will NOT deter me from voting for:

    Future President Hillary Rodham Clinton 2016 2020

  91. UCF_Engineer says:

    Just curious…how is being called a BernieBot sexist? A robot by definition has no sex.

  92. UCF_Engineer says:

    How has he not been getting a fair shake? He’s all over the news, the internet and they’ve held several debates. The super delegates are beholden to anyone until the convention. If Bernie does well enough to get the popular vote and surpass Clinton with a clear majority in pledged delegates, they won’t prevent him getting the nomination.
    If you ask me, he has had more than a fair shake since he’s only gotten 42% of the vote and yet holds 46% of the delegates. Does that seem fair to you?

  93. UCF_Engineer says:

    I couldn’t have said it better myself. It makes me feel like Sander’s supporters were born yesterday and they just woke up to this country of progressive change. All this stuff took decades to achieve and can all be eliminated or severely handicapped with the next president deciding 2-3 Supreme Court Judges and a Republican dominated congress.

  94. UCF_Engineer says:

    So by your definition Bernie being more pro gun for Vermont and becoming more anti gun now that he’s running for president (which he, himself, has admitted to) is also dishonest? Face it. They are all politicians and all play the political game. Sanders has done a good job so far running as a boy scout but as soon as you start digging a little, you’ll see all the cracks.

  95. UCF_Engineer says:

    He was mocking the ridiculous attitude of Bernie supporters and their conspiracy theories that he has filled their heads with in regards to Clinton.

  96. UCF_Engineer says:

    My god. How far down the Bernie rabbit hole have you gone? The Sanders campaign linked this guy’s info to their supporters. The proof is in the pudding buddy. Your boy scout Sanders isn’t the messiah you though he was. Open up your eyes and quit allowing yourself to be brainwashed.

  97. UCF_Engineer says:

    LMAO! Of course its donkey. You need to get your eyes checked.

  98. Mr_Liberal says:

    “…too cowardly to respond to the meat of my post…”

    Brevity is the soul of wit.

    You’re welcome.

  99. Samuel Jennings says:

    I also gotta say, I don’t expect the world to change in a 180 by electing Bernie Sanders as President. However, electing people that are pushing for incremental change is NOT the right way to tackle large issues – you need to elect activists, you need to elect people that speak consistently with passion. If we get enough of those people into office, if Bernie and people like him, like Warren and others, can change the political conversation….

    ….that is the political revolution he speaks of. Electing Bernie would be a huge step toward that goal, and even though it won’t solve all our problems. The President does not legislate, but (s)he does help set the national conversation!

  100. Samuel Jennings says:

    How have we turned on Warren? I’d love for her to be running, but I respect her decision not to, as I also respect her decision to not endorse Bernie. I have seen literally zero negative articles out of the Bernie campaign about her, or posted by the mainstream Bernie supporter websites.

    I would think that we are all fine with reasonable compromise, as is Bernie. We just don’t like Hillary, for many reasons. We don’t care that she’s a woman, she just leaves a bad taste in our mouths, because we think she’s untrustworthy, and because she changes her opinions with the way the wind’s blowing.

    Personally, I don’t like her, because my number one priority is getting large money out of politics. HRC talks that talk, but then doesn’t exactly walk that walk. My other priorities are voting people into office that will put large amounts of effort behind a universal healthcare system, and who will address income inequality and the spiraling cost of higher education. I also don’t want to see this nation waste more American lives on adventurous wars.

    I think Bernie’s that guy, and I think Hillary isn’t.

    Now, don’t get me wrong, Hillary is a far better candidate for President than Trump or Cruz. Neither of those people live in the same world. I’d rather have a Goldman Sachs Democrat for President than a walking orange or a lizard person.

    The centrist wing of the party has had its day, and a lot of us that are to the left of the Democratic party are extremely tired of having near to zero representation in government. We aren’t going to burn down the Democratic party, unlike the teabaggers, but we do want to change the political conversation. We want to feel like we’re not being marginalized as dreamers. We want to feel like we’re not being condescended to, to being patted on the head like dogs by candidates that don’t care about what we care about.

    Well, we’re not a small group. We are most of the youth vote, and the Democrats need to pay attention, or their party is going to eat itself alive by being pulled between progressives and centrists trying to maintain the status quo like Hillary.

  101. MaryLF says:

    Finally we agree. The Tea Party has ruined the GOP by constantly redefining who is pure enough to be a Republican, by absolutely refusing to compromise, by driving out all the moderate in the party, and by vilifying anyone who doesn’t agree with them. They believe their losses in 2008 and 2012 were caused by candidates that were not extreme enough. The purity left is doing the same thing. They supported President Obama until he got elected, then they were “disappointed”. They turned on Elizabeth Warren because she is remaining neutral, and should Sanders win the nomination, they will turn on him as soon as he fails to deliver everything he promised in the first two years. They prefer a bill that is pure and gets voted down to one that contains compromise but moves us forward and gets enacted. The extremists on both sides are a small group. The right has Fox News to amplify their voices. Thank goodness we don’t have a similar structure on our side.

  102. Samuel Jennings says:

    Gun makers right now are liable in cases of negligence, and gun sellers are not reasonably able to make sure that purchasers cannot use those guns in crime. All gun retailers are required to use the National Instant Check System, and to ask a series of questions that will disqualify buyers. There’s very little that could be done beyond that, and pushing the burden further onto firearm retailers is ridiculous.

    Furthermore, gun manufacturers are absolutely liable under current law if they inappropriately sell firearms directly to the public and instead of an FFL dealer. I don’t understand what situation you can think of that would qualify as negligence that they are shielded, legally, from under current law.

  103. Samuel Jennings says:

    True progressives release their secret, $225,000 speeches, and generally don’t host fundraisers with plates that reach the $350,000 mark. Sanders, meanwhile, has promised to release said tax returns and will do so.

    Look, I’m seriously not angry at you. I just don’t understand where you are getting your hostility, and where you are getting your misinformation. I’d like to invite you to have a civil conversation on the subject, if you’re willing.

  104. Samuel Jennings says:

    If he hated the Democratic Party, would he be running under the Democratic Party banner? No. He doesn’t hate the Democratic Party. He recognizes that it has problems. He hates the current way politics are conducted in our country, and so do you, unless you’re one of the 10% of Americans that think Congress is doing a good job. He hates big money in politics, and so do you.

    Disagreeing with your chosen candidate is not trying to destroy your party. Discord is only destructive when a candidate is not given a fair shake, and Sanders has not been given a fair shake. That’s what is driving a lot of the anger, and failing to recognize that there is a significant division in this party between neoliberals like Clinton and progressives threatens to destroy the Democratic party as surely as the Tea Party is slowly consuming the Republican party in a pile of hatred.

  105. Samuel Jennings says:

    Ooooohhhhh, tough man, too cowardly to respond to the meat of my post, so he’d rather do a drive by ad hominem.

    Well, eat me. Some day you will grow up and realize that what I’m saying is true. Unfortunately, it may be too late to elect an honest politician to office.

  106. Samuel Jennings says:

    They wanted to do better than run Clinton unopposed. They allowed several weak candidates to run against her to give the illusion of the choice. It was cast as a coronation from the beginning, but once the campaign started, they couldn’t exactly kick out a candidate without massive repercussions.

    Clinton’s been the one that’s failed to plan. She failed to plan for a major competitor. She failed to take the temperature of the electorate. She failed to learn anything from 2008, except that she should head off any opposition at the pass.

    She’s the weaker candidate, with less enthusiasm behind her campaign, and stands the greatest chance of failure against the Republicans, because she didn’t have the foresight to stay out of scandal while in office. While I do not think her email server was a crime, it was massively stupid to take govt emails and stash them on a private server – hell, I can’t even do that with my work email, and I just sell auto parts. I don’t broker free trade agreements with tax havens.

  107. Samuel Jennings says:

    You act like democratic socialists aren’t capitalists. History lesson – the US largely had unrestricted capitalism until the early part of the century, at which point the various socialist movements converged and gave us unions, worker’s rights, the 40 hour work week, and various other reforms.

    So, Sanders is a socialist inasmuch as Teddy Roosevelt or FDR were socialists. He believes in government investment into the economy, and use of tax revenue for infrastructure spending and social services spending. He is not a Socialist, as in Karl Marx, because he does not advocate for government control of the means of production.

  108. Samuel Jennings says:

    What measures? The total cost of the program for tuition-free college is $75bn a year, a cost dwarfed my many government expenditures and fully offset by proposed taxes.

    Further, criticizing Sanders for pushing for a plan that both Clinton and Obama supported but were unable to push through seems hypocritical, but if you take it as criticism that he isn’t realistic enough, well, I’ll just state that sometimes it’s hard to get meaningful reform, and we probably shouldn’t elect people that roll over and give up so easily. Good things are worth fighting for, and Sanders’ healthcare plan would save our country gobs of money and extend healthcare to all without relying on mandating people to purchase health insurance from predatory insurance companies.

  109. MaryLF says:

    He advocates giving free college tuition to everyone, which by every measure I’ve seen is unworkable, because apparently he hasn’t thought about it much beyond thinking it would be a good idea. Sec. Clinton pushed for health care as hard as she could when she was a First Lady and couldn’t get enough support for it. President Obama had to revise his views when he actually became president and had to make it work. He chose to get health care for as many as he could and give others a base to build on, rather than hold out for the perfect plan and lose, giving us another decade without any change.

  110. MaryLF says:

    If they had wanted to run Clinton uncontested they could have. Sanders is not a Democrat- they gave him permission to run as one. Part of the deal was he was supposed to contribute to down ticket Democrats and he has yet to contribute a cent and refuses to say if he will help even if he is the nominee. They still haven’t kicked him out so I don’t see “they want Hillary crowned’ as much of an argument. You seem to think that planning and working for the future is a bad thing. I wonder why over the last 25+ years in government Sanders hasn’t build some kind of infrastructure to support him. He doesn’t seem to have many friends at work. Sanders’ ill planned campaign is for me evidence of more executive ability. He can’t say he didn’t know how the process works – he’s been part of the process for a long time. He can’t say the Democrats changed the rules; the rules have been the same since the 70s and his campaign manager helped design them. The only one who hasn’t help up his part of the bargain is him.

  111. MaryLF says:

    That’s fine, as an independent vote for whomever you like. The Democrats didn’t invite him in. He knew the process when he asked to run as one. His campaign manager actually helped design the super-delegate system, so no one can say he was fooled. He cnose to run as a Democrat and part of that agreement was that he would contribute funds to down ticket Democrats. He has not given one cent to anyone but himself. Still, the Democrats have not booted him out. He wanted to run so he could use their fundraising and infrastructure. If that’s no longer working for him he doesn’t have to continue running as a Democrat. Don’t vote if it pleases you not to,. Then nobody has to pay attention to you. The Democratic Party won’t get any closer to your idealized view of it and the GOP won’t get any saner, and just may get crazier. What astounds me is that this hatred is directed toward the party that brought us Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the ACA, two liberal women on the Supreme Court, the end of DADT, the end of DOMA, the continuing effort to close Guantanamo, the Children’s CHIP program, the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay act, and so much more. Trump or Cruz and all of the other psychopaths get a pass, and you try to hurt and destroy the only party who is working for the good of people because a candidate is not exactly what you want or a program isn’t exactly what you want it to be. Maybe you are in a position to ride out whatever storm would be unleashed if the GOP wins the presidency. Repeal of Roe v. Wade, repeal of the ACA throwing millions of people off insurance, fracking drill, and wars all over the place, More voter suppression, There are other citizens who will not be: black people, Latino people, women, children, gay people, immigrants, Muslims, people on Social security; they will all be far more at risk. But by all means, apply your purity test and try to drive out all the ‘impure’. That’s exactly what the Tea Party did to the Republicans for exactly the same reasons and look how well that’s turning out for them.

  112. MaryLF says:

    Caucuses generally have much lower turnout. The state that he won contain far fewer people than the states she won and they are also far less diverse. She’s winning right now. Sanders could remember who the real opponents are – the GOP.

  113. MaryLF says:

    One delegate reported her young son answering the phone at 10:00pm to hear abuse on the other end. Sanders stokes the anger. You can’t govern out of anger.

  114. manderso says:

    The take my toys and go home crowd.

  115. manderso says:

    A clear thinking Bernie for sure.

  116. manderso says:

    The benie is still way, way, behind in actual votes, but those don’t count anymore? He’s already got 46% of the delegates with only 42% of the vote, the socialist way, all the way.

  117. manderso says:

    Then don’t send them.

  118. manderso says:

    Why bother with losers. Have a nice day boys.

  119. DoILookAmused2u ? says:

    You should tell the Trump supporters sending death threats to GOP delegates.

  120. Old Painty-Can Ned says:

    Blah, blah, blah. Words don’t matter, votes do. That all sounds well and good, but he still voted for the bill. He has to live with the repercussions just like everybody else does. He doesn’t get a pass just because he spoke out against it.

  121. Old Painty-Can Ned says:

    Giving people the right to sue in no way gives them a right to recovery. The gun manufacturers aren’t getting the same protection every other industry gets, they are getting protection from any and all liability regarding the manufacture and sale of firearms.

    NOBODY IS ADVOCATING LIABILITY FOR LEGAL SALES. I don’t think you understand this issue. The legislation Bernie voted for gave immunity from civil liability to manufacturers and gun sellers in all cases, even if they knowingly sold guns to criminals, were negligent in selling to straw purchasers, etc. Nobody is saying that legal gun sales should entail liability.

    This is an immunity that no other industry gets. Manufacturers are held liable in most industries if their negligence in marketing or selling a product creates an unreasonable risk of harm. There is nothing brave about granting gun sellers and manufacturers immunity from civil liability.

    The fact that such things incur criminal liability and yet are shielded from civil liability shows you exactly how ridiculous it is that these sellers and manufacturers are granted immunity from civil suit. Voting for that isn’t courage, it’s bending to the will of industry in your state.

  122. Toni Seger says:

    True progressives release their tax returns.

  123. splashy79 says:

    This is really bad. Bullying people into voting the way you want them to?

    That’s why caucuses are so awful. Bunch of bullies harassing others into doing what they want, very undemocratic.

  124. Mr_Liberal says:

    “And I don’t need your arrogant condescension..”

    While it might be true that you don’t need it, it is more-than-true that you’ve earned it.

  125. Quincy J Rowe says:

    You fucking Berniebots are a fucking joke. What you fucking morons should be doing is advising “Mr. White bread Independent running as a Democrat Bernie Sanders” to improve his outreach to minorities. You don’t win general elections with just only white people voting for you. Ask McCain and Romney how that worked out for them!

  126. Toni Seger says:

    I agree.

  127. Toni Seger says:

    “Bernie Sanders has run an above-board campaign from the get-go…” He hasn’t released his taxes whereas Hillary Clinton has released an entire decade of taxes. She’s not hiding anything, he is.

  128. Everybodhi says:

    I like to refer to him as Turdblossom, it gives the kids something to google.

  129. alternator66 says:

    America was built upon capitalism and the desire for vibrant economic growth (not simply economic equality) and will never embrace European style socialism, which is simply not in our DNA.

    The Democratic Party has always been a relatively centrist/center-left populist party which advocated for reforms of the capitalist system (“save capitalism from itself”) and things like a safety net, unions, fair trade deals, civil rights, etc – while still viewing capitalism as the main engine of economic growth and advancement.

    FDR’s military machine (which saved Europe) was powered by American capitalism. FDR was no anti-war lefty, nor was Truman, who dropped the bomb on Japan to end WWII, and favored an interventionist foreign policy (the Truman Doctrine, which is in many ways the basis for our modern foreign policy).

    HRC’s views are more in the tradition of these mainstream Democratic values, whereas Bernie is much more to the left.

  130. Samuel Jennings says:

    Nice try, bud, but socialism, as in Karl Marx socialism that you are alluding to, has as its central platform government control of the means of production. Bernie Sanders does not advocate that, and has never pushed legislation to that effect, because it doesn’t work.

    What he does advocate is reform to our college system (needed), universal healthcare (Something Sec. Clinton used to push before she started getting phat checks from insurance and pharma lobbyists), and infrastructure spending.

    If Bernie Sanders is comparable to any previous President, he is comparable to FDR. If he’s a socialist, and you hate socialism, then you’re gonna have a hard time without social security, bucko.

  131. alternator66 says:

    Oh, I see, so you enjoy the benefits of property rights/capitalism while voting for a socialist. If you’re such a good comrade, you should donate your money and home to the government at once.

  132. alternator66 says:

    I also wish Bernie would tell us why he is running for the nomination of a party that (should he win the nomination) will have to raise up to 1 billion (much from big donors, wall street, the rich) to run a general election, when he claims that such money is evil. Will Bernie tell us now that he rejects such money, and will run a general election with small donations ?

  133. alternator66 says:

    It’s the typical Alinskyite tactics of the left which have become that much worse with the Sanders campaign. Socialism can never be democratic, as evidenced by their behavior, which is all about bullying, cheating, stalking, etc. If not for the caucuses (where turnout is low and dominated by activist bullies) Sanders would’ve been done a long time ago.

  134. alternator66 says:

    A political party is a private organization that consists of 3 main elements: the voters registered with that party, the party loyalists/insiders (i.e. delegates) and the party elders/establishment (i.e. superdelegates). All 3 of these elements have a voice in determining the nominee of their party.

    In the Democratic Party the superdelegates are free agents that judge the overall race and quality of the candidates as they alone see it, and are not tied to any state results – that would make no sense – that is what the pledged delegates are for. And it is Clinton who is winning the popular vote by 2.5 million votes, with a racially diverse coalition – whereas Sanders is basically winning white leftists and mainly in the caucuses (which are low turnout and fairly undemocratic, nobody should have to discuss their vote or be bullied by anyone).

    Sanders is not even a Democrat, so it’s amazing he would think the superdelegates (who are party elders) would choose him over someone like HRC who has been a loyal Dem for over 40 years now.

  135. MaryLF says:

    Where did you get the idea I was angry about having a primary?

  136. Samuel Jennings says:

    Nah, I’d rather not, and I don’t have to, since WA is an open caucus state for the Dems and an open primary state for the Reps. Also, yes, they are extra-legal. Do your history reading – our countries’ political system was not designed with political parties in mind. That’s why they have so much power, and why third parties cannot arise – because there was no system put into place to check their power.

  137. MaryLF says:

    They are not extra legal anything. If you want to have a vote in either a GOP or a Democratic primary, join the party. You don’t have to love them or support them in any other way, join one of the other parties that are more aligned with their views.

  138. MaryLF says:

    They didn’t vote for her – 15% of them only voted for Sanders and did not vote any down ticket candidates.

  139. poobah69 says:

    I read about this and posted it so others could find out about it. It’s really sad how Sanders supporters and campain workers are conducting their campaign. It doesn’t reflect well on Sanders or his campaign.

  140. Samuel Jennings says:

    No, Bernie supports gun manufacturers being held to the same standard as other manufacturers. I used to work in auto sales. If someone walked up to me and asked me which vehicle I sold would best be capable of driving through a crowd of people, I would not sell him a vehicle. However, if he bought one from me, without telling me his intentions, and then three days later drove it through a crowded mall, killing a dozen people, am I liable? Should I be held liable?

    Where does the burden of crime prevention lie? Should we interview every person wishing to purchase a firearm for three days before allowing them to do so? Should we, as Sec. Clinton suggests, hold gun dealers and manufacturers liable if someone buys a weapon legally, without giving any indication of harm, and then uses it to commit a crime?

    In this position, it is Sec. Clinton’s position which is extreme, radical, unworkable, and ludicrous. It is entirely proper to shield a manufacturer of any product from civil liability from the fallout of crimes in which they were not complicit. Current law allows for prosecution of a manufacturer or reseller if they would have reasonably known that the individual buying those guns planned to use them to kill innocents, rather than for hunting, personal protection, or the other legal and responsible uses of firearms.

    It is laudable to be a moderate in this instance. It is brave, and it is not politically expedient. It shows that he has character, and that he thinks about his politics before speaking, and that he will not simply say whatever will sound best in a soundbite on CNN.

  141. Samuel Jennings says:

    Bernie voted for the bill in spite of those provisions, because of other provisions within it – specifically, the protections against domestic violence. Here, educate yourself – here’s him speaking against the tough-on-crime portions:

  142. Old Painty-Can Ned says:

    OK, but Bernie supports granting immunity to manufacturers and gun sellers in all instances, regardless of the negligence or even bad intent of the seller or manufacturer in ensuring guns aren’t used in crime. Blanket civil immunity for gun manufacturers and gun sellers is not a sensible policy, it’s giving victims of shady sellers and indifferent manufacturers no legal recourse. It favors corporations over people, something Bernie supposedly hates.

  143. Old Painty-Can Ned says:

    2009 was the correct progressive year for gay marriage, then? Bernie must not be a progressive either, considering his vote for the crime bill.

  144. Samuel Jennings says:

    Because the two parties are extralegal cartels that have a monopoly on power, and by holding a closed primary or caucus, you exclude people that dislike the two-party system from participating. That’s why.

  145. Samuel Jennings says:

    His record on guns is *REASONABLE.* It takes incredible leaps of logic to suggest that gun manufacturers should be sued if anyone uses a product that functions as intended and was legally and responsibly sold in a crime. It makes no more sense than it would to sue Boeing over 9/11 for supplying the planes, or to sue Ford if an angry jerk uses an F-150 to run over a crowd of children.

    It is unrealistic and idiotic to think that such a policy would be constitutional or in line with what is right. Such a policy would be tantamount to banning the sale or manufacture of all firearms in our country, and would be a waste of time and money.

    Senator Sanders is brave and intelligent enough to recognize that and speak out to that effect. Meanwhile, Hillary decides to score some cheap political points and call him weak on guns. Disgusting.

  146. Samuel Jennings says:

    True progressives don’t wait until 2013 to come out for gay marriage. True progressives don’t vote for the War in Iraq. True progressives don’t axe welfare. True progressives don’t endorse tough-on-crime policies that have ruined hundreds of thousands of disadvantaged lives in our country.

    True progressives, neither Hillary nor Bill are.

  147. Samuel Jennings says:

    And I don’t need your arrogant condescension. Not that it should matter to an ageist such as yourself, but I’m not some teenager living in a basement – I pull down a white-collar salary and pay my taxes, I own a house, I’m married, and I’m about to turn 30.

    It is not self-serving to want a legitimate choice in a primary election, to avoid a coronation of a candidate that has been pre-determined before the first vote is cast. It is not self-serving to want a candidate to represent us that does not hold $350,000 per plate lunches to raise funds, who does not admittedly conduct secret $225,000 speeches to large banks and refuse to reveal their contents. It is not self-serving to want a candidate who has principles, who has beliefs, and who does not simply lust for power. It is not self-serving to want Bernie Sanders, nor is it sexist, racist, naive, idiotic, or any other insult you might be thinking up.

    I’ll put this to you as well. Hillary has done quite a bit of work behind the scenes to set this nomination process up. She’s been working on it since 2008. Her and Bill are powerful political forces within the Democratic party, and that is why we saw only two real challengers to her in the nomination – few dared to buck the slew of political favors and fundraising money that Bill and Hillary have thrown their way to throw their hat in. That’s why we saw no Harry Reids, no John Kerrys, no Joe Bidens, no other giants of the Democratic Party seeking the nomination, because she had conspired to politically discourage anyone else with influence from running.

