Warren Says Sanders Told Her a Woman Could Not Win the Presidency

Earlier on Monday, Bernie Sanders had denied making the remark in a private 2018 meeting with Elizabeth Warren, accusing her campaign staff of “lying about what happened.”

Comments: 232

  1. "In my view, a woman could be elected president of the United States" - Bernie Sanders 1988. Warren's campaign is throwing in the kitchen sink now, absurdly trying to paint Bernie as sexist.

  2. @Sean That or there are Trolls infiltrating both Bernie's & Warren's campaigns (of course I'm "paranoid;" I've been supporting both, but leaning more toward Bernie lately).

  3. @AY I did think of the possibility that some troll wrote the "call script", but decided it was too mild. If you read the whole thing, it's really tame, and the Warren part is the tamest - probably because it really was written by an over zealous volunteer, and most Bernie volunteers like Warren too. Please let's not let it derail two amazing campaigns.

  4. @Sean - Yes expect everything to be thrown at Bernie Sanders. This sour incident doesn't seems to be something drummed up by not the candidates themselves. Besides I am more concerned about policies and the direction of nation than anything else.

  5. What an interesting statement to be alleged to make during a nomination campaign. How "familiar with the discussion", or any single relevant factor in the 2020 election do you have to be to make such a destructive, divisive statement, in fact or in theory? News for Democratic candidates - Semdog a message that you can't even get on with each other is for losers. Losing means another four years of the White House as a bassinet. Whatever the issues, get over them, and focus.

  6. This is very suspicious given the newfound tension between the two campaigns, to say the least. Ultimately, people will believe what they want to believe and confirm their priors. But this story just seems fishy and not because I think the journalists did a bad job. My guess is Sanders likely said something to the effect of "this country is sexist and a woman will have a hard time winning." That is not saying that the voters are justified in that belief, but is merely stating something that is obvious to many of us. However, this could very easily be manipulated to appear as if Sanders is endorsing this comment and thinks women cannot win in general. Sen. Sanders record in supporting women -- he encouraged Warren to run in 2016! -- makes this story look even more skeptical. It very clearly looks like an oppo and dishonest hit in payback for the unofficial campaign letter that circulated the other day from the Sanders campaign. If Sanders said something this blatantly sexist, why has Warren not only not said anything until now, but regularly touted Sanders as her friend and said good things about him? None of it adds up. The margin for error is tiny and I really hope journalists reporting this aren't being duped by staffers or someone affiliated with Warren employing a last-minute, desperate hit on their rival.

  7. @BReed Bernie has a history of demeaning women. When it came to most important woman in his life--the single working mother of his child--he dumped them faster than a hot potato to pursue his political career rather than a get a job that would enable him to meaningfully support them.

  8. @Tim What a disgusting smear and baseless assumption into Bernie's private life. Stop being divisive.

  9. @BReed, What she did is disappointing. Meanwhile, no one is surprised if simply because she endorsed Hillary over Bernie in 2016. She is too opportunistic to not side with the establishment.

  10. I don’t believe it. His comments must have been misconstrued.

  11. I seriously doubt this is true. Elizabeth’s supporters seems to be getting awfully desperate. Bernie is not sexist, plain and simple.

  12. @Zareen One could hold the opinion attributed to him without being sexist.

  13. @Zareen More likely some third party is trying to weaken the whole Democratic field by stirring up divisions. The question it ask here is who stands to gain: and the answer is Trump.

  14. @Zareen “Over the weekend, Politico reported on a script distributed to volunteers for the Sanders campaign that suggested telling backers of Ms. Warren to support Mr. Sanders instead. “The people who support her are highly educated, more affluent people who are going to show up and vote Democratic no matter what,” the script said. “She’s bringing no new bases into the Democratic Party.” Nothing like the media pushing a hit job. They are all friends with wine cave billionaires eric isaac @ericisaac “Bernie Sanders volunteer hits back:” “Here’s what actually happened. A random user who’s only ever posted once before posted that document in the Sanders volunteer Slack group. A moderator promptly removed it and stated that it was NOT a campaign source.”

  15. Even if he did say exactly that, this wouldn't even register if it was tweeted out by the current resident of the White House. I'm not a big fan of Sanders, but it's important to keep perspective lest we wind up in another "but her emails" situation.

  16. Preposterous! Another reason to not vote for Warren. She was a terrible candidate and disingenuous to begin with, but this is a new low.

  17. @Aaron A bit of hearsay from some aide.