    Well, it didn’t work. By focusing too hard on behind-the-scenes politics, the Democratic Party has ignored the lessons of 2008. The people want change, they want hope. They don’t want politics as usual. They don’t want behind-the-scenes dealmaking. They don’t want politicians that sell them out for fundraising dollars. They want someone with principles and honesty that will tell the truth whether it is popular or not, and whether you like it or not, that was not Hillary Clinton in 2008, when we all voted for Obama, and it is not Hillary Clinton in 2016.

    My knowledge of the system is quite sufficient, thank you. Independent voters and third-party voters are marginalized as “throwing their votes away,” leading to a duopoly and incessant partisan politics with no incentive to compromise. Just look at the hate thrown Nader’s way after he “cost” the Democrats the 2000 election. To be sure, Democrats are better than Republicans in this, but both parties are parts of the problem, and we will never have a healthy political system while we have a two-party system.

    If, to use your own words, you are too young and naive to realize that, then I pity you. I pity this country as well, for falling into the pockets of big business and failing to unite behind an honest man rather than a dishonest politician whose time is “due” and has “earned the Presidency.”

  148. Toni Seger says:

    I don’t need your permission to vote for Hillary Clinton or your self-serving narrative or the preconditions you’ve decided other people have to fulfill. Your knowledge of our system is next to non-existent because you opted out of it a long time ago and never bothered to learn anything about it. As you said, your vote doesn’t count and, BTW, your ‘protest’ vote is meaningless. You’re obviously very young or you would know that.

  149. Samuel Jennings says:

    Really? Honest? The person who changes her positions on a constant basis and “evolves” to suit the times is more honest than the person that has maintained the same political philosophy since the 1960’s? OK, sure. I guess if that’s the definition of “honesty” then EVERY politician is honest, because Hillary is just another politician. She is little different than any other member of Congress that simply picks positions based on what will earn them political votes rather than going from her heart.

    As to whether I’m trying to blackmail you, I’m not. Feel free to vote for Hillary. As an Independent, however, I feel no loyalty to the Democratic party. I feel that Sanders has been shortchanged throughout the entire process, and I feel that Hillary and her supporters have demeaned my candidate and myself, and have done nothing to earn my vote, so I will not be voting for her. Again, the Democrats should not feel entitled to my vote, and I will not simply give it to them because the alternative is worse.

    If you want to avoid this type of sentiment, then advocate for instituting a national primary process, fair to all candidates and states, that incorporates a runoff election and elects candidates for federal office by straight popular vote. Otherwise, it’s just the two-party duopoly running things and rigging the system for their own benefit. I don’t want to participate any longer and will not participate any longer in the current system without preconditions, and if the Democrats fail to nominate a candidate that I can in good conscience vote for, I will not vote Democrat.

    My state, Washington, last voted Republican almost a century ago, and as a result I feel that my vote is worth nothing anyways. Whether I vote for Hillary or Bernie, it will not change the fact that my state will go blue. My vote, however, IS worth something as a protest vote against a nomination process I feel to be profoundly unfair.

  150. Toni Seger says:

    I’m on a watch list? Is that supposed to be intimidation? True progressives don’t engage in intimidation tactics.

  151. Toni Seger says:

    Sanders sexism is more than evident. As for being the most liberal, his record on guns isn’t at all liberal. re: your pathetic joke about Kissenger. Did you know that Ruth Bader Ginsburg liked Antonin Scalia? Should we throw her off SCOTUS?

  152. Toni Seger says:

    I’m voting for the honest politician, Hillary Clinton. As for your intended blackmail, 1/4 to 1/3 of the Republican electorate is horrified by Trump/Cruz and ready to vote for Hillary, so if you’re determined to throw your vote away, no one can stop you.

  153. Sean Lamont says:

    The thing that get me is that some of you think that these actions are okay. This is a form on online bullying and should not be tolerated. He (BS) needs to condemn these actions ASAP, but he won’t because that is the guy he is.

  154. Samuel Jennings says:

    You’re right – can’t forget that I’m a racist, sexist pig.

  155. Samuel Jennings says:

    I don’t think that Bernie has to “disown” Thayer. A few things here:

    1) Hillary is only winning the popular vote when you look at the raw totals. When you realize that caucus states don’t actually report raw vote totals, but rather report precinct delegates, then it skews the result. There is no number that exists that accurately measures on-the-ground voting. So, stating that Hillary is winning the popular vote just means that she’s won the popular vote in Primary states, which, while true, is also mostly irrelevant, as Sanders wins caucus states by large margins.

    For instance, my state, Washington, shows a total “voter turnout” of 26,299. I can guarantee you that the actual voter turnout number is at least an order of magnitude higher than that – my precinct had about 30 people turn out, but only had three delegates.

    2) As to the delegate race, the numbers are very close, and currently are heavily weighted towards the voters of the Deep South. We’re seeing the reverse trend recently – Hillary was quite strong out of the gate with the Southerners who haven’t managed to win their states for the Democrats in decades, but hasn’t done so well in actual Democratic states. How many state contests has she lost in a row now? Seven?

    I’ll also point out that many of these caucus states haven’t even allocated their entire delegate totals. For instance, my state, Washington, went for Bernie by about 50 points. We have 101 delegates. However, only 34 of those delegates are allocated at the precinct level. The rest are determined at county and legislative district caucuses, where the delegates elected in the first round caucus. Bernie stands to pick up quite a few delegates here, as Hillary is probably going to slip below 15% in many LD’s and counties.

    3) As to how it’s been weighted, there’s a few ways I’ll point this out.
    *The Democratic establishment has lined up, almost to a man, behind Hillary, and has used what PR powers they have to marginalize Sanders. He has received comparatively little media attention and until recently has been dismissed as a fringe candidate. Bernie’s supporters have been dismissed as sexist, as racist, as unrealistic, as foolish, as young and naive, and everything else you can think of that could sound patronizing and insulting.

    *The existence of superdelegates allows Hillary to amass 400+ delegates before the first actual voter has submitted their ballot, adding to the illusion of her inevitability and skewing fundraising and voter turnout, as people that don’t like her become discouraged.

    *Election officials in many areas have been comically underprepared for voter turnout, skewing the results towards early voters and those that can afford to take an entire day off – groups which skew heavily Clinton, as they are composed mainly of the elderly.

  156. Samuel Jennings says:

    Right, and it is entirely appropriate to create a means for people to reach out to their elected officials and let them know their opinions. Again, I have seen no indication that the campaign was posting home addresses and home phone numbers.

  157. Sean Lamont says:

    Do you Sam! Do You!!!!

  158. Mary Goodson says:

    AND, now can we “steal” delegates when the states involved overwhelmingly elected Mr. Sanders as their choice while the Superdelegate says s/he will vote for Clinton no matter what? This is RECLAIMING a superdelegate, not “stealing” one!

  159. Mary Goodson says:

    The arrows are crossed BEHIND the animal’s head. The animal looks like a DOG to me, not a donkey. You’re REALLY stretching reality with your interpretation of the symbolism.

  160. Lady Willpower says:

    It’s not a “dynasty.” Hillary Clinton had her own political career that she earned by herself. If the presidency were passed down to Chelsea Clinton through succession, then you might have a point. Right now, you don’t.

  161. matthewcoons says:

    Interesting that the first screenshot of Thayer’s original tweet doesn’t have the #FeeltheBern hashtag but the second one does.

  162. aldo plepi says:

    How is the establishment colluding? She’s winning the delegate race AND the raw vote race.

    And I will believe the “obviously doesn’t support personal attacks” when he owns up to it, starting with disowning this thayer attack dog

  163. aldo plepi says:

    I have no idea why you would think MaryLF would be angry that there are primaries. Clinton is winning the delegate race AND the raw vote race. Bernie is finished.

  164. cadbury51 says:

    Actually, the article says the campaign created a portal for this, but later shut it down.

  165. cadbury51 says:

    I wish Bernie would release his full tax returns for the last several years, as Hillary has already done. He claims his wife Jane does them. Really? If his finances are so simple and straightforward, what is taking so long?

  166. cadbury51 says:

    Of course! It’s another Clinton conspiracy. Your thought process fits in perfectly with what the Sanders people do. The campaign stole data when there was a breach in the DNC’s database and then somehow tried to blame Hillary and the DNC; they constantly accuse Hillary of corruption and then ask HER for an apology when she tries to defend herself; they amazingly accused Hillary’s people of messing with polling places in AZ, even though they knew full well that AZ, where she was leading by a huge margin anyway, is run by the GOP. Jeff Weaver and Tad Devine, Bernie’s campaign gurus, have been pushing him to go more negative for months. They are masters of innuendo who can best be described as walking slime buckets.

  167. Samuel Jennings says:

    Eat me. I’ll never vote HRC. If you’re too stupid to figure out why, then that’s your problem.

  168. Samuel Jennings says:

    No one said that calling their homes was fine, and I don’t think that many people are doing that. What these people ARE saying is that the calls coming into their offices are “harassment.”

    Yeah, OK, sure, that’s harassment. If you can’t deal with anger at going against your constituents, get the hell out of politics.

  169. Samuel Jennings says:

    If someone represents me, it is my right as an American citizen to call them at their office to express my views. Complaining about that is un-democratic and childish.

  170. Samuel Jennings says:

    How dare you call me a GOP troll? How small-minded can you be? People like you have driven me to commit to NEVER vote for Hillary. I’ve voted Dem in 2008 and 2012, straight down the ballot, but I’ve been called a Republican for bringing up legitimate issues with her, a sexist for not voting for a woman, and an unrealistic idiot for believing that social movements can help fix society.

    No more. Nominate a candidate that actually gives a shit about the people, or nominate the party establishment candidate that gives $200k+ speeches to big banks without revealing the contents, whose fundraisers run up to $350k a plate, and who marginalizes her opposition. I’m voting for the same person in the general election – Bernie Sanders. If that means that we get Cruz or Trump as a President, well, that’s your fault for ignoring the polls right in front of your face showing you who the stronger candidate was.

    Maybe next time you Clintonbots will actually extend a fucking olive branch rather than demean, disqualify, disparage, and insult your opposition.

  171. Samuel Jennings says:

    Marginalizing legitimate issues as “right wing talking points” ignores the serious problems with your candidate and is a classic example of the “poisoning the well” style of logical fallacy.

  172. Voodoo Chile says:

    Don’t forget that Hillary surrogates and supporters also called you a racist, and not just a sexist.

  173. Samuel Jennings says:

    If you’re a public official casting a vote in a nominating process against the will of your constituents, what you are doing deserves and calls for public outcry. Complaining about that outcry is stupidity.

  174. Voodoo Chile says:

    You mean Democrats and democrats (like you) who are angry that there is even a primary? That we couldn’t just let a member of a political dynasty just have the nomination because it’s her turn?

  175. Samuel Jennings says:

    Because, de facto, the Democratic and Republican parties have a nearly impenetrable stranglehold on power, and us Independents are left with the choice of betraying our convictions and joining parties which are part of the problem, or not participating in a nomination system that in effect takes the place of a national primary system present in almost all democracies.

  176. Samuel Jennings says:

    The game is rigged, because no Independent has had a chance at winning a national election since Teddy Roosevelt. He could never run as an Independent, because he would not have had any credibility, because the two parties collude to fix the electoral process so that any ideas that do not fit their duopoly are ignored and marginalized.

  177. Samuel Jennings says:

    Public officials are public figures. Giving out home addresses isn’t kosher but I have not seen any indication that the campaign was behind that. Asking for people to make their voices heard to their elected officials – this is only proper in a democracy, and complaining about public outcry when every elected official in a state that he won by 50 points has declared for Hillary is simply idiotic.

  178. Samuel Jennings says:

    Well, I could never support Hillary, after being slandered as a BernieBot from the beginning. It’s patronizing, sexist, and insulting as all hell. Bernie Sanders has run an above-board campaign from the get-go, and superdelegates complaining about public outcry are barking up the wrong tree. He obviously doesn’t support personal attacks on people, but when you’ve got this much anger at being ignored for so long, at being lied to for so long, and it looks like the party establishment is literally colluding to tip the nomination away from the candidate favored by your state… well, anger is to be expected.

    Perhaps they should listen to their constituents. They are, after all, elected officials whose duty is to represent their people.

  179. Samuel Jennings says:

    Well, if you don’t want to nominate the honest politician, I don’t have to vote Democrat. Slandering Bernie as a sexist is not going to make me vote for your business-as-usual politician. I’d rather vote for an honest, consistent man for the job, rather than someone whose positions “evolve” every 15 minutes to suit the times.

  180. Samuel Jennings says:

    I guess visiting a sister city as a mayor is a “honeymoon.”

  181. William Mann says:

    There’s only one problem with your conspiracy theory. Karl Rove. You know, the reverse logic character assassinator against all things Democrat and all candidates Democratic, who helped Ronald Reagan cheat Jimmy Carter; who helped GW cheat Al Gore; who helped GW cheat John Kerry; who nearly helped Mutt Rimjob (aka Mitt Romney) cheat Barack Obama and who is now helping Bernie Sanders cheat Hillary Clinton. Don’t look now, your reverse logic is showing.

  182. SonofLiberty7 says:

    You call the law bs? Figures.
    As to my providing evidence? Evidence is for a court of law, not the court of public opinion. Here, in this forum, my opinion is just as good as yours. Evidence is the FBI’s job. I hope she’s innocent. I don’t wish that much jail time on anyone.

  183. djchefron says:

    That’s all well and good but at no time did you provider any evidence that she committed any crime in fact, U.S. Code § 192 she did appear for 11 hours before the house committee and answered their questions. So since you got that wrong I have no further need to even look at the rest of this bovine excrement

  184. SonofLiberty7 says:

    I am a member of my party, even paid dues. I already outlined that caveat with the qualifier of closed primary.
    You still haven’t addressed the issue of how a delegate is not anonymous to the primary voter when his or her name is not on the ballot.
    Its a bait and switch.

  185. MaryLF says:

    It’s not anonymous. It’s registered Republicans and Democrats. No one is disadvantaged. If you want to vote for the delegates, register with the party. If you don’t want to join the party, why should you be able to decide their delegates?

  186. SonofLiberty7 says:

    I like that idea. I’ll have to look into how Illinois does it. As to caucus, I don’t know. I’ve never lived in a state with a caucus system. I’ll have to do some homework on that before I can give an informed answer.

  187. SonofLiberty7 says:

    The law knows no wings. So, here you go.
    44 U.S. Code § 3101

    2 U.S. Code § 192

    18 U.S. Code § 1519

    18 U.S. Code § 1924

    18 U.S. Code § 798
    Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information….Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

  188. SonofLiberty7 says:

    Closed primaries allow only registered party members to vote. Why not vote for the delegate on the primary ballot? I think that’s fair, and also honest. The way we’ve been doing it amounts to a bait and switch. Why should anonymous people get to pick the party’s candidate? It disenfranchises the voters from the primary process, and presents choices hand-picked by the elites of both parties. How is that democratic?

  189. SonofLiberty7 says:

    Mother Theresa was the most admired woman in the world. Although there was the time Hillary survived that gunfire…oh wait, she lied about that.

  190. David Barkin says:

    Oh please, this guy could be in the pay of Ms. Clinton for all you know. He’s obviously on the fringe of politics, and the only thing important to him is his ego. Clearly, if someone wanted to harm the Sanders campaign, this is Exactly what they would do.

  191. MaryLF says:

    I went to his campaign website and they do not have any way of communicating with campaign headquarters. Maybe you could post the link to his facebook page with an explanation, or use twitter. Someone must be watching those.

  192. MaryLF says:

    He did offer the references, at the bottom of the article. The tweets mentioned Bernie by name. I don’t really know who this guy is and whether he supports Trump or Sanders. Where is Sanders’ staff that they are not on top of this? He should be calling this guy out and shaming him whether he’s a Sanders supporter or not. I would be outraged at someone using my campaign for this kind of stuff. Sanders is either clueless or doesn’t care.

  193. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    I did read them. Now my question is how the f**k you arrived at that conclusion from those articles?

  194. Democratinny says:

    Spot on. It is only because Sanders is losing, that this is an issue. If he was ahead, it would be a non-story. It would be “this is what a people want.” His supporters are so transparent in their disdain for the Democratic Party; yet, the party allowed him to “use them” for his benefit. I can only think that a majority of these anti-Hillary, anti-Dem people are GOP trolls in disguise.

  195. cleos_mom says:

    You knew exactly what you were doing when you addressed adult posters as “girl”. Just another example of sexists being equal-opportunity asshats.

  196. cleos_mom says:

    That’s getting obnoxious on both sides. Up to now I’d thought better of Ari and embarcadero has made it a full-blown habit. Not long ago they would have been addressing AA posters they didn’t agree with as “boy.”

  197. cleos_mom says:

    But are you master of your domain?

  198. cleos_mom says:

    Honeychile, you’re barking up the wrong tree.

  199. cleos_mom says:

    “Fanatics” pretty much covers it.

  200. cleos_mom says:

    Well, that leaves pretty much nothing.

  201. finestpundit says:

    Here’s the links that Bernie supporters in Wisconsin voted for extreme right wing Justice Rebecca Bradley who is endorsed by the NRA!!! But the question is are you going to read these links????

  202. finestpundit says:

    Muffin??? Okay, foot in mouth again! LOL!

  203. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    Link please.

  204. finestpundit says:

    Bernie wants a revolution because he is for increasing GUN sales for the NRA!!!

  205. Mindy Zumba says:

    …wish bernie would show us the text of the speaches he gave during the Cold War in Cuba and the USSR (he and Jill’s honeymoon destination) wherein he criticized the Kennedy Administration while missles were aimed at the United States….

    Vote Hillary Rodham Clinton 2016, 2020

  206. poobah69 says:

    Actually Sanders is totally responsible for his campaign and their antics. He is their leader and when leading the buck stops at the top.
    I could never support him.

  207. MaryLF says:

    The NYDN wasn’t ambush journalism. They asked him rather obvious questions to which he was unable to respond. I bet the interviewers were shocked at the quality of his answers. Chris Matthews is another kettle of fish. He interrupts and badgers everybody. The media have hardly challenged Sanders at all. If Clinton had given an interview like that she would have been crucified and rightly so.

  208. MaryLF says:

    Contacting through their offices is one thing. Calling their homes and insulting and threatening them is another. “Reaching out to reconsider” is fine. Harassment is not and I think you’re smart enough to know the difference.

  209. MaryLF says:

    The party supports a person who has worked for the Democratic platform for many, many years (and by the way, that platform has the same planks as the ones Sanders is running on). Clinton has give $34million dollars this election cycle to get down ticket Democrats elected. She understand that if she becomes president she will need to have every Democrat possible in Congress if she wants to get anything done. I assumed Sanders understood the way delegates work and how important it is to turn Congress blue, but apparently he doesn’t. He has always refused to join the Democratic party, choosing to remain independent. It has also prevented him from actually accomplishing much in Congress over his many years there. That’s fine. He asked to run as a Democrat because he has no structure to support him. He’s in it for the media and the money. His campaign manager helped design the super delegate structure for the Democrats. Surely he understands their function even if Sanders doesn’t so his talk about this being undemocratic is pretty rich. However now they are losing they want the leaders of the party to dump the candidate who has supported them and their platform (same as Sanders, remember), the candidate who is winning by every metric, and support the person who has refused to support them. It’s Sanders who wants to corrupt and overthrow the democratic process because he can’t win otherwise.

  210. MaryLF says:

    She’s taken abuse like yours for 25 years and she’s still standing and the most admired woman in the world. She stood up to 11 hours of stupid Bengahzi hearings without once losing her cool.

  211. MaryLF says:

    Sanders is not responsible for their behavior, but he is responsible for calling it out and condemning it. He is also responsible for the way his campaign is run and it is a shambles. His campaign manager and surrogates have done a terrible job.

  212. MaryLF says:

    The delegates are elected at party conventions. You need to be a member of the party to vote. I think this is fair. Why should people who have no connection to the party be able to vote on its platform or its delegates?

  213. MaryLF says:

    These tactics are vile, but Sanders isn’t worse than Trump, and despite everything he’ll have my vote if he’s the nominee. I hope he isn’t, but I’m still saying it. One concern that has grown in my mind about him is that he seems to completely lack control over his campaign. Of course he’s not responsible for this guy’s actions, but his campaign has lacked discipline in all areas; problems with accurately reporting funding, using people’ images without their permission, claiming endorsements they didn’t have, disguising themselves as union people to infiltrate a closed site. I have thought the problem is he feels he’s above such things and is oblivious to them, but it’s getting harder to give him the benefit of that doubt. Now I’m beginning to think he wants to win so badly that he’s deliberately turning a blind eye and refusing to call this stuff out. He is excused for this by his devotees, who would be apoplectic with rage if the Clinton campaign had done anyone of these things, but Sanders gets a pass and is still pure. The media have also let this stuff go by while again, if it had been Clinton, it would have been first page stuff for weeks.

  214. MaryLF says:

    Interesting that he thinks the Democrats are the threat to democracy rather than Cruz, Trump and the Republicans.

  215. poobah69 says:

    And now he’s using the confidential DNC files on delegates to harass and stalk them along with twitter supporters of HIllary.

    I hope the DNC goes after him. He also doesn’t support down ticket Democrats, but makes sure his family pulls huge salaries from his campaign. I wonder about his wife’s issues that are now going to go to court after she bankrupted Burlington College.

  216. poobah69 says:

    This is how Bernie plans to win. I’m disgusted by his dirty politics. He’s losing and losing it.




  217. poobah69 says:




  218. Democratinny says:

    Bernie Sanders must be aware of what his followers are doing by stalking, tormenting, and denigrating others. If his character is as pure as his supporters deem, he has a responsibility to address it. I’m sure he reads comments, articles, etc., he does not live in a vacuum. There is no excuse for the toxic rhetoric from his side. Freedom of speech is fine, but taking responsibility for what you say is also necessary.

  219. Voodoo Chile says:

    The most liberal political in the race and the most left-leaning demographic in America is neither sexist nor racist, despite what the Henry Kissenger wing of the party says.

  220. djchefron says:

    What corruption and please no right wing talking points

  221. djchefron says:

    In Illinois you vote for the delegates not the person. BTW do you support the caucus system?

  222. djchefron says:

    If the game is rigged why did he chose to run as a Democrat? I would think if your numbers are legion you people wouldn’t need the Democratic party and you would have your revolution all on your own

  223. poobah69 says:

    Well said. I’ve contacted the DNC over this stalking, harassing and giving out personal information they got from the DNC. Shame on Sanders and his trolls. Sanders is just like Trump only worse.

  224. Toni Seger says:

    Anyone who thinks they’re helping a candidate by harassing delegates is sadly mistaken. Anyone who thinks that super delegates supporting Hillary are, by definition, corrupt and deserve to be harassed are equally unhelpful. Super delegates are elected officials who have won their own campaigns and are very well versed in the process. They’re not bowling pins to be knocked down.