  18. @Aaron Warren is disingenuous? Bernie dropped the single mother of his child faster than a hot potato rather than let them get in the way while he was masterminding The Revolution. No wonder Bernie never talks about background. His slogan is "Not Me. Us." but when it came to supporting the single mother of his child, he put "me" first, second, and third.

  19. @Tim Stop making the same comment over and over. Also, Bernie's been around for a while--I'll be curious to see what they will "dig up" about him lol.

  20. “Sanders is said to have...” Astonishing bit of hearsay to publish in the paper of record. No first hand accounts, only anonymous sources who were “told about” or “familiar with” the conversation. Clearly this is a hit piece planted in response to anger about a sander’s call script stating “she’s bringing no new bases into the party.” That script was blown out of proportion as some sort of below-the-belt attack, and now the situation has snowballed into the gossip-journalism here. The motive seems pretty clear: out the brakes on Sanders, and/or divide progressives. Shameful.

  21. @A_W '“ x is said to have...” Astonishing bit of hearsay to publish in the paper of record. No first hand accounts, only anonymous sources who were “told about” or “familiar with” the conversation. ' Yea, it's terrible when people who were not there start a rumor that snowballs into a storm and a disaster for one or both parties. Kind of like some one who was not in the building who heard it say that some phone call happened in which possibly ... you get the idea.

  22. @A_W What a hypocrisy ! In this case of Trump "hearsay" is welcome, but not in this case of course !

  23. @Mary Printed "hearsay" about Trump almost always ends up being backed by un-impeachable sources and later evidence confirms it. 70% of the time the truth turns out to be WORSE than the hearsay, as with the Ukraine matter. I'm pretty sure the Warren campaign will repudiate this gossip or issue a joint statement with Sanders that does. If they do not, the anti-Warren backlash in the comments here will be only a taste of what's to come. Warren stand to lose a TON of support for this. Mine included -- I donated to both Sanders and Warren plus a couple others.

  24. I think journalists reporting this are being played for fools. Right in the article it says, "In relaying to Ms. Warren the challenges he thought her campaign would face, he not only said that President Trump would weaponize sexism, but also that such attacks would preclude a woman from being elected, according to the private accounts." How is this being interpreted as anything other than someone offering an honest assessment on what many American voters think and believe? Many Americans *are* sexist. If I point that out, am I sexist? This is just absurd in so many ways.

  25. They're being played for fools or the NY Times is starting again with the same tactics of 2016 in trying to discredit Bernie. I still believe Bernie was the clear winner over HC as the Democratic nominee but given all the cheating and corruption going on in pretty much all politics and institutions in the U.S. I was not surprised that he lost. He's your only hope, not only for universal healthcare, affordable education, etc. but most importantly to get rid of the corruption and all the crass that comes with it. There's no status quo with Bernie; he's ready to go to bat for you! Go Bernie!

  26. @BReed ' The mainstream "conservative" democrats are trying to sabotage the Sanders campaign, as he's the one candidate who's interested in pursuing serious reform. Establishment Democrats and Republicans alike benefit from the status quo, so any attempts at change directly affect their interests.

  27. Bingo, BReed. As Sanders said, of course a woman can (and HAS) won the presidency.[1] But he and Warren both know how vile the vile GOP are—they don't scrape the bottom of the barrel, they drill (baby, drill) past it! [1] TWICE, if you count Pelosi. Clinton's three-year refusal or inability since her win to take the oath leaves the Speaker the current legitimate occupant of the Oval.

  28. If Sanders and Warren were Republicans this alleged comment wouldn’t even be news, it would just be a given that all Republicans believe it.

  29. The article refers to two unidentified people who were supposedly familiar with the meeting. Presumably (although the article does not clearly state it), they were unidentified because they were not authorized to speak publicly. In this case, I don't think this is adequate justification to keep them anonymous. These people are attributing to Bernie Sanders statements that would be out of character for him, and thus lack credibility. The Times should either identify those people or don't print the story. The article as it is currently written just serves as an unattributed smear against the Sanders campaign.

  30. @Karen You say "These 2 whistleblowers "should be identified or their story not published". I agree with you, but why things should be different for Trump and his whistlblower?

  31. @Mary Because the whistleblower in the trump issue is protected by law, and these 2 sources aren't whistleblowers, they are spreading an interpretation of a second hand account. They are not protected by law.