    Hillary Clinton has donated $34 million to the national party this season alone. In addition, she’s set up sharing programs with key states in order to support down ballot candidates. Bernie has donated nothing. Trashing Hillary’s part support as ‘buying support’ displays a true ignorance and disdain for party and process. Bernie has trashed Democrats for decades. Now, he wants their support, but he doesn’t want to do anything to win it. No POTUS gets elected alone or governs alone. The nominee is the Standard Bearer of the party. If he’s unwilling to fulfill this function, how can he think the party should support him?

    Are women turned off to Bernie? Is he sexist? Yes, to both and there’s ample evidence in both his history with essays about sex that are a total turn off, his dismissive manner which is incredibly patronizing, his assertion that Hillary (considered more than qualified by everyone), is somehow unqualified and his supporters, some of whom have been grossly abusive to women. It’s a very bad tactic and it’s hurting him a great deal.

  225. poobah69 says:

    Sanders is abusing the data he got from the DNC. Harassing delegates should be illegal. Giving our confidential information should be illegal. Sanders is disgusting and he won’t win.

  226. novenator says:

    You obviously don’t understand the nature of ambush journalism. Go check out how Chris Matthews constantly interrupted and badgered Bernie in a live MSNBC Town Hall in Michigan before their primary, then contrast that with how CM treated Clinton with softballs and glowing admiration when he interviewed her later on. Anyone can get stung by a bad interview, but if you’re basing everything on this, you’re deliberately being ignorant.

  227. first and last says:

    As soon as you people start to be challenged on anything you resort to trying to label them as sexist! It’s pathetic and isn’t fooling anyone outside of your echo chamber, in fact it only goes to show how fanatical you are and drives people away…..please keep it up

  228. first and last says:

    Oh muffin, you made a comment on the internet and people dared reply to it……THE SEXISM NEVER ENDS!!!!!

  229. first and last says:

    Funny and convenient how you left off the fact that they are just re-using HRC’s title. More top notch “journalism” right here pfffft.
    The game is rigged and people have finally had enough!

  230. Tom Barnes says:

    Actually, it demonstrates a complete understanding of how the Democratic Party works. The Party selects their favorite “business as usual” candidate and then works to ensure that candidate’s success to the exclusion of any other candidate without regard to the voters.

  231. PeteTheTooler says:

    What has *any* of this got to do with gender?

  232. PeteTheTooler says:

    I just want a president who’ll end mass surveillance. Clinton supports the *ILLEGAL* warrantless wiretapping of the entire phone and internet system by the NSA. She’s as right wing as you can get when it comes to civil liberties. No warrant, no spying – PERIOD.

  233. thismustbehell says:

    Just because a person represents someone doesn’t mean they have to put up with rudeness and harassment. If that were the case it would be harder than ever to get good people to run for office. There are always going to be pissed off people. One would hope they could manage to act like adults, not infants having a tantrum.

  234. SonofLiberty7 says:

    In colonial times, the people would tar and feather a corrupt politician. These jokers can’t even handle a little pressure? Maybe they should quit.
    Hell, I’ve worked jobs as a dispatcher where I would juggle two or three phone lines at the same time.

  235. SonofLiberty7 says:

    You are mistaking integrity for ignorance. We understand very well how the delegate process works. Any one with common sense would be pissed.
    If elected officials can’t handle their phones ringing, maybe they should try not pissing off the people they represent.
    Truly representative government is messy. Get used to it, because you’re going to see a lot more of it.

  236. SonofLiberty7 says:


  237. SonofLiberty7 says:

    Pointing out Hillary’s corruption is not sexist. Its a fair fight.
    She can’t hide behind her own skirt while fighting for the most powerful office in the world.
    Does that sound sexist to you? So sue me.

  238. SonofLiberty7 says:

    I cannot help but wonder if perhaps, for future presidential primaries, each state might consider legislation that requires both parties list on the primary ballot, not the name of the presidential candidate alone, but also the name of the delegate who is “pledging”, for lack of a weaker word, to support that candidate. After all, both parties tell us that we don’t elect the candidate, the delegates do. Since the real deciding factor is the degree of that delegate’s loyalty, the public should know their names, their character, everything out in public. No more back room deals, no more faceless persons shrouded in anonymity.
    While some would argue that political parties should be able to write their own rules, I agree — within the limits of the law. If government can use the Commerce Clause to micromanage your home, your business, and your healthcare — who are political parties to tell us their rules are not our business?
    One person, one vote. Its the American way.

  239. thismustbehell says:

    Your comment illustrates your complete ignorance of how the Democratic Party works. Hillary has been raising money for down-ballot Democratic candidates while Bernie was being an Independent. Well the pay-off to her hard work is pledged super-delegates. Bernie isn’t going to be the nominee so I guess you are your outraged immature pals will either not vote in the general or vote for Trump or Cruz. Calling elected officials dozens of times a day is not persuasion, it is harassment by any measure.

  240. finestpundit says:

    Thanks for saying this. Any time a Bernie Bot speaks I feel like I need to take a shower. They are soooo aggressive/ immature.

  241. finestpundit says:

    I did my research and Bernie is all over the map and unfocused (for example the New York Daily interview) and on top of this Bernie is developing a serious womens’ issue. He says all this misogynist stuff about Hillary and then on top of that 90% of his online trolls are guys stalking and bullying everyone.

    In the meantime, Wyoming was supposed to be a blow out for Bernie based on his demographic and it was a delegate tie….I really think he has turned off women and they are now turning on him. The worst thing is that he is running to the VATICAN … a socialist running to the church…I never heard of such a thing. Where’s the division of church and state. Yet he can’t speak to Jewish community at AIPAC about gaza… OH vey!!!

  242. Herima Anthony says:

    Per the website one of the questions asked was:
    A. The intent of the branding was to parody the famous “Clinton Hit List, this was a tongue–in–cheek attempt at parody which I thought would encourage resharing.

  243. Herima Anthony says:

    The same list is online via wikipedia – so I don’t see what the big deal is. The sources listed have all accessed it or added to it. It is publicly available information as it should be, or am I missing something here.,_2016

  244. finestpundit says:

    it is sexists stop stalking me.

  245. Herima Anthony says:

    Not! You obviously do not know the whole story. Please do some research and get back with us, and kill the sexism crap because that’s not going to work either, because he’s not sexist, and everyone knows it.

  246. Herima Anthony says:

    His campaign did not create the website or the superdelegate hit list, a supporter did. You know the young, dumb, and uninformed kids that live at home with their parents. So if you are going to discuss something why not discuss something of importance like this … or this

  247. finestpundit says:

    If you can’t even lead your supporters how are you going to lead congress. Bernie must tell these people to back off.

  248. finestpundit says:

    First Bernie says that a the most qualified candidate who happens to be a woman is unqualified and now Bernie Bros resorting to stalking??? I think Bernie needs to teach his supporters a lesson in feminism. This level of misogyny and aggression is heading to the dark side of Trump.

  249. Mango Chutney says:

    Please edit your website and remove the harassment aspect. I have written to one of my elected super-delegates in CA already. I argued why it is preferable to vote similarly to the voters in her area and the consequence of loosing a lot of support from myself and others. I intend to write to all those who represent my area. I am not going to tweet or broadcast my complaints to unelected delegates in other states. I personally think a well written letter or visit might be a better approach. No one likes to be harassed.

  250. Mango Chutney says:

    Maybe she was wrong.

  251. k8 says:

    I’m afraid your very sensible analysis is falling on deaf ears. Sadly, this genie was out of the bottle months ago. No one in the campaign made an effort to curb the hostility. So now a small number of real morons are doing more harm to Bernie;s campaign than 10 Daily News interviews. When people start posting from RW websites to attack, they impact the credibility of their candidate, and turn off many people coming into the process undecided. Devine and Weaver could have put the brakes on this, but they stupidly thought 30-year-old attacks would actually work this time. Bernie should have booted them both long ago.

  252. k8 says:

    You obviously didn’t read his interview with the Daily News if you think there is no better candidate.

  253. ldasteelworker says:

    Where is the investigative journalism on just how Clinton got those Super Delegates pledged to her before even a single primary vote was cast by the electorate?

    What Democrats need to understand is, before a single Democrat’s vote was cast, how this primary process with respect to Super Delegates has been usurped by the deal made between the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the “leadership” in 33 individual state Democratic parties and the Hillary Clinton campaign through a joint fundraising entity called The Hillary Victory Fund…

    I am outraged that my vote as a Democrat has been diminished by this joint fundraising deal!

    See: [ ] and [ ]


    Whoever holds the purse strings in this twisted joint fundraising process assures that most of the Super Delegates will support their interests, regardless of how Democrats actually vote! This type of behind the scene scheming to coerce the outcome of the Democratic nomination process and avoid individual donation limits does not belong in our politics period.

    For this, and this reason alone, Clinton does not deserve to be the Democratic nominee.

    True and loyal Democrats need to clean house in the DNC and any state Democratic parties that participated in such corruption of the process and disenfranchisement of Democratic voters.

    The only effective way to do this is to see that the other Democratic candidate receives the nomination and is elected President.

    Please, seriously consider this or it might just be the Democratic Party that implodes instead of the Republicans when the truth is told…

  254. Marvin Melhorn says:

    As my grandmother used to say: The political spectrum is not a line but a circle; the farther left or right you go, it’s all the same thing.

  255. Marvin Melhorn says:

    What was wrong with what Laffing Crow wrote?

  256. novenator says:

    What do you mean “you people”?

  257. novenator says:

    Nice use of KKKarl Rove wedge tactics there! For the record, if Democrats actually want to win in November, there is no better candidate than Bernie Sanders, so the sooner you stop impugning his character with negative attacks, the sooner we can start focusing on the regressive, obstructionist Republicans.

  258. novenator says:

    I used to plug this blog for years, then John jumped the shark by deliberately spreading vitriol and disinformation in his quest to smear Bernie Sanders. That’s a deal breaker for me.

  259. Lacey Danielle Coyle says:

    Speaking with our elected officials is not harassment. Sorry for bursting their bubbles, but if they can’t deal with the concerns of the public they are supposed to represent they should get out of politics. This doesn’t even compare to the efforts Hillary makes on her side to silence the people and hide her lies.

  260. Parque_Hundido says:

    S/he was a Hillary bot

    I’m not sure mockery is the best way, but people need understand a simple message that has nothing to do with Sanders: Hillary needs to face her own issues. They make her divisive and unlikable. Targeting Sanders in this way won’t help.

    Framing a Hillary v. Sanders fight is unhelpful. Sanders isn’t gaining because he’s mean and awful. He’s gaining because voters find it hard to commit to Hillary.

  261. cleos_mom says:

    I’ve followed this guy’s posts; if nothing else he’s good at not losing his temper. What I’m seeing at the moment is a mighty chorus of “YOU’RE SO ANGRY! STOP IT RIGHT NOW DAMMIT!”

  262. cleos_mom says:

    But “deep down everyone knows I’m right — they just won’t admit it” is always useful for comic relief.

  263. cleos_mom says:

    The Us that’s better than Them. Part of the Us that will stay home, vote third party or write in their bff and then complain for at least the next 4 years.

  264. cleos_mom says:

    That was one of the monstrous ironies about Watergate. All Nixon would have had to do was sit back and watch the purity ponies do their scorched-earth thing.

  265. cleos_mom says:

    As I recall, the weirdest thing about 1996’s Silly Season was the effort of the Dole campaign to convert [Bill] Clinton supporters by insulting them nonstop. I kept a list of the imaginative names that I’ve long since lost but “pudding head” was the personal favorite at the end of the day. Had a nice nostalgic ring to it.

  266. cleos_mom says:

    Oh, how adult. Maybe someone will plant a dead fish somewhere in the locker room.

  267. Zincoshine says:

    Don’t talk about stuff that you clearly know nothing about.

  268. ria13 says:

    So now we aren’t allowed to contact the public officials who determine our possible future president? Give me a break. Nice trying to spin this into some monstrous thing. We all know if the situation was flipped, Hillary supporters would also like to reach out to superdelegates and urge them to reconsider their vote. Superdelegates should listen to the constituents.

  269. Throb_Marley says:

    Twitter can be an all consuming experience. Fortunately it turns out that lots of people who don’t support the same candidate aren’t terrifying weirdos with nothing better to do than hump their online identity and mainline the paranoid tribalism of social media. Go to a public Party function, you’ll get much more rewarding political dialogue from people who have invested the time to put on pants.

  270. TPP, the failed “Grand Bargain,” and increasing wars of expansion overseas says otherwise.

  271. Simple, no laws have been broken.

  272. No, I did not. “Superdelegates” are a nickname, their actual names are Unpledged Delegates. They can back any candidate and are never officially committed until they vote.

  273. Sandrine Jeune says:

    no, spenc – YOU got it wrong

  274. Sandrine Jeune says:

    I love it – never have a read and heard today on NPR of such idiocy – Bernie supporters think that harassing these delegates will win him votes? hey guys – what about blackmail – that d work for sure to get those votes. just shows to go you – these supporters don t think things through. jump on the bandwagon, no idea of where its goin. Good news for Hillary supporters at least!!!

  275. Zincoshine says:

    If you want to help, phonebank, canvass, and cut out the trump-like attitude. Let the campaign deal with the superdelegates as Obama did in 2008. Your website helps HILLARY. Get that through your thick head of yours.

  276. Zincoshine says:

    Hey, YOU fuck off! You are the one trying to hand the nomination to Hillary by using trump-like tactics to smear our campaign as a hostile and violent one. Hillary lost in 2008 in part due to her aggressiveness. Now you are doing the same thing and it’s costing us. You do not represent us! All you and your website has done is to cause undecided voters to go to Hillary. You are her best campaigner!

  277. As to your slander that I support Trump, fuck off. I’ve been to Trump protests, my comrades shut him down in Chicago, and we’ll continue to dog him wherever he goes. Just because your restricted worldview cannot think outside of the party system doesn’t mean everyone is as limited.

  278. Laffing Crow says:

    Umm, it’s actually the other way around. “Plain old delegates”, as you say, the delegates designated by the primary and caucus results, are considered pledged delegates. They HAVE to vote for the candidate that they are pledged to, unless that candidate releases them. This is on the first ballot anyway. After that, if there is no majority winner, they are free to change their votes if they want to.

    Superdelegates are “unpledged”. They can support any candidate they want and are free to change their mind at any time, right up until they cast their vote at the National Convention. And I’m sure doxxing and harassing them will make them want to vote for Bernie! What a great plan! (sarcasm)

    Plus, as it stands right now, Hillary is ahead in pledged delegates. She’s still beating Bernie without superdelegates and will almost certainly head into the convention with a majority of the pledged delegates. The superdelegates might help cement her nomination but they won’t be what handed it to her. Those democratically elected pledged delegates will be. Bernie however, can’t really make his nomination math work at this point with elected delegates alone. Even if he takes all 218 of the currently uncommitted supers and moves another 110 from Hillary’s column into his, in effect splitting the superdelegate vote 50/50 with Hillary, he still loses. He cannot win without a majority of the superdelegates.

    That’s why these Bernie supporters are on this pure and high-minded mission to take “our democracy back” from the “undemocratically elected super-delegates” by harassing them into switching their vote. If their guy doesn’t get a majority of those “undemocratic” votes, then he loses. It’s that simple.

  279. “If you really do support Bernie then take down your site immediately and apologise for doxxing superdelegates and inciting harassment on them.”


  280. I agree. Bernie isn’t a socialist, he isn’t even a democratic socialist, he is as you have stated an FDR like social democrat. He doesn’t even want to seize the means of production, a bedrock in socialist thought. I have no idea why he identifies as a socialist but he does.

  281. Zincoshine says:

    Bernie isn’t a socialist, he is a social democrat. None of his policies are socialist as he isn’t calling for the nationalisation of anything. His claim of being a democratic socialist does not align with his policies. Social democrats believe in a mixed economy a “comfy capitalism” that uses capitalism to develop the country. Right now you are not a Bernie supporter, you are a trump supporter who has managed to do more damage to Bernie’s campaign than Hillary could possibly do. If you really do support Bernie then take down your site immediately and apologise for doxxing superdelegates and inciting harassment on them. If Bernie wins in pledged delegates they will switch. If they don’t, then we can do a grassroots campaign to ensure the relevant superdelegates in pro Bernie states or districts up for re-election will have their career ended this November. There is no point in a harassment campaign other than to try and ensure the superdelegates don’t switch.

  282. People said I was a Trump supporter when I made too.

  283. I’m a Socialist. Certainly no Trump supporter.

  284. Bill_Perdue says:

    Obama deported more than two million immigrant workers fleeing the economic dislocations caused by Bill Clintons NAFTA. That’s racism pure and simple.
    Obama and the Democrats are a right centrist party.
    You lose your bet.

  285. Bill_Perdue says:

    Democrats are right centrist and are not part of the left. The DP is moving right at a fast clip.

  286. Bill_Perdue says:

    Reformism is a dead end and has been since 1783. I’m not surprised when Democrats have no facts, just opinions.

  287. Irm Alderman says:

    Waiting for the shoe to drop, someone to get hurt! Bye,bye Bernie, and the bern!

  288. Virginia Liberal says:

    Wow, thank you!! Glad to hear it. Someone needs to use some sense when things seem to be in the tank.

  289. Virginia Liberal says:

    How pitiful a response. Turn that around and you might be in the ball park. Extremists who believe in black and white politics get nothing done. You are wrong.

  290. Virginia Liberal says:

    Thank you for your thoughtful response. I don’t have time to unpack and respond to your comment but just may I say that I agree with some of what you said and have an opinion more in line with Party values. I will say that the two party system that we have is not going away anytime soon and it is sad that Republicans have become a completely null and void entity when it comes to trying to get much done with their radical faction that is alive and well. That should be a lesson for Democrats and believe that those who hold offices from our party realize. Being too radical never helps any thing get done. As long as people like Bernie are not willing to compromise nothing will get done. That is the reason that the down ballot elections are so important. I don’t pretend to be a political expert but I have learned more over the past 7 years about how the system works, than I have in my whole life. We all must try to bring credibility back to the process.

  291. Virginia Liberal says:

    Nice try. You are broadcasting your ignorance. You’ll have to do better than that embarcadero.

  292. Demosthenes says:

    The NY primary results will prove whether I’m right or wrong.

  293. embarcadero says:

    Oh, the name calling… Do you actually think this is going to help you reverse the course your candidate is on? Can’t you see that denigrating your critics is the problem?

  294. embarcadero says:

    How is this post anything other than deliberately insulting? Someone who disagrees with you is “unstable”?

  295. embarcadero says:

    Sorry, but Hillz may be a lot of things but she’s been no friend to LGBTQ Americans. Perhaps you do not recall the twenty five years prior to her “evolution” on marriage equality.

    She did the right thing only after trying literally everything else.

  296. embarcadero says:

    I think you’ll find that vapid condescension isn’t going to help you win friends and influence people. Sorry.

  297. embarcadero says:

    Wasn’t your claim that Sanders stole the data? Is there any proof of this?

  298. Moderator3 says:

    You are blog clogging. You need to stop it, or I will. You made 10 comments in less than 15 minutes, and they did nothing to add to the discussion.

  299. embarcadero says:

    I think you’ll need to hope harder.

  300. embarcadero says:

    Not according to the most recent polls.

  301. embarcadero says:

    Isn’t it most likely a Clinton supporters? Could be a Trump bot, I suppose.

  302. embarcadero says:

    Please tell the Hillz Bros. This appears to be their primary campaign tactic. And it’s failing.

  303. embarcadero says:

    Happy to help. Bear in mind that covering your ears and denying reality isn’t what we think of as a good strategy. Just saying.

  304. embarcadero says:

    You rush to prop up your candidate against a backdrop of declining popularity and an increasingly likely chance of a hotly contested nomination. You respond by denying what anyone not in a coma can see. That’s shilling.

  305. embarcadero says:

    Are you suggesting that there is mathematical certainty in an open race? Does this require analysis?

  306. embarcadero says:

    Based on your candidate’s recent win in Wisconsin? The latest PRII/Atlantic pill?

  307. embarcadero says:

    Or, 4) Making fun of you is a good natured way to point out the folly of blindly following a candidate and being allergic to reason about that candidate’s shortcomings.

    This is the thing you don’t seem to see: you’re fast becoming the the same thing that, within the GOP gave the world the gift of Donald Trump.

  308. embarcadero says:

    How about your claim that the primary is over? Defend that.

  309. Moderator3 says:

    You’re wrong and you have been corrected. Bye.

  310. Zincoshine says:

    Show me an example then. Here is a tip: if they say they support Bernie but imply he is a socialist and mention Karl Marx and such, then they are trunp supporters masquerading as Bernie supporters. We do not support socialism and Bernie’s policies are not socialist in any way, they are social democratic (like Norway and Denmark). Only trump supporters are dumb enough to put bernie in the same basket as communists.

  311. Moderator4 says:

    Moderator3 did not say that you had almost 800 comments flagged just here on ABlog; you have had almost that many flagged on various Disqus sites. And we know this because Disqus allows us to see everyone’s Disqus statistics.

  312. will says:

    Wow. Bernie must be thrilled.

  313. King of America says:

    Also, I doubt I’ve posted more than 100 comments to AB in total; I’m not sure where you’re getting that 800 figure from.

  314. King of America says:

    I had no intention of continuing to reply; I was making a (relatively) good faith effort to find out what the heck they were even talking about (and I doubt I’ve responded to more than half of their increasingly insulting and vaguely homophobic/misogynistic/I-can’t-even-tell-any-more posts). As far as I can tell, I’ve said nothing that was out of line, although I freely admit I’ve gotten slightly testy on occasion; please correct me if I’m wrong.

  315. Moderator3 says:

    I’ve warned King of America, so I will give you the same warning. Most of your comments are nothing more than you arguing with other commenters. You’re saying nothing to add to the discussion. If you wish to continue commenting here, control the arguing.

  316. Moderator3 says:

    I noticed Mod 4 telling you to back off. Now another Mod is telling you to back off. Most of your comments are nothing more than you arguing with other commenters. You’re saying nothing to add to the discussion. You’ve had almost 800 comments flagged, so this behavior is nothing new. If you wish to continue commenting here, control the arguing.

  317. King of America says:

    What name calling?

  318. King of America says:

    OK, didn’t think you could point out a mistake I’d made.

  319. King of America says:

    So to sum up the possibilities:
    1) I’m trolling you, in which case you’re stupidly responding exactly as I want.
    2) I’m right, in which case you’re angrily insulting me and accomplishing nothing.
    3) I’m wrong, in which case you’re angrily insulting me and accomplishing nothing.

  320. King of America says:

    I think you’re broken.

  321. King of America says:

    What struggles with numbers?


  322. King of America says:

    I just asked you to; you’re the one claiming I’m wrong.

  323. King of America says:

    What shilling?

  324. King of America says:

    OK thanks for telling me what my opinions are. You’re a great gatekeeper, which is definitely something that progressives need.

  325. embarcadero says:

    Only in a police lineup. You’re a right winger.

  326. embarcadero says:

    Your desperate, non-stop shilling. How’s that Hillz Grl?

  327. embarcadero says:

    Do the analysis.

  328. embarcadero says:

    LOL. Except that they do. Your candidate’s only strategy is to whine and feel entitled. Just like her supporters.