  32. @Mary This story is the result of a leak about a private discussion of politics. It is a not a whistle blowing case, as you must fully realize. Trump is in trouble because an employee of the federal government spoke up about his criminal behavior while in office. Here a political operator leaked about a private conversation among Warren and Sanders -- not even remotely the same thing.

  33. The timing makes it pretty obvious that this is a false accusation. Warren's campaign realizes that their odds are going down by the day. She needs to personally release a statement immediately; the longer she waits, the more suspicious it is. Bernie has my vote. If Warren or Biden is the nominee, I'll be voting third party. I only vote for candidates with at least one ounce of integrity.

  34. @mike Do you think Bernie would vote third party if he himself is not the nominee? Never!

  35. @mike I'm a Bernie supporter and contribute monthly to his campaign. If you don't vote for the Democratic party you will be voting for trump! And that is exactly what happened last time.

  36. @mike Bernie doesn't have my vote. If he wins the nomination, I'll be voting third party. I only vote for candidates with at least one ounce of integrity.

  37. As the French say, this non-event is a storm in a glass of water. Basically a made up story using a few words taken out of context. No need to get excited about that. The real story here is Bernie going full out on the offense against Joe.

  38. @R 'The real story here is Bernie going full out on the offense against Joe.' The real story is Warren showing her true colors, inventing lies to get ahead in life. She has made a career of it, so why stop now.

  39. If this is true, he did nothing wrong. "Could not win" is an opinion, possibly incorrect, about political reality. Don't confuse it with "should not win", which is an expression of prejudice.

  40. @Jonathan Katz Except it shows how that is is in agreement that a woman should not win since he should win.

  41. @Jonathan Katz Shocking how many are defending Sanders, who proved he is entirely willing to pose as patriarchal patron bountiful and call a woman names to do it. Same old same old egotistical man with minions who think he’s right for it. Really this is why the democratic party was in trouble last election and is so again.

  42. @A Lady When, specifically and with what words, did Bernie "call a woman names?" What "names." Please be precise about this and include a link.

  43. Don't present rumors. If you cannot independently verify this story it should not have been posted. Period. Facts matter; rumors do not.

  44. Its sourced just like everything else. Everyone knows Bernie is not as progressive at heart as he likes to present.

  45. @Better American than Republican Same for Trump ?

  46. This is salacious nonsense, once again trying to attack and divide the progressive Democratic candidates.

  47. I'd bet a lot of money that this unsubstantiated rumor has the DNC's fingerprints all over it.

  48. @Bob That makes no sense. Warren and Bernie are both the leading edge of progressive. If you think the DNC is out to get Bernie, logically they'd be trying to sabotage Warren too. But both candidates running strong. It's candidates like Cory Booker who have been hurt by the DNC debate entry rules.

  49. The gloves are coming off. All Warren has to do is deny Bernie said it and the issue goes away. That she hasn't (yet at least) shows how tight and tense the race is becoming. If as Warren said the dinner was private and would remain so, then someone somewhere is creating trouble. (Someone check Vlad's email.) I'm afraid this is going to get uglier which will only end up benefitting Biden and Buttigieg.

  50. @Eric. Do you mean benefitting Trump.

  51. lucky for me. i can't vote for any of these candidates. but, you better figure it out soon folks. from where i sit, biden is too old, bernie is too angry, liz has no corporate support(you know, the kind they all need!). my guess is america's next prez will not be female or gay.

  52. @ed - and any one of them is more qualified to be president than IMPOTUS. Any one of them is a better human being than trump.

  53. @Jeanne 357 There are approximately 7 billion people on this planet who are better human beings than Trump.

  54. The campaign staff egos are, unfortunately, going to help reelect Trump. Knock it off!

  55. Cat fight in the Left Far Side. If he said it, admit it, and explain this anti-woman bias Bernie. If he did not say it, admit you invented this story Warren and politely bow out of the race. Either way you both lose. Let the pie throwing contest begin.

  56. What a splendid coincidence...pity Sanders is leading in the polls...and he's damnably querulous too...

  57. I'm not familiar with the CNN report. Was it Chris Cuomo who used to work for ABC? You do understand how the Television industry helped elect Trump by dedicating a Billion dollars worth of free airtime to his campaign, don't you?

  58. @PATRICK Do you mean dedicating a lot of time, worth billions, talking very bad andd negative bout him ? Then he should win bigly 2020 too...

  59. The comments and lies that Trump used against Hillary make me believe that he has gotten to someone in the Warren campaign with either a bribe or a threat.

  60. So the question to Democratic voters is which campaign do you believe, Bernie Sanders’ or Liz Warren’s? Perhaps neither....

  61. Truth contest between Bernie and Warren? Not even a contest. I'll pick Bernie every time - Warren is a known inventrix.

  62. Nothing like stirring up some controversy where there is none. If it is not the media creating it, it could be one of the other candidates, Biden, Klobuchar ...

  63. Most likely Trump and Putin.

  64. "But the two senators were the only people in the room, and all reports of what was said have been secondhand." One year later on the eve of another CNN debate, CNN just happens to "break the story" and deploys the over-used "anonymous people familiar with the matter" tactic to create a fallacious story in hopes of generating viewership for their debate tomorrow night. Trump is 100% correct about CNN and "fake news".

  65. "In a private meeting in 2018 between Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Mr. Sanders said that he did not think a woman could win the presidency, according to two people familiar with the discussion." So who are these two people? Interesting how the Times chooses when to be flexible with its no anonymity rule. Damage Sen. Sanders? No problem.

  66. Sexism certainly played a role in Hilary Clinton's loss in 2016. Whether outright from men or the internalized misogyny on display from countless female Trump voters, its quite clear. That being said, in a meeting discussing strategy for the 2020 election, this topic had to be discussed. I personally feel like what may have been discussed is being intentionally taken out of context because Warren is failing to bring new people into politics and her campaign is on the decline. Bernie attempted to recruit her to run in 2016 and has been supporting female candidates and the possibility of a female president his entire career. Its a shame to see her campaign going into some blatant tattle tale smear instead of focusing on policy and vision. I thought they were better than that. More importantly, this just further shows weakness in character and is guaranteed to fail against Trump in the general.

  67. I love Warren but this is a desperate attempt by her campaign to discredit Mr. Sanders. I would request the reporters/journalists to show a little restrain and not report everything based on "hearsay" until you know this to be true. We cannot afford to lose in November.

  68. So, a conversation from 18 months ago becomes news when Sanders is suddenly leading in the polls? Anonymous people who weren't at the meeting claim that Sanders said Americans are too sexist to elect a female president, even though he endorsed and campaigned for a female candidate that won the popular vote by 3 million? This seems like a hit piece to me. The Times has been demonstrating that it has a bias against Sanders since 2016, I'm sorry to see that they haven't gotten over it yet.

  69. @John Kelly , It's been demonstrated that the Times had a much bigger bias against Hillary. She got much more negative press than positive.

  70. @Naomi And Trump got daily above-the-fold coverage during the campaign.

  71. Sooooo, the question is: Between Warren and Sanders, which one has a history of speaking untruths?

  72. Elizabeth and Bernie are incredibly close in their positions and goals. For the good of the country they should join forces. Bernie president Elizabeth VP in 2020. Bernie agrees to serve only one term (he is 78, she is 70). They would lock this thing up and we would have a progressive government for the next 12 years. Enough time to get real change accomplished

  73. @Steve Every single New England Democrat after JFK has gone down in flames in the general election. Our winners hailed from Georgia, Arkansas and Illinois. Two on the same ticket? Not a good bet.

  74. @Steve It is impractical to think that we will ever see a ticket consisting of two 70-something New England progressives. Historically, tickets are balanced, to broaden their appeal & improve their chances of winning. If either Liz or Bernie is nominated, look for them to choose a person of the opposite gender, from a different part of the country, much younger than they are, & with some moderate credentials.

  75. Right now the story is that the progressives are tearing each other apart. An unprecedented Aliance would be the new big story and a winning ticket the Dems need to stop fighting each other And put out a candidate quickly

  76. Here we go again. The Democrats are beginning to organize the circle firing squad to ensure that Trump is able to win in 2020. As in 2016, Sanders seems to be organizing the circle. It looks like 2016 and 1931 all over again. Let's not create fractures. With Bernie and many of his followers it is my way or not at all as "We" have the only true insights on how to solve problems. Throughout much of his career he has enjoyed being the outsider jabbing at the "establishment". However, when it is presidential politics time, he wants the insider establishment mantle hosted around him or he will oppose the Dem candidate. If he thinks Trump with target women, what will he do running against a "socialist".

  77. Ms. Warren has stated that she believes that the private meeting should remain private. Bernie states that he did not make such a statement. Let's move on to defeat the guy sitting in the Oval office. There is no need to waste time on "he say-she say". Ultimately, the voters will decide who should be the next person to sit in the Oval office.