  329. embarcadero says:

    Dunno. Haven’t seen it. And given your struggles with numbers, I have my doubts. Math is HARD!

  330. embarcadero says:

    Dunno. How many was his win? Tell us girl.

  331. embarcadero says:

    Defensive AND desperate. I’m LOVING IT!!

  332. embarcadero says:

    Really? So how did he lose that caucus? I’m all ears.

  333. embarcadero says:

    I’m giddy at your inability to respond.

  334. embarcadero says:

    Again, let me know when you have poll data from outside your nursing home. Thanks.

  335. embarcadero says:

    I delight in your fevered desperation.

  336. embarcadero says:

    Well, I’ve got you dodging. You are obviously wrong and unable to offer a defense.

  337. embarcadero says:

    You are. DC republican

  338. embarcadero says:

    That’s only because you’re unable to recognize your errors. Much like Hillz.

  339. embarcadero says:

    You were awfully quick with the name calling. You just weren’t very good at it.

  340. embarcadero says:

    Which also said nothing.

  341. King of America says:

    Why do you keep referring to me as female? What do you think this angry spam is going to accomplish?

  342. Viir Exeter says:

    Um…you STOOOOPID Berniebot morons, they’re SUPER DELEGATES. That means they CAN’T rescind their support. Plain old DELEGATES can rescind their support, but NOT Super Delegates. Stoooopid, that’s you brain dead Bern Victims’ lot.

  343. embarcadero says:

    Girl, your middle name is “outrageous claims”.

  344. embarcadero says:

    What is it that you’ve backed up? Nada.

  345. embarcadero says:

    Why can’t you be teachable?

  346. embarcadero says:

    See the Hill Broz.

  347. King of America says:

    Again, no. What is wrong with you?

  348. embarcadero says:

    Except he’s ahead in the polls. Whoops!

  349. King of America says:

    OK, let me know when you have something resembling a point. I’m not really interested in talking to angry people who think insults will make up for their candidate’s manifest shortcomings.

  350. embarcadero says:

    LOL. Desperation much?

  351. embarcadero says:

    Could we have polls not conducted in nursing home So? Thanks.

  352. King of America says:

    Not even slightly. Are you OK?

  353. King of America says:

    I can, in fact, read numbers. For example, Sanders lost the African American vote in WI by more than 40%. That’s not a problem in a lily-white state full of university students, but it’s a real problem in every other state.

  354. embarcadero says:

    I’m sorry you can’t read numbers.

  355. embarcadero says:

    LOL. Defensive much?

  356. embarcadero says:

    Non non partisan polls of registered democrats? Did you really post that’s? Do you wonder why you have zero credibility?

  357. King of America says:

    I’m sorry, I’m not interested in childish insults. If you have a point, and your literal spamming of every post I’ve made suggests you do not, then say it.

  358. embarcadero says:

    So will you support Sanders when Hillz loses? That’s the REAL question.

  359. King of America says:

    How many delegates did Sanders win? 10? 11?

  360. King of America says:

    What about the PPP (an A- minus pollster rating from 538, as opposed to NPR’s C+) poll showing her 18% ahead? Does that not count?

  361. embarcadero says:

    How many Badgers did Hillz win?

  362. embarcadero says:

    This from a girl who thinks she can do math. Lol!

  363. embarcadero says:

    When Hillary makes you all wear Nikes and drink the Kool-Aid?

  364. King of America says:

    I’m sorry, those feeble insults don’t have any bearing on anything I’ve ever said.

  365. embarcadero says:


  366. King of America says:

    How am I wrong? Can you find another example of a primary where a candidate was this far behind at this stage and won? I bet you can’t.

  367. embarcadero says:

    Her name is Hillary. She lost to Obama.

  368. King of America says:

    I’m not desperate at all. Can YOU cite an example of me getting angry?

  369. embarcadero says:

    We get it. You’re not good with numbers. Math is hard!

  370. King of America says:

    I’m far to the left of Sanders.

  371. embarcadero says:

    Which would make you a dead fish.

  372. embarcadero says:

    Wisconsin? LOL

  373. embarcadero says:

    Yeah, how’s that going to go? Sanders polls better agains Trump than your girl Hillary. Sorry…

  374. embarcadero says:

    You’re a DC Republican.

  375. embarcadero says:

    Tel us about those NPR polls…

  376. embarcadero says:

    And she did. And you were wrong. Next.

  377. embarcadero says:

    Lol. Have you seen the latest NPR poll?

  378. embarcadero says:

    And you were wrong there too. You’re batting a clean ooo.

  379. embarcadero says:

    Nope. Another Hill Bro who needs remedial math.

  380. embarcadero says:

    Pointing out your struggle with nth is hardly an insult. It’s an observation.

  381. embarcadero says:

    Like the thought crime of sexism for pointing out your candidate’s cash from Goldman Sachs? Walmart? LOL

  382. embarcadero says:

    Sugar, we’re laughing at you.

  383. embarcadero says:

    Oh, our little Hill Bro resorts to name calling! Lovely!

  384. embarcadero says:

    Hill Broz are totally not worth it. Best to let them hang out in the nursing home on their own.

  385. embarcadero says:

    She should have accused you of being delusional. Or Republican. Or both.

  386. embarcadero says:

    And she was correct. Desperate much?

  387. embarcadero says:

    Who are you to feel sorry for anyone? You strike me as a sock puppet.

  388. embarcadero says:

    Now that it’s not going to be the coronation ceremony you folks expected. That’s about now.

  389. embarcadero says:

    You mean a GOPer like you?

  390. embarcadero says:

    I would agree you Hill Briz are delusional.

  391. embarcadero says:

    You are another right winger in the Hillary camp.

  392. embarcadero says:

    Well, as a Hillary bot, why do you support the First female Board member for Wallmart? Let me guess… Tiny, incremental change. Spare us.

  393. embarcadero says:

    Yawn. Let me guess, you work in DC?

  394. embarcadero says:

    You’re delusional. You’re pretending that the problem is Sanders. You’ve missed the point entirely, just like that candidate you support.

  395. embarcadero says:

    I’m shocked. Never thought this would become a launching pad for Hillary bots.

  396. King of America says:

    That’s a ridiculous reading of the situation. “Left of you” is NOT the same thing as right-wing.

  397. King of America says:

    “Leftists don’t engage in racist mass deportation campaings.”
    I’m willing to bet you’re an FDR fan. He kinda put a bunch of people in prison camps for having the wrong racial background – including Jews fleeing from the Nazis – and he did that AFTER being advised they were not security threats by his intelligence agencies.

  398. Alphenex says:

    As an independent i find it disappointing that both camps are slinging mud (especially their most devout followers), but it is a presidential primary race so its to be expected that the more intense it gets and the divides are shown not to just be in party lines but there are great disparities within both parties that at min there should probably be 4 parties and possibly after this election we will join the majority of other republics and move from a two party system. Also find it disappointing at everyone from blinding themselves from the things they do not want to see their candidate or party do yet pointing out with such ferocity similar if not the same exact actions from candidates they oppose. This is different in both parties in how it is done but most all people are guilty of this to some degree or another.

  399. Alphenex says:

    I am really not for anyone, but the truth is neither Bernie or Hillary will get much done with this republican congress, so at that point its about who may get more people who haven’t voted before out to vote. Right now Trump is doing that on the Republican side which is unfortunate, and Bernie on the Dems side, but i do not think the way that the race is going that it will translate to Hillary and congressional races like DWS and the DNC seems to think, that Bernie will be able to get everyone in line behind HC and Party, he is only their leader as long as he is fighting what is perceived as the establishment, if he stops that i do not think he will continue to be the leader of the movement, it will be more similar to Occupy Wall Street, a lot of people with many different ideas and grudges yet no leaders. Therefore the movement may just lose its fire and infighting will occur which wont help the DNC or the Progressives. But the argument from Hillary supporters that she and the current DNC know how to get things done is ridiculous in my opinion, your talking about the congress and RNC that is still pursuing trying to put her in jail, grill her on Benghazi among so many other scandals they will not let go of. So to ever think they will agree with anything other than her capitalist policies is a fairy tale as much as is claimed by Hillary supporters the Bernie Sanders supporters getting anything done is a pipe dream.

  400. King of America says:

    Sorry. I’d like say that I haven’t really been insulting, despite great provocation, but I won’t engage with that guy any more (I’d already concluded that he wasn’t entirely stable).

  401. Zero Dark Thirsty ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:

    Just remember inbetween your demands for diversity, you are supporting 2 old white guys. One very angry in control of the campaign and doesn’t give 2 shxts about the Dems winning in Nov, and the other one old, very, very old.

  402. Parque_Hundido says:

    Hope you get you money back on that prom dress.

  403. Moderator4 says:

    You and Parque_Hundido are blog clogging with your arguments and insults. Knock it off.

  404. Zero Dark Thirsty ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:

    Are yo kidding? Bernie bots are all over twitter calling all Hillary’s supporters b’tches and c’nts and threatening them just for their existence.

  405. Moderator4 says:

    Parque_Hundido, you and King of America need to stop the blog-clogging, back and forth insults.

  406. Zero Dark Thirsty ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ says:

    Nothing new. Bernie bots are as insane as Trump bots. there’s no difference whatsoever. All low IQ simpletons with no knowledge of how government works. Bernie’s not a Dem, never has been. He won’t help support down ticket Dems like Hillary is doing. He stated he doesn’t care if it hurts Dems in Nov. He is too fking old. Period.. you want a president who can be there 8 yrs. He’s unqualified and he’s offering free stuff he can’t deliver on. WTF up people.

  407. Ari says:

    We can leave that period.

  408. Ari says:

    Delusional indeed.

  409. King of America says:

    You’ve got nothing except feeble insults and ableism – in this case, you’re attacking people with mental health issues. Neither of those are traits that a progressive should have – but then, you’re not a progressive, just a dull zealot.

    I hope that helps!

  410. King of America says:

    You’re actually screaming at me for completely imaginary thought crimes.

    I hope that helps!

  411. King of America says:

    I’m sorry you can’t read.

  412. King of America says:

    Yes, the fact that you’re clearly angry and also nuts definitely makes your opinion worth reading. Sorry that Sanders lost the primary solely due to incompetence, but that’s not my fault – maybe you should get mad at him.

  413. Parque_Hundido says:

    Denial much? LOL

  414. Ari says:

    Got it.
    Thank you.

  415. Parque_Hundido says:

    Oh, no friends huh? Stay away from my sites, kay?

  416. Ari says:

    Ues, patronizing. Like calling people “sweetie” eh.

  417. Parque_Hundido says:

    The complete opposite of a poll released today that shows a difference that falls within the margin of error?

    What are you smoking? Please pass it around.

    Or just scowl harder.

  418. Spartacus Gruen says:

    Good idea! We should inform the black caucus what Bill Clinton really thinks about them. He thinks the Black lives matter crowd defends Drug dealers and rapist.

  419. Parque_Hundido says:

    I’m pointing and mocking the crap you said.

    You’re frothing at the mouth.

  420. King of America says:

    Yes it is ME getting mad here, guy who has been stalking me to other sites.

  421. King of America says:

    Ah yes, personal insults and ableism. A winning combination.

  422. King of America says:

    How are you mocking me by angrily screeching about things I haven’t said?

  423. King of America says:

    See previous post.

  424. King of America says:

    You’re ignoring the polling that shows the complete opposite, yes. That’s cherry picking.

  425. Ari says:

    You might want to inform the black caucus of that.

  426. Parque_Hundido says:

    Let’s see you dismiss numbers you don’t like. Oh, wait, we already did!

    Q: When is a PRII/Atlantic poll “partisan”?
    A: When it shows that Hillary’s coronation is off.

  427. Spartacus Gruen says:

    A candidate who win is to rely on Southern states for the nomination is probably not the person who will win up becoming the most powerful person in the world.

  428. Parque_Hundido says:

    Those who are not delusional hillary bots.

  429. Parque_Hundido says:

    Should we leave that to the Hill Broz?

  430. Parque_Hundido says:

    You’re welcome.

  431. Parque_Hundido says:

    Bless your delusional little heart. I’m “cherry picking” a poll released today?

  432. Parque_Hundido says:

    Keep those pom-poms in the air! Scowl loud at those mean Bernie tweeters!!!!


  433. Parque_Hundido says:

    I think you’re the one being mocked here. I’m enjoying this thoroughly.

  434. Ari says:

    Let’s see non-partisan poll samples across the board.
    Say five independent.

  435. Parque_Hundido says:

    Um, so, nothing? Or are you all out of your ADHD meds? or are you just too upset about Hillary trailing Sanders?


  436. Spartacus Gruen says:

    You know there are over 1,955 delegates left right?

  437. Parque_Hundido says:

    Looks like I was right. You’re now full-tilt temper tantrum.

  438. Ari says:

    A candidate who’s win is relies on the wobbles in approval ratings of another candidate is probably not the person who will wind up the most powerful person in the world.

  439. Ari says:

    Right. In the real world where magical math conjures up the return of the messiah.

  440. Ari says:

    “Yes, inter-dimensional travel will do that to a body”


  441. Ari says:

    And then there is the matter of the Super Delegates Bernie would need but won’t get.

  442. Ari says:

    Not worth engaging with folks like that.

  443. Bill_Perdue says:

    Democratys are not part of the left – they, including BS, are right centrists.

  444. Ari says:

    Let’s not start with the snark personal attacks ok.

  445. Ari says:

    Who is “us?”

  446. Ari says:

    “Leftists don’t engage in wars of aggression.”

    Tell that to Hilary Clinton folks.

  447. Ari says:

    The net results are not something any progressive, moderate or even conservatives want.

  448. Bill_Perdue says:

    Leftists don’t engage in wars of aggression. Democrats do.
    Leftists don’t busty unions. Democrats do.
    Leftists don’t engage in racist mass deportation campaings. Democrats do.

  449. King of America says:

    You are actually nuts.

  450. King of America says:

    See previous post.

  451. King of America says:

    It’s weird that you think angrily accusing other people of being angry accomplishes anything other than making yourself into an object of mockery.

  452. King of America says:

    Sorry you’re mad about numbers. Get better soon!

  453. King of America says:

    Uh huh. We’ve been through this already; cherry picking only the polls you like is always a mistake. There’s a competing poll out from PPP – a highly reputable pollster – showing her ahead by 18%.

    The average remains unchanged, and again, even if Sanders manages to move slightly ahead he’s not going to improve his numbers enough in the demographics he needs to win.

  454. Parque_Hundido says:

    Except that she’s not:


    Can you get your money back on that prom dress you bought for the coronation? It ain’t gonna happen.

  455. Zincoshine says:

    I’m not passing the blame, I am stating the obvious.

  456. Parque_Hundido says:

    You’re a hoot!

    And your candidate is now behind in the polls.

  457. Parque_Hundido says:

    And what, exactly, are my political views? You wouldn’t know because I haven’t stated them. But you’re not one of those people who lets facts get in the way of a story.

    Good luck lecturing those moms who won’t believe your “widely held” science beliefs! Berate them harder and see if that works.

    If only you’d scowled harder at Bernie supporters, maybe he wouldn’t be ahead in the polls.

    Ruh roh.

  458. Parque_Hundido says:

    Nothing is precisely what you’ve got.

    I’m guessing you’re now in a tizzy over the PRII/Atlantic poll that shows Sanders with 47% of D voters’ support, Clinton with 46%.

    Ruh roh. Better get those pom poms in the air! More fury now!

  459. King of America says:

    So nothing at all then. Got it.

  460. King of America says:

    OK, sorry you couldn’t respond in a cogent fashion. Good luck trying to win over converts to your political views by berating them for non-existent thought crimes!

  461. King of America says:

    I’m sorry, you seem to be actually delusional.

  462. Parque_Hundido says:

    Oh, bless your little heart. You’re obviously whipped up into a full-on Hillary-bot fury. That’s why you’re not making any sense. That’s why you can’t follow a thread for more than 5 seconds.

    Poor you.

  463. Parque_Hundido says:

    Oh, sweetie. Admitting you have a problem is the first step.

    Can you point me to where there is any evidence that the Sanders campaign stole data? Or are you too busy wondering whether you can get your money back for the awful prom gown you were planning to wear to Hillary’s coronation?

    Again, your knowledge of public health is about on par with your knowledge of politics. Not pretty.

  464. Zincoshine says:

    I am a very active bernie supporter, I have never met people like this. His attitude fits the description of a typical Trump supporter.

  465. Parque_Hundido says:

    Are you on drugs? Are you unable to follow a logical thread? Are you so foaming-at-the-mouth angry and in full-on temper-tantrum mode over the cancellation of the coronation that you can’t pay attention for more than 10 seconds?

    Sorry about your issues.

  466. King of America says:

    What does any of that have to do with what I just wrote?

  467. King of America says:

    I’ve made no errors, and I’m not responsible if you, or anyone else, refuse to believe what is manifestly true, about the Sanders campaign theft of data or any other topic. I’m sorry that you’re like this, but it isn’t my job to fix you.

  468. Parque_Hundido says:

    Sorry. You told me how “Sanders [sic] biggest problem is Sanders.”

    I pointed out that if that were true, it should explain his defeat in Wisconsin. After all, Hillary’s biggest problem is Hillary, which explains her defeat in that state.

    Go on, explain. I’m tired of your spiraling. I want a full-on Hillary bot tantrum.

  469. King of America says:

    You accused me of being angry. I haven’t been. This has been just one of a number of false claims you’ve made about what I’ve said and how I’ve said it; you are not arguing in good faith, or even coherently.

    I hope that helps!

  470. Parque_Hundido says:

    “Blaming you”? I’m simply helping you understand the nature of your error. And you’re welcome for the lesson.

    Now, I’d like to get back to the temper tantrum you were throwing when you realized that the coronation had been cancelled. Tell me about how it’s a “widely accepted truth” that Hillary is going to be queen of Democrats.

    Go on, I’ll wait. Entertain me.

  471. King of America says:

    “Weren’t you going to explain Clinton’s victory in Wisconsin” – I made no statement resembling this; why do you think arguing with strawmen of your own construction proves anything other than your own ineptitude?

  472. Parque_Hundido says:

    Nope. Sorry, but now you’re just splitting grammatical hairs.

    Easy peasy. Now you’re all hot and bothered.

    Did you have an outfit picked out for the coronation? Can you get your money back?

  473. King of America says:

    Ah, OK, so you’re blaming me because you’re a conspiracy theorist. Got it.

  474. King of America says:

    I’m sorry, that isn’t true. I’ve not only done no such thing, but you accused me of actual fury, not merely being furiously active. Can you cite an example?

  475. Parque_Hundido says:

    Nope. Just pointing out your inability to follow a discussion.

    And that’s not a very entertaining retort. I’d prefer more whining about how Bernie and his legion mean tweeters are a threat to civilization. Or how it’s sexist to point out that Hillary has been bought and paid for by her corporate backers.

    Popcorn is popping. You need to get moving.

  476. Parque_Hundido says:

    Yes. Your furious attempt to distract people from your inability to explain Clinton’s defeat in Wisconsin.


  477. Parque_Hundido says:

    Poor thing. In this instance, those who determine whether we have outbreaks – parents – do not always find that scientific literature persuasive, no matter your rush to dismiss them. You see, some people are swayed by emotion, especially when making decisions about their children. Scientists’ inability to understand that has cost them the ability to control childhood diseases.

    Yes, this is a parallel about Hillary bots who are now up in arms because they realize they no longer hold tickets to a coronation.


  478. King of America says:

    I’m sorry, you accused me of “fury” – can you point to an example? The only angry people I see here are the Sanders supporters.

  479. IndependentThought says:

    Just FYI… there’s a list of these people that has been on Wikipedia for MONTHS now. All this list says differently is how to get in touch with their offices to voice your opinion on how you feel that this is reminiscent of the way the DLC tried to fix the 1968 Democratic National Convention, which was the whole reason that they changed the rules to GET superdelegates in the 1st place. And remember how well that worked out for the DNC? Richard Nixon got elected that year.

  480. King of America says:

    I’m sorry, you seem to be arguing with voices in your head.

  481. Parque_Hundido says:

    And what lie would that be? The one about Clinton’s victory in Wisconsin?

  482. Parque_Hundido says:

    I’m sorry, weren’t you going to explain Clinton’s victory in Wisconsin? I’ll grab some popcorn and wait. This is going to be awesome.

  483. Parque_Hundido says:

    It will take many years of therapy for you to come to terms with your issues. And Hillary with hers. Sorry.

  484. Parque_Hundido says:

    “Since like always”. You actually wrote that.

  485. Parque_Hundido says:

    Aren’t you the people who run the GOP rumor mills? I don’t think you’re in a position to counsel others to do research. Hillary is the new Trump. Sorry.

  486. Doug105 says:

    Sure pass the blame.

  487. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Your doubt isn’t a fact.
    Your opinion on his chances isn’t a fact.
    Your belief that Hilary will win due to a present lead isn’t a fact.
    This is all subjective, totally biased, and completely hope filled.

    66% isn’t an impossibility. And in fact if his last few victories are a trend, highly believable. We’re about to enter the part of the primaries where swing states for democrats are going to come into question. Hillary isn’t popular in any of them.

    Including New York. The only reason we might push her for president would be because that means we no longer have to deal with her. But I doubt NY is gong to do her that favor.

  488. Zincoshine says:

    I doubt it is even a bernie supporter, this looks to me like a trump supporter trying to ensure Trump goes against Hillary in the general election.

  489. No.


    And after the media busted them for it…

    “This site’s goal is to help voters hold DNC officials accountable. Its name has been changed to better reflect this intent.”

    And when you scroll down, they say Hillary has a list, now we have one too!

    No, it’s not trump. It’s the hardcore Bernie supporters.

  490. Zincoshine says:

    They probably haven’t been made aware of it…. I really wish I knew how to contact the campaign and let them know, it needs to be disavowed immediately.

  491. Zincoshine says:

    Don’t be so gullible, this is a trump supporter pretending to be a Bernie supporter.

  492. Zincoshine says:

    Dear gullible Tumblr feminists: google “framing”. Not everything you see is as it seems. This is clearly a Trump supporter trying to masquerade as a Bernie supporter. They want to ensure Hillary wins the nomination because she is easy for Trump to take down in the same way as he took down Jeb Bush. Sanders is Trump’s real nightmare.

    On another note, how is this guy not arrested already?

  493. Zincoshine says:

    Have you ever considered this might be a Trump supporter pretending to be a psychopath Bernie supporter to try and give Hillary the nomination? Trump and his supporters would much rather go against Hillary than Sanders. Hillary can be taken down just as easily as Jeb Bush, they are/were both heir apparent to their political parties. On the other hand, none of Trump’s usual attacks would work on Bernie, the worst attack he can make is to try and call him a communist and he has been attacked in that manner by the mainstream media in every single debate, defending himself well each time.

  494. Zincoshine says:

    No we don’t, stop watching TV. This guy is some Trump psychopath. How has he not been arrested yet?

  495. King of America says:

    Obviously she was more popular than Sanders before anyone had heard of the guy. And that’s the same 5-10 points it’s been at for months.

    And again, even if Sanders managed to move ahead of her in popularity, that won’t be enough for him to win.

  496. Spartacus Gruen says:

    Yes the polling average has shift for Hillary in the past year or so. Hillary start out with a 60+ lead over Bernie Sander. Now it down to less than 5 points.

    Sorry but Hillary just lost the black vote in New York. Bill Clinton criticized a black lives matter for protesting his crime reform bill. Black people aren’t going to voted for somebody that compares them to drug dealers.

  497. King of America says:

    Ah, cherry-picking polls that tell you what you want to hear – that always ends well. Of course, other recent polls say the complete opposite (PPP, usually reliable, shows her up by 18%) – that’s why smart people look at the average, which hasn’t shifted. Sanders has never been more popular than Clinton, and even if he managed to become so it wouldn’t affect his dismal numbers with the minority demographics he needs to win. This primary was over a month ago.

  498. Virginia Liberal says:

    None of us is being overconfident. Being over confident is stupid but reading and acknowledging facts are quite another.

  499. Virginia Liberal says:

    If Bernie can do the lift on what you said, good luck. However there really is NO easy simple way for him to get above the delegates that he needs. Good luck to him if he can but doubtful.

  500. Spartacus Gruen says:

    Wrong, the latest PRRI poll just came out showing Bernie with a one point lead over Hillary Clinton. PPRI isn’t the only poll that show Bernie Sander beating Hillary Clinton.

  501. Virginia Liberal says:

    Actually 66%.

  502. King of America says:

    Nope; she’s still the more popular candidate, and still by roughly 5%.

  503. Virginia Liberal says:

    Boy I’m starting to feel sorry for you! You really shouldn’t talk about things you know nothing about. You sound to me like a person who has been hook winked by Republican Spin Mills. They have been in operation for 35 years and are still spitting out crap. You might want to check some of your objections at the door and do some research.

  504. Spartacus Gruen says:

    Yes they are.

  505. King of America says:

    Hillary’s poll numbers aren’t dropping, though.

  506. Virginia Liberal says:

    Since like always. Bernie lives in his own world. You can’t make promises you can’t keep. End of story. Just ask a Republican.

  507. Spartacus Gruen says:

    If Hillary polls numbers keep dropping then yes he will win every single state with 58% of the vote.

  508. Virginia Liberal says:

    I disagree. If anything the Dem’s have moved farther to the left. However the real Dem’s know what it takes to win support and pass bills. Truman made it clear in his first full run for President who is for what when it came to parties and who they support. We have varying degrees of stands in our party like more all of us do. But making a suggestion on what we would like to accomplish, is a far cry from just flat out blowing smoke up someone’s ass just to get elected. Then what’s he going to do. Republicans have shown us what happens to parties that do not deliver on campaign promises. Bernie will be no different.

  509. King of America says:

    Do you honestly think he’s going to win every remaining state with 58%, given that in Wisconsin he still lost the African American vote by 40 points? He doesn’t have a chance. Sorry.

  510. Virginia Liberal says:

    Nice to know that you are the same. Bernie is not where near as bad to run against as it will be to run against the Republicans. You can keep your insults. They land on sterile ground. No one here is going to feed them. Whatever and thank you as well.

  511. Spartacus Gruen says:

    Maybe in your fantasy world he doesn’t have a realistic chance.

  512. Virginia Liberal says:

    Geez Whiz Stan S. I was sure when I opened up your comment I was going to get blasted by some Bernie person. I had to say thanks for the pleasant surprise. I’d also like to add, those of us road tested ones have to keep in mind that we were once that age. They have to learn like we did. Hell I voted for Reagan! I used to vote Republican half the time because I was so uninformed. So I can’t be but so mad at them. I can’t remember when I got so old. Well if they are lucky they’ll live long enough to understand. Hopefully we can keep the country above water in the meantime. Have a great night!

  513. King of America says:

    Not a realistic chance. There’s no likely scenario in which he’s suddenly going to become 150% more popular and stop losing the African American and Hispanic votes.

  514. Spartacus Gruen says:

    Uh? Bernie Sanders still has a chance of winning the nomination.

  515. King of America says:

    Yes, inter-dimensional travel will do that to a body.

  516. King of America says:

    I’m sorry you think Sanders has a chance of winning; he doesn’t. He hasn’t since March 1st. To be perfectly honest, he hasn’t since the start of his campaign, when he decided to ignore his obvious weakness with any demographic other than white college-age males.

  517. King of America says:

    Yes the “fury” of me calmly pointing out a total lie.

  518. King of America says:

    I’m sure you thought you had a point there that didn’t involve aligning yourself with anti-vaxxers, the stupidest people in the world. I’m also appalled you think that “widely” is the same as “universally”.

  519. Gracie Bean says:

    Oh please… This is a Sander supporter. This is how you people act.

  520. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Sure thing!

  521. Moderator4 says:

    Gabriella, you and Ari are engaging in blog-clogging and constant mutual insults. This needs to stop, and both of you should back off.

  522. Moderator4 says:

    Ari, you and Gabriella Creighton need to back off from your constant back-and-forth insults. It’s getting beyond old, you two are engaged in blog-clogging, and it needs to stop. And I will tell her the same thing.

  523. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I don’t believe you. Constant use of my name in a short hand and the repeated use of “girl” clearly signify my gender had something to do with your motivation and how to act.

    We’re sticking to topics. You’ve made my behavior a topic. So now we’re discussing it in full. Your behavior gets included here because you’re the one being fanciful if you think your attitude is immune to analysis.

  524. Gabriella Creighton says:

    1. Sure, this is an insult, however, since you were trying to infer that the only people who vote for Sanders are kids, you were already insulting people when I said that. Nice.
    2. Not an insult. The truth. As you say, “Calling someone out.” If that’s an insult you’re just a pot calling the kettle black.
    3. None of those are insults.

    You clearly lack any dignity if you’re trying such bald face tactics.

    Also nice attempts to circumvent the filter.

  525. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Declaring you lack integrity isn’t an insult, it’s the truth.

  526. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Defense of Marriage Act: She was not a Senator in 1996. She was the First Lady. She endorsed the bill, which was written by Bill Clinton. Nice trick question though.

    Actually not once did I say a thing about her voting habits. I was talking about her outright stance against gay marriage. Note these are quotes and promises, not votes. It’d be doubly bad if she actually voted for gay marriage while saying these things, because then it says to any voter she can’t be trust to do what she says or say what she’s doing in any transparent fashion.

    There hasn’t been a vote about the Immigration bull yet. However she DID vote on the previous bill:

    Her voting history says everything. She only rarely voted Nay and when she did it was over matters which either included a different issue she was against or a downright dumb bill (like the National Language Act). She however voted yay every time that restrictions and deadlines were increased against immigrants and yay on most border securing acts which target minorities.

    So there’s some of the votes for you.

  527. Spartacus Gruen says:

    You will be when he wins the nomination.

  528. Ari says:

    Where’s the vote?

  529. Zincoshine says:

    This is obviously a Trump supporter trying to make Bernie look bad. I don’t know how, but we need to somehow condemn this guy.

  530. kissyface says:

    Bernie needs to win every primary from here on out by 78% to even tie Hillary. 50% of New Yorks economy is based off of Wall Street. do you really think New York will vote away their jobs?

  531. Ari says:

    Altough I would personally love to see this country shift away from our current two party oligarchy and include viable 3rd and 4th party platforms.

  532. Ari says:

    “Are you an idiot who thinks that every conversation is closed and I can’t somehow carry my knowledge of what you’ve said in one thread to another? Grow up and stop pretending to have integrity you clearly lack.”

    Hmm…still think you were insulting people?

  533. Ari says:

    Definitely smarter move he made to run against Hilary. His ideas have been heard loud and clear and the momentum he has created can have a lasting effect if he is smart about moving forward.

  534. Ari says:

    Telling folks you know junior high school students with a broader world view.
    Telling someone theor perspective is BS.
    Calling folks immature, misogynistic etc.

    At least have the dignity to admit it girl. Everyone loses their $hit from time time to but thinking we don’t makes us dangerous.

  535. Ari says:

    And here is where you really stick you foot in it by making gross assumptions about my motives because you are a woman.
    I assure you gender has nothing to do with this discuasion.
    Let’s stick to the topics and not get to fanciful.

  536. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You know pretending a single state’s outcome isn’t a metric you can use to predict the other half of the state outcomes correct? You’re also making a GIGANTIC presumption by stating he might not win New York, California or Pennsylvania… the three states his supporters are strongest in.

    You’re fudging math to create a confidence while ignoring the reality of the situation. Yes, he has quite a bit to regain to take a lead. No, that’s in no way an impossibility.

    But yes, what this dude is doing is certainly crazy and I’d never encourage this kind of behavior myself. Alas, a single supporter does not represent an entire campaign or the millions of others who support Bernie. Just like not every person caught attempting voter fraud for Hillary represents her campaign, or the people beating black protesters into critical condition represent all of Trump’s people.

    But since this article wants us to attribute the actions of one crazy supporter to an entire campaign, maybe we should?

  537. Parque_Hundido says:

    Except that if it were the “widely accepted truth”,we wouldn’t have communities of anti-vaxers causing outbreaks, would we?

    You can cover your ears and repeat the same circular lies over and over. It won’t make them true.

  538. Parque_Hundido says:

    Look at the fury of your own posts and those of other Hillary bots. The coronation has been cancelled and you’re all in a tizzy. I think you hope that Bernie Sanders is Hillary’s problem. But deep down, you know that Hillary is Hillary’s biggest problem.

    I also get that it’s hard to comprehend things when you are so invested in not understanding them. Psychologists call this “denial” or “compensation.”

    I’m just enjoying the show.

  539. Parque_Hundido says:

    Nope. I’m asking why he lost in Wisconsin. Given your bullet-proof, airtight logic, you should be able to explain that loss. But you can’t. So you won’t.

  540. not telling says:

    You do know he has to win every state left by about 70% of the vote to win right? winning with 56% of the vote like in Wisconsin isn’t enough to pass her in Pledged delegates ( he only received 10 more then Hillary) so that would mean at the end the the super delegates would still go to Hillary. I am sure if Bernie would some how pass her in Pledged delegates the super would follow but they won’t until then. right now Hillary has 1280 and sanders has 1030 a difference of 250 Pledged delegates. So the idea of this Hit list is just him being a Bernie troll. so if he doesn’t win lets say New York, California, and Pennsylvania the largest pledged delegate states left by at least 70% of the vote there is no way for him to catch up. even if he would get lets say 75 to 80% of the other states votes for the other ones left. he still wouldn’t be able to pass her. So asking the Pledged delegates to switch to Bernie before he passes her pledged delegates is just crazy and stalker like.

  541. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You should keep trying to read things out loud, because you’re calling me stupid while admitting that current super delegate pledges mean absolutely nothing. They’ll mean something when the primaries are actually over, seeing as about half of the available delegates aren’t even assigned yet.

    Seeing as Bernie is now winning every state in the primaries as we go along, there are good chances he will pass Clinton. Who, I might add, still lacks the delegates needed to be nominated. Therefore hasn’t won anything yet.

    You are buying into Clinton’s strategy. It does prove how effective it is. By creating a pretense of victory they’re hoping for a self fulfilling prophecy.

    Yes, this Sanders supporter is a moron. So are you for holding ANY value in superdelegate votes this early on. And yes, it’s still early seeing as three of the biggest states haven’t had their primaries yet and each one is a literal swing state.

  542. not telling says:

    in 2008 Obama passed Hillary in feb 9 or 10th of 2008 in pledged delegates and
    then the super followed but they didn’t follow until after he passed her
    in pledged delegates. In Pledged delegates Hillary
    is way ahead this time. Last time in 2008 Hillary fell behind in pledged
    delegates in feb 9 or 10th of 2008. The super won’t follow Bernie until
    He passes her in Pledged delegates, and that is why this guy that posted this hit list is a
    complete troll. Most of the time the super delegates go by the number of
    Pledged delegates nation wide before they swing their vote for the
    other person.

  543. not telling says:

    I did and you are totally wrong. Like i said back in 2008 Obama passed Hillary in feb 9 or 10th of 2008 in delegates and then the super followed but they didn’t follow until after he passed her in pledged delegates. HOW stupid are you!!!! Pledged delegates Hillary is way ahead this time. Last time in 2008 Hillary fell behind in pledged delegates in feb 9 or 10th of 2008. The super won’t follow Bernie until He passes her in Pledged delegates!!! Now do you under stand there is no silliness!! and that is why this guy that posted this hit list is a complete troll. Most of the time the super delegates go by the number of Pledged delegates nation wide before they swing their vote for the other person.

  544. rebecca says:

    I’m glad he did. running a three way race as an independent would have been a real dick move.

  545. Mary Lang says:

    “my room mate Is getting paid HOURLY. ninety-eight$ on the internet.”….two days ago new McLaren P2 bought after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a days ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn. More right Hereo!635➤➤➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperJobsReportsEmploymentsPhase/GetPaidHourly98$…. .❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:❖:❦:::::o!635………

  546. Bill_Perdue says:

    Democrats are not part of the left. They’ve always been right centrists and are currently moving further right at a fast clip. BS and his supporters are naive if they think they can out vote the monied interests that control the DP leaders and their brothers and sisters in the RP.

  547. WampusKat says:

    I suppose if you wanted to ensure that everyone hates your candidate (superdelegates in particular), pull a stunt like this on his behalf. Very teabaggerish… I notice the Bernouts are here to make excuses instead of offering what should be a unanimous, “Not cool, dude!”

  548. WampusKat says:

    Can you direct us to the webpage calling itself a “hit list” on behalf of Clinton?

  549. WampusKat says:

    The loons have become a feature, not a bug.

  550. WampusKat says:

    Then there really is no excuse for your behavior on this thread.

  551. WampusKat says:

    “So your argument is that you believe younger voters are stupid”

    Exhibit A.

  552. King of America says:

    You weren’t wrong – you were lying. Totally different.

  553. King of America says:

    I didn’t make a counter-claim, I pointed out that literally nobody – not even the Sanders campaign – agreed with you. In much the same way, I don’t need to prove that vaccines work to an anti-vaxxer claiming they don’t, because my position is the widely-accepted truth.

  554. King of America says:

    I think you’re confusing 10 or so delegates with the several hundred he needs to win?

  555. King of America says:

    I’m sure you think that made sense as a reply, but it really didn’t.

  556. Ari says:

    But it’s been all day and night and you still haven’t backed up anyrhing.
    It’s more than a little bizarre at this point.

  557. Ari says:

    I have read through the entire thread.
    You’re mistaken but the way you so rabidly insist you’re right is a bit troubling.

  558. Ari says:

    If your going to cut and paste other people’s work you might want to at least use quotation marks, least folks think you are a plagarist.

  559. Ari says:

    So you view her thinking states should decide for thselves as contradicting her current position?

  560. Ari says:

    That’s because I am looking to engage with folks who have taken the time to educate themselves on the issues and can present factual information so I can become informed.
    It’s a funny quirk I have, this enjoyment of facts and rational thinking ;-)

  561. Ari says:

    You’re reaching Gaby.

    Pick a topic and let’s share viewpoints or pick a topic and we can debate it.

  562. Ari says:

    You still have not named my bias

  563. Ari says:

    When did I ever claim to have no bias?
    Scrolled around and it looks like…never.

  564. Ari says:

    Lordy girl…

  565. Ari says:

    The only other person who called you out threw down when you didn’t

  566. Ari says:

    You kept pushing him to produce evidence instead of being humble enough to give space to the idea that your statement might not have merit.

  567. Ari says:

    You asked for a link. Reasonble.for him to Google it for you.

  568. Ari says:


  569. Ari says:

    You haven’t produced any evidence for anyone to ignore.

  570. Ari says:

    No, wow, you really beleive your hyperbol

  571. Ari says:

    Again, where’s the bias? Name it.

  572. Ari says:

    What were the topics?

  573. Ari says:

    Because she is too insecure to ask to be informed on a topic.

  574. Ari says:

    I definitely want to hear more about that.

  575. Ari says:

    I’m not sure you taught him in as much as he knew he was right and you were really going sideways with personalizing it. I think he just wanted to end it for you.

    Regarding the math, I’m not going to do it for you but I will point you in that direction.

    Agrates to consider:

    Calculate # of pledged delegates left in each state primary or causcus and what percentage of those he would need in order to win.

    There’s a self evident second part to that equation once figure that out.

    Unfortunately for Bernie the unpledged “super delegates” are going to back the only true Democrat left in the race. Hilary.
    Like it or not, the SD’S very existence is designed to protect the Democratic Party from candidates just like Bernie. They will do their job.


  576. Ari says:

    He was just wanting you to back up your premise which is expected.

  577. Ari says:

    It’s a noble trait.
    It’s also noble to be teachable.
    One of the great things about debating is the opportunity it gives us to learn.
    If we have to be “right” that leaves nothing for the other person to be but wrong. Dialog doesn’t get very far under those circumstances. Nor does it when we make it personal.
    Safe to say we violet ed some basic rules of engagement and I venture those were the parts that weren’t fun eh?
    Not helpful to feel attacked I imagine.
    Here’s a link you might enjoy.

  578. Ari says:

    But you still haven’t named bias or how it informed my viewpoint.

  579. Ari says:

    I suspect most humans have more than two biases.

    I was speaking to holding internalized dialectical viewpoints simultaneously.

    Your shrink friends will be the first to tell you it is good mental hygiene to be able to do that ;-)

  580. Parque_Hundido says:

    Judging by the ire of the Hillary bots, I’d say now.

  581. Parque_Hundido says:

    Since when do Hillary bots speak on behalf of the rational among us?

  582. Parque_Hundido says:

    Was that why he lost Wisconsin?


  583. Ari says:

    “Epileptic, thay made me chuckle ;-)

    Objectively though, Bernie will admit he is lacking in foreign affairs. Most folks paying attention in non-election cycle politica know he is sorely lacking.
    It’d be awesome if that weren’t true but it is and with the state of global affairs economic and otherwise, we really can’t afford to have a President doing an apprenticeship over the next 4 years.
    The economy is duct tape together…for now, we have major trade considerations with partners who’s own economies are teetering, we have strategic security alliences thay need careful tending by a skilled hand. Someone with experience.
    Like her or not, objectively she has the better resume for the job and what’s more, though lord knows why, she wants to do the job.

    If I thought a full tilt revolution would help us evolve more fully as a nation, I would be first in line and have definitely fantasized about it. I simply don’t and am ok with more moderate, slow and steady growth.

  584. ADDISON GAINOUS says:

    Oh I agree 100%. I think he is a passive aggressive piece of ….

  585. Ari says:

    Most humans aren’t skillful when their emotionally aroused by strong passion and viewpoints.

  586. Ari says:

    Which one?
    I’d like to see it.
    C’mon Gaby. Produce the evidence or at least admit you get carried away by your passion and might misinterpret things when you’re extra emotional.

  587. Gabriella Creighton says:

    He thankfully finally decided to provide the evidence. I was happy to be proven wrong with something solid that wasn’t “I don’t believe you therefore you’re wrong.”

    I’m willing to accept when I make a mistake.

  588. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I don’t give up. Which you should have figured out by now.

  589. Gabriella Creighton says:

    It’s your job to back up your own counter-claims and to actually settle an argument you know you can win instantly with speed. Anything else is just baiting someone.

  590. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Yeah I thought I detected a hint of misogyny. The constant need to mention my gender is a big giveaway.

    It was also acceptable of me to ask him to back up his talk. Funny how it took him 3 hours to do so. If he was so sure he was right, then by his own admission, it would have taken him 30 seconds to do so. Yet he took so long.

    Maybe you should take your own advice about the irrational arguments and insults though. Especially with the need to continually rag on someone’s gender. I do wonder why a Hillary supporter sees an issue with women talking in a debate though.

  591. Ari says:

    He’s right though.

  592. Ari says:

    Dang girl! You have awesome stamina!

  593. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Quite adept at Google, sir. However, I’m glad you’ve proven that someone in your camp can’t gracefully accept it when someone says they were wrong. And instead needs to keep pushing. Bravo sir.

  594. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Yet today I’ve accomplished teaching someone to actually set down their evidence instead of just attacking people to prove themselves “right”. A feat most teachers dream of getting their problem kids to do all their lives. And the dude is an adult to boot!

    I’m rather proud of myself.

    I would like to hear from you actual backing to your claims that Bernie has lost the primaries though. While you’ve attempted to get me to “do the math” and “show my proof”, every time I have you’ve avoided the answer so far as though I’m saying something inconvenient to you. Is that because I’m right or because you’re too lazy to give any evidence?

    In terms of Delegates:

    Hilary: 1,280 / 2,383
    Sanders: 1,030 / 2,383

    Neither has enough delegates for a win yet. There are 1.955 delegate votes remaining for a nomination. Realistically, both candidates are still 100% in the race, as either could get more than 50% of the votes left and win the nomination. Sanders has indeed been trailing, but the thing is, it’s actually possible for them to tie at this point too. Which is when the super delegates would even truly matter, because despite what people claim about their “pledged” support, Super Delegates historically actually vote according to the popular vote. They aren’t actually tied down to either candidate.

  595. King of America says:

    Why is it my job to look up evidence for your ridiculously false claims? You kept claiming to have that evidence, but you were obviously lying. In other words, I am not to blame for your mental laziness.

  596. Ari says:

    He is not the one making statements girl.
    You are.
    Again, it’s completely acceptable for him to ask you to back up your talk if what you are wanting is a fully enaged debate.
    If on the other hand you want to pontificate and share your biased, completely prejudoced or ilinformed opnions, that’s totally ok too. We all like to do thay once in a while.
    Just say so and don’t use irrational argument or insult folks when you get challenged.
    It makes you look petty and smallminded.

  597. King of America says:

    I didn’t need to look it up; I was entirely correct all along. You asked for a link and – since you were obviously too inept to work google yourself – I provided one. Sorry that you were entirely wrong, as I kept telling you; no part of the fault for that can be laid at my feet.

  598. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Not at all.

  599. Ari says:

    It’s fair enough for anyone to ask you to back up your statements Gaby.
    As tenacious as you are, if you took the time to really educate yourself you’d be a force to recon with.

  600. Ari says:

    I think you might be tired and confused.

  601. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Oh, the posts where you literally said you weren’t biased.

  602. Gabriella Creighton says:

    And it’s almost as if you just admitted you needed to look it up to see if you were right or not.

  603. Gabriella Creighton says:

    No, I actually thought I was right, but I also wasn’t going to dig into it when it was your job to do so when proving me wrong. I was more angry that you refused and instead decided to claim I was a liar when, and you’ll have to forgive the irony here:

    Until you looked it up, you didn’t know you were right either.

  604. Ari says:

    When did I ever “pretend” I didn’t have biases?

  605. King of America says:

    Yes, I’m sorry that your false claim took literally seconds to google – it’s almost like you could have done that yourself before posting your conspiracy theory version of events.

  606. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I already have. What you call stumbling must make Hillary epileptic, because she’s stumbled more than this on simpler issues.

  607. King of America says:

    I love that this entire post boils down to “I was lying all along”.

  608. Ari says:

    Try watching the actual interview unedited girl.
    Start with that.
    Then name the bias that informed by flippant view point.
    Take your time…

  609. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Yes, two viewpoints can coexist, they require two individuals to have different viewpoints however. So if you’re trying to say you can have two biases, I have some good shrinks to recommend to get that multiple personality disorder looked at.

  610. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Hold up. Now we’re stating that NGPVAN did it? I guess I can take in good faith that you’re actually pausing now and doing research here. But there’s a little problem with that one.

    NGP VAN also didn’t detect a breach. In full disclosure, they stated they were able to confirm that the Sanders Campaign was able to get past a firewall that was opened by one of their own staffers. What they actually did was confirm that there was a breach some time later and check the logs to see who had exploited it.

    By the way, same logs actually showed that the Clinton Campaign’s assertions that the Sanders Campaign had taken “valuable data” was a crock. The logs, which are on public record, you can look them up, don’t contain a single instance of export, which is the only way to actually access the data. The Campaign only used several searches and viewed several lists, neither of which actually contain the data that the Clinton group claims was so valuable.

    I’m finishing this up after another reply you made. THANK YOU for finally doing what I asked and providing your damn evidence. I’m PROUD to say I’m wrong now, about who detected it.

    Was it really so hard? Proving me wrong with an actual fact instead of trying to write me as wrong and make an assertion based on a loose link?

  611. Ari says:

    In all dialectics two seemingly opposing viewpoints can co-exisits. The degree to which humans can hold them skillfully is the degree to which they are at peace.

  612. Gabriella Creighton says:


    Was that so hard?

    Yes, that does seem to prove me wrong. My bad on that one.

  613. King of America says:

    Likewise, Sanders biggest problem is Sanders. The reason he lost this primary is because he never took any steps to make himself more appealing to minority voters, a weakness that was apparent at the very start of his campaign.

  614. Ari says:

    I think it might be a good time to get some sleep folks.
    We’re all Americans. Blessed with considerable rights and even greater responsibilities.
    Argument and shenanigans aside, I send blessings to you and your loved ones.

  615. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I’m half convinced now that you’re a bot that was made to troll posts.

  616. King of America says:

    “The data breach was discovered Wednesday by the Democratic party’s voter data software vendor, NGP VAN.”

    I hope that helps!

  617. King of America says:

    OK sure.

  618. King of America says:

    Technically it was NGP VAN who detected the breach.

  619. Ari says:

    There’s that insulting thing again.

  620. Ari says:

    Now we’re using “odds.”

    Wow, this is like shooting fish in a berral

  621. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Sorry, I must have missed it, when did you provide an article of your own that claimed the DNC “detected it within hours”? Can you quote any article, anywhere, that supports your claim? It should be easy if you’re telling the truth!

  622. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You… already posted this in another thread. And I answered you already. He’d need 50% of the remaining delegates.

  623. Ari says:

    I said do the math.

  624. King of America says:

    No, that’s where I’m saying that your account isn’t supported by any reported version of the incident – not even the self-serving one from the Sanders campaign itself.

    I hope that helps!

  625. Ari says:

    There’s those insults again.

    For the sake of hrony, let’s do the math.

    We’ll start with what percentage of remaining delegates would Bernie need to win in order to get the nomination?

  626. King of America says:

    Sorry, I must have missed it. No, I just checked – you haven’t; probably just an oversight on your part. Can you quote any article, anywhere, that supports your claim? It should be easy if you’re telling the truth!

  627. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Of course not, because he hasn’t lost.

  628. Gabriella Creighton says:

    What does that have to do with the fiction you’re asserting that the DNC detected the breach themselves – a claim that is included in zero reporting of the incident?

  629. King of America says:

    I’m not smug that Sanders has lost.

  630. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You do realize you’ve now just admitted you have a bias right? After a full day pretending otherwise?

  631. King of America says:

    What does that have to do with the fiction you’re asserting that the Sanders campaign reported the data breach themselves – a claim that is included in zero reporting of the incident?

  632. Ari says:

    I like to subject facts to my completely biased opinions.
    It’s more amusing thay way.

  633. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Sorry sweetie, that’s all you. You’re the one trying to call an election halfway through.

  634. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Thank you for admitting that you’re a troll.

  635. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Typo: You let your smug get in the way of facts. :)

  636. King of America says:

    I’m not the one making the outrageously false claims, here. That would be you.

  637. Ari says:

    You’re just too easy Gaby.

  638. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Thank you for admitting yourself a bullshit artist.

  639. King of America says:

    Typo: You accidentally put a 5 in front of that 0.

  640. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Already did.

    By the way:

    Good reading for you.

  641. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You’re a loser for claiming to have no bias, demonstrating a clear bias, being called on it, now trying to change the subject.

  642. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Primary is still happening, and he’s currently got a 50% chance to win.

    Learn how to calculate odds.

  643. Ari says:

    “Such bs coming from one person.”

    Ding, ding, ding!

    Indeed it is :-)

  644. Gabriella Creighton says:

    So far you’ve linked and quoted nothing at all.

  645. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Here’s where you totally weren’t making any claims. Nope. None here. You didn’t state in the above that the DNC detected the breach or anything.

  646. King of America says:

    So it should be super easy to quote the parts of those two articles that support your claim, then. Go on.

  647. Ari says:

    Now I’m a “loser” for asking for you to educate and inspire us?

  648. King of America says:

    Except the primary.

  649. King of America says:

    A better answer would be to link to an article that contains your claim, and provide a quote that supports it. All you’ve done so far is quoted Uretsky saying he intended to report it.

  650. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Again, if you’re not making any claims then you’re not in an argument, which means this conversation isn’t happening.

    Yet it is.

    You have yet to prove anything false. Claiming you don’t like my evidence isn’t proof buttercup.

  651. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Interesting, now you have so little to actually respond to you’re trying to get me to do your thinking for you.

  652. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Only he hasn’t lost anything yet. :)

  653. King of America says:

    Again, I’m not the one making any claims; you are. You can’t back them up, though, because they are 100% false.

  654. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I have and they do.

  655. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Cute, more ad hominem and no substance. Why is it always the trolls that try to claim others aren’t making substantial statements that always turn out to be the biggest losers in that themselves?

  656. Julian says:

    More like a kindergarten playground. Good grief.

  657. Ari says:

    What’s your original thought?

  658. King of America says:

    Sorry that Sanders lost due to incompetence! Not my fault, though!

  659. Gabriella Creighton says:

    And yet you still haven’t provided one that says the DNC is the one who detected the breach. Interesting.

  660. King of America says:

    You have not provided any evidence. You’ve linked to two articles, neither of which says that.

  661. Ari says:

    “Sheilded by pretense?”
    What exactly am I shielding?
    Call it out. Name it “sweetie.”
    You don’t like being called out?
    Engage in a topic.
    State your position that is not cut and pasted regurgitation you’ve lapped up from National media sources or weak minded argument just for the sake of argument.
    Share an original idea that inspires or educates. I’m even open to some sassy, quick witted banter.

  662. King of America says:

    A better answer would have been to quote the actual point in any article which says the Sanders campaign reported their espionage attempt themselves. You won’t find such a quote, though.

  663. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Oh yes, the child who can’t accept that he’s wrong tries to bow out pretending he was right.

    Sorry you think the primary is over. Your future will be filled with disappointment. If overconfidence is really what Hillary’s supporters are dealing with, I doubt we have to worry about them turning out for the remaining half of the votes.

  664. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I’ve backed it up, because I can. And even if I couldn’t, that doesn’t make it false.

    Actual evidence of your own claim would.

    And yes, you started this.

  665. King of America says:

    OK, now you’re just lying.

    Have a great day! Sorry the primary is over.

  666. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Actually yes, they have. You’re just refusing to acknowledge it. I even provided a quote like you wanted.

    You’re really driving that denial hard aren’t you?

  667. King of America says:

    Pretty sure I didn’t start this. I asked you to back up your claim, and you cannot. That’s because it’s false.

  668. King of America says:

    What “evidence” have you provided? You’ve linked to two articles, neither of which say anything remotely like your claim.

  669. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Yes you did.

    And yes, he can realistically win.

    Please stop presenting actual strawman arguments and using fallacies before attempting to call them on others.

  670. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I did in another thread, which you’ve of course now refused to respond to.

    “Bernie Sanders is a huckster promising fairies-in-the-garden to people
    lacking the critical thinking skills to discern that as demonstrated
    appallingly by his interview today with the New York Daily News, he
    literally gibbers when asked to explain how these things could be
    delivered. A complete ignoramus about foreign policy, he sounded like a
    child, not a potential President, on that subject also. Total amateur,
    totally unqualified to be in a global leadership position. Hillary
    Clinton far, far outstrips him on every front, including ethics,
    honesty, willingness to forge consensus, and willingness to do the hard
    work needed to gain the deep expertise she has and he so egregiously
    lacks. ”

    That’s from you. Please explain how this is a statement made without bias.

  671. Gabriella Creighton says:

    No sweetie. You started this. You have to actually prove what you said.

    Now back it up. Show even one shred of evidence that the DNC is the party that detected the breach.

    You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Even if you proved me “false” it doesn’t make your claim true. That’s a very old fallacy. You don’t make something true just because you prove something else false, especially when other factors could be involved.

  672. King of America says:

    I never said “do the math”. I said, again, that he can’t realistically win. Please stop inventing strawmen to argue against; it’s embarrassing to watch.

  673. Gabriella Creighton says:

    HAH! The guy constantly demanding evidence from me, ignoring my evidence, and not providing ANY of his own, telling me I’m the one not supporting my claims. This is comedic.

  674. Ari says:

    Name it.

  675. King of America says:

    No, the claim here was made by you – that the Sanders campaign reported the intrusion. That is not supported by any evidence, and it isn’t in either of the articles you’ve linked to; nor is it in any other reporting of the incident that I’ve ever read. That’s because that claim is 100% false – not even the Sanders campaign itself has claimed to have done this.

  676. Gabriella Creighton says:

    About 50%.

    Funny that. It really could go either way.

  677. Gabriella Creighton says:

    When you linked the infographic stating the lead and told us to do the math sweetie. That’s when you made the claim.

    Nice backpedal. There is a very realistic scenario in which Sanders can in fact catch up. You’re just terribly in denial over that. There’s almost 2000 delegates left to vote. You’re trying to claim the election on about half the votes in.

    Perhaps instead of ignoring anything told to you that doesn’t fit with your denial, maybe stop trying to tell people that all they’re doing is insulting and actually read what they have to say.

  678. King of America says:

    What did anyone, other than yourself, say here that was “bullshit”? You’ve made a claim that is wholly unsupported by any evidence, and you seem to be avoiding admitting that.

  679. Ari says:

    “This isn’t the kind of math I’m talking about.”
    Of course it isn’t because it doesn’t involve magical thinking or your candidate winning.

    Sarcasm aside, let’s really break it on down here.

    This is not complicated.
    Let me kick it off and ask you, what percentage of remaining pledged delegates would Bernie need to win in order to get the nomination?

  680. King of America says:

    I’m sorry, when did I make the claim that 250 delegates were enough to win the election? I said there’s no realistic scenario in which Sanders can catch up. Rather than angrily insulting people, perhaps it would behoove you to read what they said.

  681. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You’re the one making the claim that the DNC detected it. You’ve yet to link anything at all. You haven’t proven your claim. All you’re doing is trying to ignore my evidence in order to claim you’re right.

    Either prove the DNC is the one who detected it, or stop trying to make the claim that Sanders didn’t report it. Because it can only actually be one or the other.

  682. Gabriella Creighton says:

    The only other person to call me out has also failed to bring anything to the table other than fiction.

    Here’s the math: 250 delegates ahead isn’t a victory. Were she actually holding enough delegates to secure the candidacy, that would be another story, but she does not.

    That’s the math I’m speaking about here. You’re so dead set on being right you fail to see that this is a race that could very easily go the other way. Especially since every state looking forward for quite a bit now is actually already vetted to Bernie.

  683. King of America says:

    You are the one making the claim that the Sanders team reported it; that is not mentioned in the article you linked to – a claim you disputed, although you now seem to be admitting it was the truth – and nor is it mentioned in this new article. It’s not mentioned ANYWHERE, in fact, except possibly in the self-serving lies Tad Devine told about the incident.

    Uretsky is one of the two main people who commit the espionage, and his word isn’t worth anything – especially once you read the audit trail and see that he’s lying through his teeth. This was deliberate and they attempted to set up dummy accounts so that they could commit further intrusions after security was restored. The Sanders campaign response was wholly inadequate.

  684. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Yeah. Wow. Someone’s not actually bending to your usual bullshit. :)

  685. Gabriella Creighton says:

    lacking the critical thinking skills to discern that as demonstrated
    literally gibbers when asked to explain how these things could be
    totally unqualified to be in a global leadership position. Hillary
    lacks. ”


  686. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I have, twice now. You ignore those threads and stalk my others to make false claims about me insulting people.

  687. Gabriella Creighton says:

    This is cute considering the post just underneath this one. I really want to know what peyote you’re smoking.

  688. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You need to return to school and pass those math classes. Were she 2500 delegates ahead, it wouldn’t be a race. But 250 isn’t the amount needed to actually win the election.

  689. Ari says:

    Ok, well then you show me the math Gaby. C’mon girl. I know I’m not the only one today who has called you out. Giddy up. Let’s go! Break down the math for us all.

  690. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Oh cute. First of all, burden of proof falls on the first person to make a claim. You said the DNC detected it. You’ve avoided, three times now, actually proving that one.

    Second, you never read the article.


    “But rather than reporting the glitch immediately, they probed the database for a bit under two hours.”

    In this case the site does a good job avoiding the facts, but they admit that the Sanders campaign did report the breach, just not immediately.

    Uretsky has gone on the record many times stating that in those two hours, he was merely exploring the extent of the breach to properly report it.

    Now, would you please, pretend we’re all not idiots, and actually provide evidence to your claim that it was in fact the DNC that detected the breach? Because in my own searching I can’t find a single report that actually says that.

  691. Ari says:

    Respectful is refreshing :-)

  692. Ari says:

    Can’t fault him for that.
    He has a message and he chose a platform most likely to let him be heard. Makes sense and…
    It is a bit hypocritical of him to decry the DNC’S rules on Superdelegates while he is actively campaigning to get their vote.

  693. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You’re the one who’s literally stated anyone who supports Sanders is a “dipshit” and “brainless teens”. While ignoring the many actual facts I’ve given. It’s cute that once proven wrong, you act like a petulant child.

  694. Gabriella Creighton says:

    And here’s Ari, actually fully unloading insults towards anyone who doesn’t agree with (him?). While not actually giving a single point that isn’t a gigantic subjective opinion.

  695. Ari says:

    Where’s the bias?
    If you’re gonna play at least contribute something substantial girl. C’mon.
    Where’s the bias? Name it.

  696. Gabriella Creighton says:

    He didn’t gibber. Try watching news sources that don’t sample negatively.

    We get that you have an overgrown superiority complex, and a clearly demonstrated bias you’ve pretended not to have. But what about those well reasoned arguments you keep asking for?

    Oh yes, and before I forget. You said Hillary outstrips in him what?


    Nope. That would be Sanders outstripping her.

    Hard Work for Expertise:
    Besides this being purely subjective on your part, seeing as one has a Masters Degree in Political Science (Sanders) while the other has a Law Degree (Clinton), also Sanders having been serving as a Senator far longer than Clinton, we could actually err on Sander’s side in terms of Hard Work and Experience, while Clinton has more knowledge on the executive branch.

    As for Ethics?
    Let’s see, other than the Clinton Campaign filing an ethics complaint against Sanders (which btw, does not make him guilty, just accused), there hasn’t been a whole lot of talk about their ethics.

    Unless you want to dig into the stories about how the voting process has been going. How Clinton reached out to Early Voters and attempted to use those votes as claims for state wins. The multiple attempts at voter fraud uncovered where a member of Clinton’s campaign staff was linked. The amount of paid chairs and (quite literally) stolen ballots linked to Clinton supporters.

    You really don’t want to talk Ethics. Not even Clinton wants to actually talk Ethics, which she’s gone on the record for stating herself.

    “Willingness to Forge Consensus”, I’ve saved this for last because I want to show how a Clinton supporter can be dishonest. All you’re saying is that Clinton is well known for being willing to compromise to get parts of things she wants. Arguably, this could be a good thing, it shows she has the realistic (if somewhat nihilistic) view that you can’t actually get a job done without compromise. On the other hand, it shows that she’s not actually a candidate we can trust to fight for the things we want or need. She will, in the end, settle.

    Any chance you can respond to this without ad hominem towards anyone who disagrees with you?

  697. Ari says:

    Pick a topic Gaby. Let’s throw down.
    I personally love to learn and welcome getting schooled while engaging in intelligent, well informed debate.

  698. Ari says:

    She won’t. She has been here on this thread all day hurling personal insults trying to feel intelligent while backing up her statements with absolutely ZERO facts.

  699. Ari says:

    Oh, here’s Gaby again struggling to have meaningful dialog so resorting to personal insults.

  700. Ari says:

    I have been open to Bernie’s ideas, just as I have to any other candidate. Bernie Sanders is running for POTUS not cubscout den mother so the vetting should and will continue to be intense. It’s his choice to stay in the race.

  701. King of America says:

    OK sorry that you think it’s possible for Sanders to win in any realistic scenario; it really isn’t, and hasn’t been since March 1st.

  702. King of America says:

    I’ve already told you the article makes no such claim; you’ve said I was wrong. Prove it.

    Oh wait, you can’t.

  703. King of America says:

    I don’t seem to see where you have actually pointed I’m wrong, I just see the usual insults you seem to specialise in.

  704. Ari says:

    Bernie Sanders is a huckster promising fairies-in-the-garden to people lacking the critical thinking skills to discern that as demonstrated appallingly by his interview today with the New York Daily News, he literally gibbers when asked to explain how these things could be delivered. A complete ignoramus about foreign policy, he sounded like a child, not a potential President, on that subject also. Total amateur, totally unqualified to be in a global leadership position. Hillary Clinton far, far outstrips him on every front, including ethics, honesty, willingness to forge consensus, and willingness to do the hard work needed to gain the deep expertise she has and he so egregiously lacks. 

    Bernie Sanders’s amateurism and dumb-dumb ignorance, makes the late Sen. George McGovern, another far-left poster boy who lost a Presidential race in a landslide after being put in as nominee by dipsh**s who demonized the center-left liberal who could actually have won, look like a towering statesman and Mt. Rushmore candidate. Oh, and then there’s Nobel Prize-winning, Oscar-winning environmental activist Al Gore, who the dipsh**ts demonized as just too centrist for them, while they were voting for Ralph Nader and giving us W Bush round II. Keep it up. Fairies in the Garden.

  705. Gabriella Creighton says:

    By the way, interesting you want me to read an article for you instead of finding it yourself. Possibly want to also, while you’re at it, provide evidence of what you stated?

  706. Gabriella Creighton says:

    So much BS coming from just one person. It’s no wonder you guys really need to focus a campaign on lies. :)

  707. Gabriella Creighton says:

    And this isn’t the math I’m talking about. This is playing with numbers to try and create a fiction that isn’t happening. There are currently 1955 delegates left undecided and each candidate still has yet to cross the threshold for minimum needed for candidacy. While Hilary has a slight lead right now, that number can easily change especially since the elections are now shifting towards states which are already attributed towards Sanders, not Hilary.

    You’re either buying Clinton’s preemptive bias campaign or actually helping in the delusion. Either way, you’re not doing any decent sort of math here. A lead means absolutely nothing until the total are actually in. As several states which were declared for Clinton and now are actually Sanders have shown.

  708. Ari says:

    There’s no race. Do the math.
    The uproar is because rational folks know there are bigger fish to fry.



  709. King of America says:

    “Constantly” you say. Weird, as far as I can see he seems to have made one half-hearted statement months after it became apparent that his fanbase was full of misogynists, and never repeated it.

    BTW, you don’t seem to have pointed out where I was wrong below about the Sanders campaign not having reported the data theft they were involved in. Can you quote the part of the article where it says that?

  710. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Except, you know, constantly state to his supporters that this isn’t the behavior he wants to see.

    Why do you post complete fiction constantly? And no, that wasn’t what I was getting at with my statement, it was a direct parody of 12 other posts saying how Bernie supporters were coming out of the woodwork. It’s going both ways.

  711. King of America says:

    Yes, nobody should comment on this story unless they are totally uncritical of Sanders, who hasn’t done anything much to reign these people in.

  712. King of America says:

    When is it going to be a race? She’s 250 delegates ahead.

  713. Bill_Perdue says:

    “Take Hillary Clinton. Earlier this month, she said, “there can be no justification or tolerance for this kind of criminal behavior” that has been seen on Wall Street. She added that “while institutions have paid large fines and in some cases admitted guilt, too often it has seemed that the human beings responsible get off with limited consequences or none at all, even when they have already pocketed the gains.” Her campaign echoed the message with an email to supporters lauding Clinton for saying that “when Wall Street executives commit criminal wrongdoing, they deserve to face criminal prosecution.”

    Clinton’s outrage sounds convincing at first—but then, audacity-wise, it starts to seem positively Trump-like when cross-referenced with campaign finance reports, foundation donations and speaking fees.

    According to an Associated Press analysis, Clinton has already raked in more than $1.6 million worth of campaign contributions from donors in the same financial sector she is slamming on the campaign trail. Additionally, Clinton’s foundation took $5 million worth of donations from at least nine financial institutions that secured special deals to avoid prosecution—even as they admitted wrongdoing. The Clintons also accepted nearly $4 million in speaking fees from those firms since 2009.

    Oh, and that anti-Wall Street email from Clinton’s campaign? It was authored by Clinton aide Gary Gensler, a onetime Goldman Sachs executive who later became a government official

  714. Parque_Hundido says:

    Wow. Now that the Hillary bots know that it’s going to be a race instead of a coronation, they’re getting testy!

  715. King of America says:

    Clinton has 2.5 times the lead that Obama had:

  716. Stan S says:

    Since you all want to use age I am 77 years young !

  717. Stan S says:

    Real DINO using the DEMOCRATIC PARTY for his own Advancement !

  718. Stan S says:

    Virginia, This is the smartest post,i have read this evening, You are right, I don’t know what these kids see so fascinating in this old geezer, but, I hope they soon find out what the DEMOCRATIC party stands for, , We are a party for the Middle Class, The Repukelikan Party is for the rich and the RICH ONLY, Bernie is NOT A DEMOCRAT, and NEVER was, I have worked 60 years + of my lifetime in public works, and, you know what, The Repukes have fought everything and anything the workers have strived for, I sincerely
    hope these kids get an education on who they are trying to support, he has promised them so much free stuff, he has them all blind-sided with his rheotoric, he has promised so much stuff with NO WAY TO PAY FOR IT, but they are like the jimmy jones followers, eatin his bullshit up ! God have mercy on us, should he ever make President !

  719. heimaey says:

    He’s won more caucuses (10 out of 14) so that’s not a completely fair comparison. But yes she does technically have more votes. New polls show she dropped from a 20 point lead to a 6 point lead in PA this week so good luck!

  720. Stan S says:

    I feel that burnie stands with this kind of shit !

  721. Stan S says:

    Two of a kind !

  722. ADDISON GAINOUS says:

    Because he needed to “use” the Democrats. His words, not mine.

  723. ADDISON GAINOUS says:

    I say soon.

  724. King of America says:

    Can you quote the part where it says the Sanders campaign reported it?

  725. ADDISON GAINOUS says:

    I am telling you guys Sanders is not who you think he is. The sleazy behavior started with hacking Clintons DNC list, the BernieBot behavior towards ANYONE who does not agree with them and now this lowlife crap and don’t get me started on the denigrating way he talks about Clinton. Whenever he wins she always congratulates him with class–in reverse he is a passive aggressive a-hole.

  726. Gabriella Creighton says:

    No sweetie, it isn’t a conspiracy theory. It’s verified fact. Given you clearly don’t read things thoroughly however I can see how pesky little things like the truth get past you.

  727. King of America says:

    OK, sorry – that’s a conspiracy theory. That article does not support your contention, by the way.

  728. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Sorry sweetie, but lying doesn’t change facts. Just like declaring yourself a sovereign doesn’t actually make you a king. :)

    Not only did they report it, they’d reported the same exact breech two months prior and the DNC did absolutely nothing. It’s amusing that you think the DNC’s security was good enough to even detect intrusion.

  729. King of America says:

    Except that there certainly WAS a theft, and the Sanders campaign did not report anything – they were caught by an automated security audit several hours after the intrusion.

  730. Parque_Hundido says:

    That evidence was provided by HuffPo AND the WaPo. But for die hard Hillary bots it’s never enough. Go whine somewhere else.

  731. Parque_Hundido says:

    Oh. You’re one of those delusional Hillary bots who thinks her problem is Bernie Sanders. Newsflash: she is her own worst problem. You’re welcome.

  732. Katt Bruner says:

    I’m sorry Diane, but I need to respectfully disagree with you here.

    I’ve never seen Bernie do anything to incite anyone. He motivates people by siding with them on important issues.

    Aka he listens to the people.

    In regards to superdelegates the only thing that annoys me is that they are included in the media’s delegate count giving a false bloated number.

    Those delegates don’t choose their candidate until the amount of delegates is reached or they help decide at the democratic convention.

    I don’t think they should be counted in the overall delegate total for either candidate until then.

    As far as publishing information for purposes of harassment, I feel this guy should be arrested. He is putting these people in a bad situation…one in which their families could also be harassed, which is dead wrong.

    I saw Sanders speak with my 13 year old, and he was respectful even whem people were trying to boo other candidates. He is inspirational and a highly motivating speaker. I hold immense respect for him amd he has tried to call out people’s behavior before in regards to how they are treating others.

    I’ve seen similar disrespect from multiple supporters of other candidates as well. Including attacks on Sanders wife by Clinton supporters for the way she dresses. Which isn’t right either…you are going to have people that go to extremes when they become passionate supporters, and especially on the internet where there can be a great deal of anonymity.

    Anonymity that can turn into hateful rhetoric.

  733. Katt Bruner says:

    I’m a huge Sanders supporter and I’m absolutely appalled by this behavior.

    This guy should be arrested in my opinion for inciting violence.

    This is no more acceptable than the behavior of those people on the Clinton side attacking Sanders wife.

    Or those making racist or misogynistic statements for Trump.

    Just despicable morally bankrupt behavior.

  734. MattM says:

    No solutions. Only hate. Bill Perdue, the avid faux Socialist, is waiting for a revolution that will never come.

  735. andyk304 says:

    While your arguments are fascinating, Gabriella. /snark

  736. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I’vedone that plenty. All of your responses sadly are the same thing repeated as if it nullifies what is said. How about you provide what you’re asking for. The demand for it doesn’t count. That’s the “shielded by pretense” bias used to extremes.

  737. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You have a bias, let’s stop bullshitting people sweetie.

  738. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You respond to anyone’s post that isn’t in her favor with the exact same thing even when they’ve just presented it. There’s irony in just how bot like you are.

  739. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Let’s see…

    In 2013 her stance on Gay Marriage became support. Yet in 1996 she wholeheartedly supported the Defense of Marriage Act. (Which gave states the right to refuse same sex marriage.)


    Additionally, in 2004, Hillary stated on the floor of the U.S. Senate that she “believe[s] that marriage is not just a bond, but a sacred bond between a man and woman.” She goes on to say the unity of a man and woman is the “fundamental bedrock principle” of marriage.

    Yep, no contradiction to her current statements there.

    As Secretary of State back in 2012, Hillary Clinton was a strong proponent of a free trade agreement known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (otherwise known as TPP), consisting of 12 nations. It’s common sense that free trade is beneficial to our economy, so much so that even President Obama supports it. Hillary, on the other hand, cannot afford to lose a single voter as she gears up for 2016, so she conveniently changed her views on the matter. With various unions upset over the TPP, Hillary’s campaign office recently suggested that she will no longer be supporting the TPP that she once advocated so passionately for. No contradictions there at all.

    She turned against her own legislation dude.

    “We’ve got to do several things and I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants.” – Hillary Clinton, 2003

    Her current stance? Full support of Obama’s immigration bill and a vow to expand on it.

    That’s three major political debate points. Need more? Because sadly I have dozens.

  740. William Mann says:

    The question positively begs to be asked: “At which point in time and space will the far left Bernie Bots converge with the far right Don-atons and literally cease to exist by virtue of their apposite proximity.

  741. Gabriella Creighton says:

    No sweetie. If you’ve actually done the math you wouldn’t be standing at this opinion. For someone demanding me to speaking with reason or lack of bias, you sure could use your own advice.

  742. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Adorable how many Hillary supporters are piling in to rag on Bernie in a shockingly Trump fashion. Wait, not shocking.

  743. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Such unbiased statements.

  744. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Such substance.

  745. bardgal says:

    Reminds me of the Rwandan DJs. I hope someone from some law enforcement organization gives him a visit. Should it be the FBI or Secret Service, considering this is tampering with a National Election?

  746. 10isace2 says:

    because this will really want to make them change their vote (facepalm)

  747. kissyface says:

    the people are choosing. Hillary has 2.4 million more votes than Sanders. if the super-delegates were to go the person with more votes, Bernie would lose half of the 31 super-delegates he has and Clinton would have 7 more

  748. Ari says:

    “Willful ignorance…”

  749. Mark Sanderson says:

    I think I made my point fairly well in my post, kid…that the supporter is an asshat and not indicative of Bernie or his campaign and that I do not support such behavior…please provide examples of the “hate and misunderstanding” that Bernie has generated, as I don’t feel the hit list the aforementioned asshat advocated for, is the proof I am asking for…and the phrase you were looking for is, “the ends justify the means”…super delagates is a term coined by the DNC if I am not mistaken…I do sincerely feel that Clinton is merely the Democratic flavor of the same ol’ same ol’ and that she would do nothing to effect the change to our incredibly corrupted political system…And while I know full well that a GOP will block his efforts to effect changes, his being elected may signal a sea change in the manner in which the electorate intereact to the electoral system and therby effect some meaningful change…And I do not really feel Clinton will be able to make any headway against the GOP in Congress…and the fact that she had to be “dragged to the left” I find troubling…

  750. Ari says:

    I have done the math.
    Bernies team has done the math.
    The math is done.
    The contest has been done for a while.
    Does that mean I think Bernie should drop out, no. I believe he is good for the broader conversation.
    What’s not good for his folks is irrational behavior that works at cross purposes to the values he espouses.

  751. Diane says:

    I am not the first to point out similarities between the Sanders and Trump campaign styles. While Sanders does not verbally promote violence, both use rhetoric, and mannerisms, not simply to energize, but to incite, their supporters. Although Bernie leaves a lot of the incitement up to his campaign workers.

    This hit-list is a good example. Bernie has mislead his supporters on the concept of super delegates, which is a derogatory name attached by candidates who are not winning. The correct title is “unpledged delegates,” meaning delegates that are not obligated to vote for the candidate receiving the most votes from a particular location. The opposite of “pledged delegates” who are obligated to a particular candidate.

    But what is your point, Mr. Sanderson? Do you agree with publishing a list of people and their home addresses, social media contact info, so people can harass them, shoot at their houses, etc., like pro-lifers do to abortion providers?

  752. Ari says:

    Facinating to me that Bernie chose to run on the very ticket he cries as “establishment.”

  753. Danielle says:

    Just listen to any of his speeches in his rallies.

  754. heimaey says:

    Of course YOU would bring up a Nazi reference.

  755. Danielle says:

    HIs original tweet said “BernieOrBust” who else but a Bernie supporter says that? Just because the truth so often shows Bernie in a bad light doesn’t mean someone wrote a hit piece about him.

  756. Ari says:

    Go Gaby! Let’s see those votes! Pull um on up along with evidence of her contradicting statements.
    Let’s see it girl!

  757. Ari says:

    I’m not a Hilbot but would love to hear you back up your statements with unbiased, factual evidence.

  758. Ari says:

    Don’t assume I have a side girl.
    Throw down with some intelligent, insightful comantary Gabriella. It’s more fun that way.

  759. Danielle says:

    You made the allegation as if though it was fact, it is up to you to prove it. The Clinton’s are not known for playing dirty tricks, prove that too.Just because you keep saying it like a Goebbels disciple doesn’t make it true.

  760. Ari says:

    Awesome, make a viable, unbiased, rational argument for your position.
    Engage in meaningful debate.
    So far you’ve only responded to others comments with insults and ZERO substance.

  761. doridotcom says:

    “You’ll note that the logo is a donkey with two arrows through its head.” In whose universe is that a donkey?

  762. Danielle says:

    Bill Clinton had no choice but to sign it, it was a veto proof bill and he was a lame duck President at the time, but, Bernie had a choice and he made the wrong choice.

    Read this:

  763. Gabriella Creighton says:

    “Well researched”, nice code for “we dug up a loon and decided to make him the face for an entire side we don’t support”.

  764. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Cute. But nice try. May I suggest not trying to declare people making points you don’t like as trolls when literally all you’re doing is shitposting anyone who decries your side.

  765. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I’d suggest you take your own advice. Do the math, actually look up the results after they were finalized.

  766. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Except there was no theft and the persons to report the leak were in fact… The Sanders Campaign.

  767. Ari says:

    What’s up with all the insulting of people? I have not heard you contribute a single meaningful argument or make irrational Well thought-out Point. Start being civil or go troll somewhere else.

  768. MoonDog says:

    It was like going into an unlocked filing cabinet, sifting through it for data and then try to copy it. Pure corruption that Bernie tried to deny and hide for two days before finally firing only one of those involved.

    Not like opening a book.

  769. Ari says:

    Do the math and get back to her.
    She’s speaking to an unequivocal reality at this point. She is speaking to her the DNC operates. You may not like it but it does not make her statement silly

  770. Ari says:

    We are experiencing the net result of what our country was founded on. We are living that history now in these divisive politics,

  771. Mark Sanderson says:

    So, you are equating Bernie with Trump?

  772. Bryce says:

    I suggest reading the results of this poll:

  773. Bryce says:

    Nope, I am not lying, do the research yourself.

  774. Bryce says:

    You may want to do actual research into the subject, instead of taking propaganda at face value. Bernie has done more for this country then the Clintons ever will.

  775. Diane says:

    Who do you think generated the hate and misunderstanding about super delegates? I expect Bernie is quietly cheering him on. The result justifies the means, right? Bernie plans as an explosive convention as does Trump.

  776. Mark Sanderson says:

    Spencer Thayer really just seems like an asshat…perhaps he ought to ask himself, “What Would Bernie Do?” before he says any of the hateful shit he spouts

  777. Bill_Perdue says:

    Personal attacks are not valid.

    HRH HRC, formerly the Senator from Wal-Mart, is a rabid warmonger, a racist and a union buster.

    Between 2013 and April 2015, Clinton was paid $21.7 million in fees for 92 speeches that she delivered to various Wall Street firms, major corporations, and trade associations. During a Democratic presidential debate on February 4, Clinton was asked if she would release the transcripts of all her paid speeches. She furtively responded, “I will look into it. I don’t know the status, but I will certainly
    look into it.”

  778. John says:

    Lots of presumption without evidence. I’m a Bernie supporter and have been since `1981 when I first voted for him. There’s no evidence that this jerk is for real or supporting anyone in particular. People do some crazy shit these days for reasons only they understand it seems. And, there’s no evidence Bernie had anything to do with it, and Bernie has made public statements about some of the underhanded, vile things some of his supporters have said and done and he condemned them and said he didn’t want their votes so, don’t just make shit up please. You all sound just as bad as they guy you’re condemning. This guy is just an asshat. Two wrongs still don’t make a right as far as I know.

  779. Amwatching2c says:

    With slim to no possibility of winning the nomination, support turns to desperation. As I have said before, Got the Bern for Trump. Every attack on Mrs. Clinton is a campaign ad for the GOP. Bernie has milked the democratic party for long enough. Where are your tax returns for the last couple of years? What are you hiding? And how much have you raised for thew down ballot candidates? The people needed to sprinkle your fairy dust.

  780. Amwatching2c says:

    It’s the same nut jobs that were in on the theft of Clinton data at the DNC.

  781. Paul Mailhot says:

    Exactly what does this random nut job have to do with his campaign?

  782. Badgerite says:

    Well, I’m a moderate Democrat so your criticism of her does not exactly sting. When Sanders is asked in detail how he would get any of the things he promises enacted into law and how that would actually work and what the true cost would be, he becomes exceedingly vague. A little like the Donald and his “big, beautiful wall” that the Mexicans are going to pay for.
    When it comes to trade issues, The Donald wants tariffs and Sanders wants the US to not trade with any nation that does not meet our own environmental and labor standards. And as an article in Salon noted, that would mean not trading with any but developed nations. I don’t think his policies are actually that much better thought out than Trump’s. They are just better sounding.

  783. Gabriella Creighton says:

    So does Hillary. And Trump. And Cruz. And Starbucks. And Microsoft. And Bagels.

  784. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Similar to the No True Billary fallacy? Come on, grow up.

    You’re exercising a willful ignorance if you really try to attribute the behaviors of any one individual to an entire group.

  785. Gabriella Creighton says:

    This has absolutely nothing to do with Gamergate.

  786. Gabriella Creighton says:

    No, he’s pro-Sanders, it’s clear just by looking at his twitter.

    HOWEVER: The writer of the article clearly twisted some details about him to paint him in a bad light. And seems to want to eschew the fact that supporters don’t actually work for, represent, or do anything on behalf of the people they support.

    You betray a bias and a need to create a smear tactic when you attempt to link a campaign to a more extremist supporter.

  787. Gabriella Creighton says:

    Seriously? Are you high?

    Historical fact? Let’s talk Hillary’s voting habits over the last decade. You know, how every single thing she currently professes to support and want she voted the exact opposite for before this election.

    How about her very well documented habit of lying both about her previous political decisions (which are on the public record and thus it was dumb to lie in the first place) or about her previous involvement in programs even with her competitor? You know, lke she didn’t know where Bernie was during her health care bill, while we’ve got photos of her in meetings with him and him standing right behind her during press conferences. She even signed one of the photos.

    Let’s talk about her stance on gay marriage, which has taken a radical 180 in the last few years, her record including multiple votes against gay marriage and equal rights bills giving gays protection.

    Let’s consider her frequent attempts to decry even the attempts to make these facts known, playing the victim instead of just owning up to what she did honestly and saying she’s changed her mind.

    Hillary’s campaign is one of deep, inherent dishonesty, lies, and fictionalizing her career as a senator in a desperate attempt to shift the popular vote in her favor.

    But you’re right.

    The efforts of Republicans over the years to curb the education and base intellect of the country’s citizens is clearly resonant in you. Especially when you’re going to challenge people to bring “actual historical facts” to a current events fight. Even moreso when those facts are all heavily NOT in your favor. I’m glad to see you admit you believe Hilldog’s sob story tale of her deep and committed liberal career as a move-in senator.

  788. Gabriella Creighton says:

    I’m 31, I assure you I wasn’t in Junior High. Maybe you should take a step back and consider the incredible immaturity in your views. I’ve met actual kids in Junior High with a broader view on the world than you.

  789. Gabriella Creighton says:

    You should really read what you write. Out loud. You might just hear the complete silliness.

  790. Gabriella Creighton says:

    So your argument is that you believe younger voters are stupid so their choice in candidate can’t possibly be a good one for the country?

    If our founding fathers’ worked for a nation of bigotry, corporate enslavement and the destruction of the middle class, then maybe we had the wrong founders. Or maybe you just don’t actually understand what it is this nation was truly founded on.

  791. conium says:

    I am a member of the Democratic Party and I am burnt out on Bernie. If Bernie Sanders couldn’t get anything done in more than 30 years as a career politician, he couldn’t get it done as President. Yes, a little bird told me.

  792. 2karmanot says:

    It seems that since AB has launched its Sanders Slanders every Hillbot troll and her condescending opinion is packing these threads. I’m seventy, knew Bernie in Vermont and can tell you he is the real deal. GO BERNIE!

  793. Michael Hoppe says:

    The Sanders campaign, just like the Trump campaign, is a parasite campaign.

  794. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    You need to develop a new argument. I’m a grandfather who has voted in every election since I was eligible. I support Bernie, and I know many other people in my age bracket who feel the same way.

  795. Al'n says:

    If superdelegates are “the establishment”… and Bernie Sanders is a superdelegate… *crickets*

  796. Virginia Liberal says:

    Et to Brutus? You real believe that? Ok, give me the proof.

  797. Virginia Liberal says:

    Well it looks like the effort Republicans have made over the past 35 years has paid off in dividends when people like you believe that stuff. I challenge you to give the rest of us some actual historical fact to support your comments. As usual you will not be able to do that. There is nothing to spin and the bigger the spin the bigger the idiot who believes it.

  798. Virginia Liberal says:

    Amen to that one!

  799. Virginia Liberal says:

    In spite of what some of the spoiled brats that support Bernie Sanders don’t seem to realize is that they are going for superficial appeal and not substance. But what new voters doesn’t? Well I guess we don’t have time for them to grow up before this election so those of us who do understand what is at stake need to keep up the pressure on these voters with as much truth and substance as we older ones have. It’s so easy for these new voters to be seduced into believing lies and empty promises in the beginning. Of course the leadership in this country should not be decided by such voters. They think the popular vote will win and it will not. I didn’t learn this until Bill Clinton was elected. Of course I was shattered when I decided to learn about our system and how it real works because I had been lied to and fed a bunch of faulty and misleading dogma by Republicans. I learned and so will they. I just hope these young ones have the sense to remember that Dem’s much lead this election against the Republicans. We only need to look back in history to learn how Truman was able to win the Delegates and the votes he needed to earn a full term as President after he completely the term of FDR. Bernie Bots are trying to destroy the Democratic Party. The very party that has afforded these radicals the very freedoms and opportunities they enjoy today. I and many like me will not allow that to happen. Bernie is beginning to look more like a foreign conqueror than a candidate for Presidents. That is a scary thing. Especially when you look at all of the tweets posted here in this article. There will always be a battle we will have to wage in order to preserve what our Founders envisioned for us to build on. There is always an element of radicalism lurking below the surface that if left unchecked would kill all we have worked for and accomplished up to now. Bernie is that element.

  800. Borzoi says:

    The No True Berniebot fallacy.

  801. not telling says:

    In 2008 Obama passed Hillary in Feb around the 9th or the 10th and the super delegates followed. So far Berine is loosing and they want the super delegates to go with someone who is loosing without even counting the super delegates. I am sure if he starts to win more states the super delegates would follow. but he has to pass her first in regular delegates before the super would follow.

  802. Taelon says:

    you are clearly lying because you would have discovered she and bernie voted the same way like 93% of the time, more than him and warren

  803. Anne Zadonia says:

    Wonder where all those bernouts were during the Obama primary? You know, the same primary with the same laws on delegates. O, I forgot, they were still in Junior high.

  804. heimaey says:

    McGovern keeps being brought up but this is not 1972 and it’s time to move past that. The reason they’re around is so that they can pick the presidential candidate and not leave it up to the people if their persuasion on the people doesn’t work. They are desperately trying to push Hillary because she’s “owed” it – but that sounds awful like inheritance to me, a trait more often seen in monarchies and oligarchies, which let’s face it we live in an oligarchy.

  805. heimaey says:

    You can prove this how? Also, the Clintons are known for playing dirty. That’s their biggest strength and why so many love them.

  806. heimaey says:

    Maybe – we all change our minds as we get older, but then we don’t change them at all – case in point: most of the Democratic Party. They get mired down in “what works” and stagnate. Further, this generation is going to have a very different lifestyle than Gen X and Baby Boomers – there is much more inequality and fewer places for them to move up. I think we’ve created the largest base of social democrats in generations and sure some will move on, but many many others are here to stay.

  807. heimaey says:

    I mean no I’m not going to admit it. First off, they went after him, he did not go after them. Secondly, he’s attractive to them because they are willing to change. Less people like me at my age (42) are willing to shake things up. Clinton is a safe bet for more of the same, but I think our problems are too big to have more of the same.

  808. Yes, I do. I second what Danielle said. Even if he wouldn’t do it officially, I’ve met enough BernieorBust people and they are obsessive enough, and crazy enough to do anything, and think they are helping.

  809. andyk304 says:

    Publish a well-researched article and watch the Berners spin faster than Rumpelstilskin. Good stuff,

  810. Steven Gendel says:

    People, do your homework. This is an ugly hit job, by a blogger known for it. He found this Ass, a complete nut job, and tried to make him famous or infamous. This is fraudulent “reporting” and includes outright lies about Sanders’ Chief of Staff. And as soon as the hit man published his blog, the Ass freaked out and pulled his shit down, admitting that he was not a Sanders supporter (just a narcissistic, trouble-maker/jerk-fu*k). OMG, really? What a surprise! Get a grip, people…

  811. Merlin Veltman says:

    Name 1 Sanders lie

  812. Merlin Veltman says:

    He’s not asking people to shoot people. All he wants is for people to ask superdelegates to vote for the candidate their constituents are voting for

  813. Parque_Hundido says:

    We can count Goldmann Sachs among her supporters, right? Then you have no argument.

  814. Parque_Hundido says:

    “Huge on Reddit”. Did you actually just say that?

  815. Parque_Hundido says:

    “Used to be” is key. Now he’s just a Hillary bot.

  816. Parque_Hundido says:


    Looks like this little blog has become a launch pad for the Hillary bots who are deluded enough to think that Sanders or his supporters are the issue.

    Newsflash: Hillary’s biggest problem is Hillary, not Bernie, not Bernie supporters. Not even the ones who send mean tweets.

  817. hiker_sf says:

    Sorry, I’ve been consistent in saying that I will vote for Clinton if she wins/steals the primary election. Rabid posts like yours actually makes it more difficult for many of us to vote for her.

  818. MattM says:

    And who do you think influences and emboldens his supporters? If this were about a Hillary supporter, you’d be calling for her head.

    We get it: you hate Hillary, and to spite her you’re going to undermine the Dem vote by abstaining from voting from her in the general if she gets the nomination. You’re petty.

  819. Bryce says:

    Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 was signed into law on December 21, 2000 by President Bill Clinton.

    Here, read this:

  820. Constant says:

    I have no idea why it is appropriate to even imply that – nothing said here justifies the straw man of no intention of supporting whomever is the Democratic nominee. In fact, there simply is no organized or widespread movement of Clinton supporters so far this cycle to deny support for Sanders if he is the nominee. There is a bitterly hostile faction of Sanders supporters in the “or bust” movement, and this latest tactic of intimidating delegates fits in rather awfully with the tone being set and tacitly encouraged by Sanders. But I know of no Hillary supporter who would not vote for the Democratic nominee, regardless of how odious the campaign is that Sanders is now running. I do know that calling him and his supporters on the damage they are doing is both appropriate and warranted.

  821. Cam says:

    Bernie polls better against Trump, fact. Bernie has the support of independants, which make up 40% of the voting population, fact. Independants dont like the establishment and a large portion will flock to Trump if Hillary is the nominee, fact. 33% of Sanders voters will not vote for Hillary under any circumstance, fact. Hillary vs Trump is a toss up. Hillary vs cruz or kasich she loses. Bernie can win because he has a large democratic following, an unreal independant following, and even republicans will vote for him over trump. Republicans hate Hillary and will not cross over for her. Nobody is making things up, its actually stupid simple to figure out.

  822. Danielle says:

    The financial crisis was not because of the repeal of glass-steagall which was pretty much decimated at the time anyhow. The 2000 Commodities Futures modernization act had more to do with the financial crisis than anything and Bernie voted for that

  823. Danielle says:

    You are just downright silly if you think that Hillary is a conservative or that she would have someone on the Supreme Court which would be the same pic as a Republican. If the Republicans tax the Supreme Court progress is going to be set back 50 to 75 years and you won’t be able to change it for 30 plus years.

  824. Danielle says:

    Bernie went for the young people 17, 18 under 20 people because they are more naive I’m sorry if you don’t want to admit that but it’s the truth

  825. hiker_sf says:

    Who is advocating violence and murder?

  826. Ravan Asteris says:

    This looks like a classic GOP, over the top, agent provocateur. Or a 24 karat asshole. Maybe both.

  827. Danielle says:

    The people with the bird are young people who will change their minds in about five years of what party they want to be in

  828. Taelon says:

    doesnt matter that much if hes not a bernie supporter if bernie supporters are both following him, signing his petitions, and taking his advice. bernies team could ask his social media team to blacklist him

  829. hiker_sf says:

    There was no hack. While it shouldn’t have been done, it was like opening a page of a book.

  830. ria says:

    Every single thing that happens on the internet attracts “these kind of people.”

  831. hiker_sf says:

    Thanks for confirming that Clintonistas still malign Sanders with lies.

  832. Danielle says:

    Never happened. Hillary didn’t leak that picture

  833. Danielle says:

    We give Bernie credit for his two sit-ins, getting arrested at one for which he paid a $ 25 fine and going to the I have a Dream speech. The in 1964 at the height of the Civil Rights Movement he disappeared and moved to the whitest state in the nation, and we didn’t hear from him again till 1981. Where was he between 1964 and 1981? But if you feel these threats in this hit list are not worse then you play too many video games.

  834. Danielle says:

    Look up originally had the hashtag Bernie or bust and he’s the same one that set up that petition to not vote for Hillary. The guy is a Bernie supporter

  835. Danielle says:

    Yes, I do think Bernie’s people would do this and i think Bernie would be aware of it and not have a problem with it. He would just deny it even though he knew about it cause he’s a liar

  836. PocketNaomi says:

    Funny how exactly the same accusation was made against Obama in 2008. Doesn’t Hillary have the money for a new strategy?

  837. PocketNaomi says:

    This actually looks like one of the classic cases of Republican interference to keep Democrats fighting each other. They’ve been pulling this crap since October.

  838. Danielle says:

    Sanders with his lies has promoted this type of behavior

  839. Danielle says:

    This is the same guy that set up the Bernie or bust petition that people signed saying they wouldn’t vote for Hillary. Of course he is a supporter of Bernie’s

  840. Moderator3 says:

    I’ve had it with the capital letters. Most of them are going now.

  841. kissyface says:

    the super-delegates job is to evaluate who would be the best candidate, not to go with the voters. only 15% of delegates are super-delegates and if we were to insist that super-delegates go to the winner of the state then Hillary would have 7 more super-delegates than she currently has. super-delegates are in place to ensure we don’t have another McGovern-like loss

  842. James says:

    If you want to get in the …. PUBLIC ARENA …. hold great power over the American people … then don’t cry when you try to hide behind ANONYMITY …. ANONYMITY DOES NOT EXIST ….. what do you think is contained in the DNC voter database????????? WAKE UP PEOPLE …. THERE IS A WHOLE SYSTEM OPERATING AROUND YOU …. TO UNDERSTAND OR CHANGE THAT SYSTEM …. YOU HAVE TO EXAMINE THE WHOLE SYSTEM ….. SUPERDELEGATES ….. CHANGE IS COMING ….. AND YOU WILL NOT STOP IT ….

  843. Evangelina Aguilar says:

    that is not a sanders supporters, sorry that is a billary follow the money $$ u will find out is a billary supporter..

  844. Bryce says:

    There is no difference, the long-term outcome will be the same. Courts and social issues won’t matter when the economy collapses, and the second Great Depression begins.

    The funny thing is, I am a literal genius; the true idiocy when people don’t listen to brilliant minds.

    Oh, and I have a question for you, has voting Democrat fixed the major underlining problem in the last thirty years? Do you even know what the problems are?

    Let me give you a hint, union busting and bank deregulation, what does that lead to?

  845. Elizabeth Burton says:

    Which is the whole point, isn’t it. Do people really believe Bernie and his campaign people are so stupid they would deliberately set out to lose the nomination by encouraging this kind of crap? If so, I feel sad for you because you are clearly so deep in cynicism.

    Whoever this person is, I’ve seen nothing that proves the contention he’s a “Sanders supporter.” The references that the author said he would “get to” were never gotten to, and most of the Twitter posts offered sound more like a Libertarian troll than anything. And we know which side they’re on.

  846. timncguy says:

    we were discussing the difference between Clinton and a Republican. Even if I agree that the economy would be the same under Clinton and a republican (and you aren’t saying she would be worse) and I don’t. You must admit she would be better on the courts.

    When the choice in the general is between Clinton and a Republican, you don’t get to choose what you call a progressive. And, what gives you the idea that the court only decides social issues? It’s the conservative court that has stripped away voting rights and make it more difficult to elect progressives. Do you want to fix that?

    With any luck, you live in a blue state and won’t hurt anyone with your idiocy.

  847. Elizabeth Burton says:

    On what do you base your opinion? There’s no evidence shown that supports the premise this person has anything to do with the Sanders campaign. The link that allegedly goes to a “portal” the campaign is supposed to have set up releasing the names of the Superdelegates so people can contact them goes to an article on the Washington Examiner website where the only reference to that subject is one sentence: “Sanders’ senior campaign staff is encouraging his few committed superdelegates to reach out to those who are undecided or Clinton supporters who could be convinced to change sides.”

    The rest of the article at the WE is a clear anti-Sanders hit piece.

    So, again, on what do you base your contention that the troll who did this is a Sanders supporter rather than a shill paid to undermine the campaign. Because I can’t prove that, either, which makes either contention as sound as the other.

  848. Whoa!

    Full-on Gamergate bullshit.

    Not acceptable.

  849. Lexington Goyle says:

    The Sons of Liberty who sparked the revolution this country was founded upon would beg to differ.

  850. Bryce says:

    You are aware that Bill Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, right? Which led to the Great Recession… a recession that will never fully recover because of automation.

    I guess, I just put more value in a healthy economy that benefits everyone, then putting on my chips in social issues… which Clinton has a horrible record in.

    Conservatives like the Clintons are going to lead to another Great Depression, but instead of a unemployment rate of 25%, it is going to be over 45% because automation is going to replace a majority of our job functions… and it will never recover.

    We need to elect progressives now before it is too late, and we all starve from high unemployment.

    Here is a video about automation, I highly recommend watching it:

  851. Lexington Goyle says:

    I suppose it’s a good thing then that Democrats tend to be lazy with going to the polls. ;) They’ve had such a long history of low voter turnout. I mean at this point if she wins it will be pretty much due to superdelegates; another shady form of politics even Democrats are not above conducting.

    But then again those same Democrats were with Bill Clinton too. We got DOMA, NAFTA, PR&WO (welfare reform that is not working out so well today) OH and those cheap products form China? Yeah.. he signed that into law in 2000 to permanently lower tariffs on imports from China. Yet you want to complain about Trump and his double standards on the issue? Pfff. Please.

    Just bear in mind nearly half the voting population identifies as Independents many of whom cannot even vote in primary elections. The show isn’t all about your kind either just because our candidate chose to run as a Democrat thanks in large part to this ridiculous two party system we have in place and people like yourself who are fools that play right into the game of the current political establishment. We see the bullshit on the left and the right and Democrats at this point are merely the lesser of two evils.

    So when TPP becomes law, something she helped to fast track, don’t you dare bitch about the problems that will result from that like NAFTA had done.

  852. Dan Lawson says:

    the only way to fight what is not right is by any means necessary you stupid fuck ! Well said Marvin Hl
    ! super delegates are not part of a democracy !

  853. Bryce says:

    Oh please. Hillary’s voting record shows she sides with Republicans against most minority issues. I have literally researched her votes, I suggest doing the same. Her record is quite clear, and is easily found online.

    Though, I would love to see how Hillary has actually supported Disabled Americans, even one article with legitimate sources would be great.

    Caucus were created by the Democratic party, which is controlled mostly by Hillary supporters, except in areas where Bernie converted a majority of long-term party members. I suggest if you have a problem with the system, you tell the people that created the system.

  854. Lexington Goyle says:

    Quite frankly the same could be said about the supporters of any candidate. There’s extremes in every group including Clinton’s and their denial about her being a moderate Democrat and more akin to a Republican on economic and foreign issues.

    I would prefer harassment over assassinations because do bear in mind in the past that was the only viable way of taking on an establishment was to grab the pitchforks and kill them. Iceland however has shown us a better way to go about change.

  855. Lexington Goyle says:

    Just remember though.. by today’s standards the Sons of Liberty would be deemed terrorists.

  856. timncguy says:

    You are aware that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is on the court because Bill Clinton put her there, right?

  857. Arturo Sierra says:

    When two wrongs make a right? Just how STUPID are the bern-out brain dead ass$#@!%?

  858. Arturo Sierra says:

    Bull Shit and you know it!!!

  859. Bryce says:

    Clinton is just another conservative, if Bernie is not elected, the long-term outcome will be the same no matter what conservative is elected, whether they have a D or an R next to their name.

    The Democrat vs Republican scare tactic is just propaganda, I am only interested in electing progressives. Clinton would most likely elect the same person as a Republican to the Supreme Court.

  860. Steven Gendel says:

    The person who did this was NOT a Sanders supporter…

  861. Jonah Falcon says:

    Thankfully, Ralph Nader proved what a disaster that was.

  862. Jonah Falcon says:

    Clean campaign? Like that deal in Nevada? Like hacking Clinton’s computer? etc? (chuckle)

  863. The Truth says:

    I keep hearing Bernie supporters talk about Clinton guaranteeing the Pubs a victory, but this just isn’t based on fact. There are no projections or polls that lead us to believe that Trump will do anything other than get his teeth kicked in with votes.

    If Bernie is so great, why do his supporters have to keep literally making things up like this?

  864. Jonah Falcon says:

    Sorry, but calling people names is politics. Publishing names and addresses of private citizens is ILLEGAL.

    For instance, I’ll call you a dumbass. That’s not against the law.

  865. Doug105 says:

    They haven’t got to the cross-haired wanted posters yet have they?

  866. Jonah Falcon says:

    Funny how Sanders attracts these sort of people.

  867. Jonah Falcon says:

    hahahaha. Nice rationalization. Everyone is corrupt but Sanders.

    But, you probably approve of Sarah Palin’s methods, too? 2011, Gabrillie Gifford.

    Sanders and Palin, the same style of kooks.

  868. heimaey says:

    How about the picture Hillary leaked in 08 of Obama in a turban and how she is likely the original birther…I mean if you’re going to start playing who’s more corrupt here….I wouldn’t.

  869. ria says:

    The guy who put up the “hitlist” openly states he doesn’t support Sanders he just wants to harass Clinton. Either Aravosis didn’t do his homework on this, or he’s smearing Sanders deliberately.

  870. Marvin H says:

    When the DNC is as corrupt as it is, people resort to tactics like this. The simple solution is for SD’s to vote for the candidate the people they represent voted for instead of automatically pushing the nomination on Clinton, which would guarantee a republican victory in the general.

  871. Bill_Perdue says:

    more fun infighting.

  872. Bill_Perdue says:

    HRH HRC is not as adept a lying as Obama and his right wing politics led to the mass desertion of 27 million in 2010. If either HRH HRC or BS win it worse for you in 2018.

    ”PRINCETON, N.J. — In 2015, for the fifth consecutive year, at least four in 10 U.S. adults identified as political independents. The 42% identifying as independents in 2015 was down slightly from the record 43% in 2014. This elevated percentage of political independents leaves Democratic (29%) and Republican (26%) identification at or near recent low points, with the modest Democratic advantage roughly where it has been over the past five years.”

    “Democratic turnout has fallen drastically since 2008, the last time the party had a contested primary, with roughly three million fewer Democrats voting in the 15 states that held caucuses or primaries through Tuesday, according to unofficial election results. It declined in virtually every state, dropping by roughly 50 percent in states like Minnesota and Texas. In Arkansas, Alabama, and Georgia, the number of Democrats voting decreased by roughly a third.”

    “The fall-off in Democratic primary turnout — which often reveals whether a candidate is exciting voters and attracting them to the polls — reached deeply into some of the core groups of voters Mrs. Clinton must not only win in November, but turn out in large numbers. It stands in sharp contrast to the flood of energized new voters showing up at the polls to vote for Donald J. Trump in the Republican contest.”

  873. BillTheCat45 says:

    Really? That was a crime was it? lol

  874. BillTheCat45 says:

    No, more like pointing and laughing. They won’t turn a single delegate, and in fact, will stiffen their resolve to vote Hillary. You lose.

  875. trinu says:

    Unless he’s somehow affiliated with or was encouraged by the Sanders campaign, this is not Bernie’s fault. We’re voting for candidates, not their supporters.

  876. ria says:

    this guy isn’t a sanders supporter. He’s a troll or an anarchist or both. Wish John Aravosis would do some fact checking before smearing the Sanders people: he used to be a decent journalist.

  877. barbara mcdaniel says:

    The Right to Lifers would love your help!

  878. cinemaven says:

    The harassment tactics being used on super delegates is quite a large effort by a number of Sanders supporting websites. It was huge on Reddit for weeks and now it’s showing up frequently on pro-Sanders threads. It was his own team who first released the contact info. If Clinton was silent about something like this, I’d be the first person saying she should disavow.
    Are you agreeing with these tactics?
    Do you think they help Sanders?

  879. Bee Webb says:

    This is seriously getting creepy.

  880. nicho says:

    Right after Hiklary disavows every single action of every person who says they support her. What nonsesne.

  881. Webster says:

    Another day of pearl-clutching over here at HillaryBlog, I see…

  882. cinemaven says:

    Another site published the delegates contact info and then asks Sanders supporters to choose their level of anger for the generated tweet or Facebook post. The choices were annoyed or angry.
    I’m not sure how anyone could think that angry or even abusive tweets or emails will bring someone to your side and I’m surprised Sanders hasn’t disavowed these efforts.

  883. Pamela Pitt says:

    I hope you are right.

  884. I do not Tweet. How does anyone complain to Twitter about this. If anything goes wrong, they are third party liable.

  885. Well that’s the truth. I’ve met more than a few.

  886. What.. do Bernie supporters want to give Hillary the nomination? A hit list… publishing personal information including home address of super delegates. If I were a super delegate supporting Bernie and I saw this type of thing from his supporters I wouldn’t support Bernie anymore. What kind of people is he attracting? That’s not good for the country.

    This can, and probably will backfire in their faces. If you threaten/harass a super delegate do you actually think they’ll switch sides? or be hardened in their stance, with added fervor? They’re Americans. They’re going to stay in support of Hillary just to spite you.

    And goodness knows if Bernie doesn’t shut this down, he’s going to ruin his campaign for sure, if it isn’t already ruined. He’s going to have to denounce a whole lot of his supporters.

    Idiots. Such a horrible idea.

  887. Badgerite says:

    I’m not so sure. Some of his supporters are a bit off the wall.

  888. SpiritOnParole says:

    I am a Hillary supporter, but I am doubting this is a true Bernie supporter. I just feel like a real Bernie supporter would know this would not only turn those on the fence away from supporting him, but that it would not move the superdeligates at all. They are used to threats and just are not swayed by them

  889. Willow C. Arune says:

    And no doubt this stupid and evil man has ordered a gross of brown shirts which he will sell off to his followers. This is way beyond civl bounds and if a certain candidate does nto denouce it, he supports it.

  890. Moderator4 says:

    Stop. The caps. Like now.

  891. Mark Bauermeister says:

    QUOTE: “The only anti-GMO stuff I’ve seen have been anti-monsanto more than anti-GMO.”

    And that’s better why? I’d like some actual reasons. Not the long disproved BS.

  892. Taelon says:

    they have been doing this on reddit for months. its not like bernie hasnt known about it. he chooses to pretend it doesnt exist … and worse… gets surrogates like glenn greenwald to write articles saying bernie bros are a clinton conspiracy (an article he still has refused to retract)

  893. Mark Bauermeister says:

    He has nurtured the crazy throughout his whole dirty campaign.
    They’re the result of his insane conspiracy theories from B like “Big Pharma”, “Big Agri”, “Big Soda” to E like “Establishment”

  894. Mike O'Connell says:

    What a phenomenally stupid idea.
    Are you trying to run the campaign into the ground?

    “Hit List?”
    That’s fucked up right there.

  895. Taelon says:

    i am a gay disabled American, and Hillary is light years better than Bernie on issues affecting the disabled. not even close.

    Bernie cannot even win much at all without caucus voting which prima facie disenfranchises disabled voters…

  896. timncguy says:

    Just out of curiosity, how does helping to elect Trump or Cruz instead of Clinton and having them replace Scalia on the Supreme Court help your plans for the future?

  897. Taelon says:

    is that a joke?

  898. Bryce says:

    Actually, I am a Disabled American; one of the most discriminated against minorities in the entirety of the United States of America with a real unemployment rate of over 80%.

    You think other minorities have it hard? They will just lose social issues. Without Bernie, Disabled Americans won’t be able to find jobs to support our families which is an economy issue. Did you know it was legal to pay Disabled Americans less then minimum wage? Well it is, and we work for pennies on the dollar, if we work at all.

    I, for one, am sick of being unemployed, underemployed, and underpaid! Currently I make $700 a month… I am homeless, and can’t even afford rent, food, nor anything else…. and I have three adopted children to support. What is Clinton going to do for Disabled Americans? JACK SQUAT! Then only group fighting for Disabled Americans are progressives like Bernie!

    How about you check your privilege? Because that is not an valid argument.

  899. Mark Bauermeister says:

    Claiming he wasn’t part of some movement some decades is worse than promoting violence and murder?

    Excuse me. Are you even old enough to vote?

    Thank you, Reagan! For letting all the crazies out of the loony bin!

  900. doug dash says:

    Ok, but make sure you don’t add fuel to the fire. Cool heads will prevail. I am sure that we will have a winner and whoever that person is will be embraced by a very large majority of the democrats. It’s not fair if you are beseeching Sanders supporters and have no intention of supporting him if he wins. At that point you are no better than they are.

  901. hiker_sf says:

    Slandering Sanders by saying he didn’t participate in the civil rights movement is WAY worse than this. But because we expect that slimy crap from Clinton, nobody cares.

  902. hiker_sf says:

    Whatever lies you need for your narrative.

  903. Constant says:

    This is quite disingenuous. Sanders has changed his tone, and is now running a very negative campaign. The latest on oil and gas money has been given 3 Pinocchios, and yet he keeps on making this completely false claim. This is not simply supporters. Sanders is leading the negative charge, and if you think peace is where we should head, please spend your time equally remonstrating with the Sanders campaign.

  904. Bryce says:

    We are progressives, not Democrats; so of course we aren’t on board with the Democratic party. We want real change, not more of the same. If Bernie is not the nominee, we will be moving on to getting local progressives elected.

  905. Bryce says:

    Bernie’s endorsement won’t matter, the race for President will be over for progressives, we will move on to getting local progressives elected.

  906. Constant says:

    You must be… a white male? This is an awfully privileged position, not to vote for the best candidate in the race in November, and to throw the SCOTUS over to the R’s.

  907. Bryce says:

    The true enemies of progressives are corporate owned politicians like Hillary. There is a lot of us, and we will not fall in line.

    Instead of wasting my vote on Hillary, I am going to focus all of my effort on getting local progressives elected, not even going to waste my time voting. If Bernie loses the nomination, the race is over for President, it will be time to move on.

  908. Constant says:

    She’s winning the primary and winning with actual Democrats. No evidence that there will be mass desertions. Democrats are with HER!

  909. Constant says:

    If you’ve got anything to report that approaches the behavior from Sanders’ supporters documented here, go for it. I’ve not seen anything like this on the Clinton supporters side.

  910. Andrea says:

    His campaign literally opened the doors and showed them the eay, just like opening the DNC data portal long enough to allow the unethical access to Clinton’s proprietary campaign files.

  911. Andrea says:

    State and federal

  912. doug dash says:

    I think you are getting yourself all work up over a few miscreants. Whoever wins, a very large majority of the party will come around and support the winner just like they did when Obama beat Clinton. Sanders will support Clinton. Give peace a chance.

  913. heimaey says:

    That’s not representative of every Sanders FB page. I’m subscribed to a bunch and I haven’t seen one anti-vax post – the only anti-GMO stuff I’ve seen have been anti-monsanto more than anti-GMO.

  914. doug dash says:

    I did say that if it’s criminal it crosses the line.

  915. Cheryl R says:

    Just for good measure – you can contact them online.

  916. Doug105 says:

    The last FB Page I quit over extreme Sanders partisanship, was also full of anti-vaxxers, anti-gmo, and pro-organic crap, so saying a bunch of them are idiots wouldn’t be far off the mark.

  917. Yee-Lum Mak says:

    Well, acknowledging where someone’s behaviors come from doesn’t mean condoning them. People may do dumb/wrong things because they’re young, but it doesn’t make those things less dumb or wrong. I don’t think “letting them do their thing” is right if their thing is dangerous to others or involves behavior that you would condemn if it came from anyone else.

  918. Cheryl R says:

    I’m sure it has. This is criminal now.

  919. heimaey says:

    Polls show numbers as high as 40% so again we’ll see.

  920. Pamela Pitt says:

    Well, I am not worried about her feelings and whether or not she is strong. What I am worried about are Bernie supporters doing the Republicans job against Hillary. They have convinced a lot of people not to vote for her even if she gets the nomination. Yes, the right wing paid a lot of money for their disinformation campaign against her. That does not make it right for Bernie and his people to pick up the Karl Rove developed talking poin