  78. @Mary Voters will decide unless Russia, vote suppression, disinformation, and RNC dirty tricks tilt the playing field.

  79. @K. John. Same shoud be valid for Trump !

  80. Bernie has been saying a woman is just as able to be President as a man since the 80s. He encouraged Warren to run in 2015 before he ultimately decided to. He has been a champion of egalitarianism for as long as he's been in politics. These allegations are untrue - noise being whipped up in the last stretch of the Democratic primaries to draw a stake in the heart of the progressive movement. We, the tens of thousands of Bernie volunteers, will continue fighting for our candidate. I hope that Warren supporters similarly see these headlines for what they are and join us in fighting for a better world.

  81. @Dylan That's the sanest comment I've seen here yet.

  82. @Dylan With you (and Bernie and Warren) all the way

  83. I don't believe he said this, at least not in that way. But you know what? This woman thinks it. I wish I didn't.

  84. Pre hashtag me too Sanders remarks reprehensible; current ensuing hysterical me too overreach viciously, hatefully attacking genuine Progressive (Al Franken prime example) especially “white cis men” generating blowback against perceived overreacting harpies meaning further costly obstacle regarding electing first woman US President.

  85. Ed Rendell said the same thing on national TV in 2016. Something to the effect that he knew that at state like Pennsylvania would never vote for any woman. This isn’t news, it isn’t fair but in this misogynistic country it is true.

  86. I’m not a fan of Bernie Sanders, but, from a political perspective, he would have to be almost insane to say that. Unless Warren herself confirms this, I don’t see how anyone could fairly conclude he said that. I haven’t seen anything to suggest that he’s sexist.

  87. 2016 proved that many voters are deeply uncomfortable with the idea. But hopefully Bern's alleged comment will prove to be dead wrong.

  88. The most important words in this article are "all reports of what was said have been secondhand". This article feels like gossip, something I am dismissing.

  89. @KatCaakes In a social media-obsessed society, everything is gossip.

  90. "But the two senators were the only people in the room, and all reports of what was said have been secondhand." I am certainly glad that this information is included in the story. But to put it at the very end, seven full paragraphs after Senator Sanders's comment, is extremely puzzling and begs for an explanation.

  91. @polymath The explanation is simple. The NY Times did everything it could to discredit Sanders in 2016 and they’re going full steam ahead for 2020. It will be interesting to see whom they endorse if he manages to get the nomination.

  92. All the candidates should sit down together and be real about who might best beat Trump.

  93. This article certainly appears to be an effort to discredit Sanders, and/or create schism among progressive candidates. While this item may be legitimate, it resembles the distorted and polarizing posts which appeared on Facebook in 2016.

  94. It feels extremely irresponsible to report on this given that Bernie has denied it and there has been no comment from Elizabeth Warren, the only other person in the room.

  95. @Mary Because we have the transcript, and testimony of multiple witness given under oath.

  96. @JT According to the article, she is now saying that he did say it. I don't think him saying it means much, but she is claiming he did.

  97. @JT Why not the same thoughts for Trump ?

  98. I heard somebody say that one time they heard somebody in the circles of Elizabeth Warren say that she had said to somebody who wasn’t there that Sanders. . . Come on, people.

  99. @Tam why don't you say just the same in Trump's case ?

  100. @Mary Because in Trump’s case there is a transcript of what he said.

  101. @Mary The transcript was not hearsay. Trump released it and approved it. He is so corrupt he could not even see how corrupt it was. He thinks if he doesn't say someone will be "sleeping with the fishes" he hasn't threatened them.

  102. So what if he did? I see analyst say stuff like that on television and in articles I read. I doesn't mean he thinks a woman is not capable. There is plenty of history against a woman president to support that.

  103. He's right. At least not this year.

  104. All this does is play into Trump's reelection.

  105. @Joe Also because of the hypcrisy here about the anonimous whistleblower

  106. Yeah, these two camps are going to work real well together when one of them loses to the other. What a wonderful, united party Democrats will be in 2020. Oh, not in this version of the Multi-Verse but almost certainly in one of them.

  107. Reminder: Warren has not spoken out publicly about this. This is hearsay from third-party sources that for some reason was printed. Based on the scanty facts in the article, my guess is he said something like "be aware Trump will try to use sexism against you." Warren probably agreed with that. This is NOT coming from the Warren campaign, they have not officially made any form of statement. Both Warren and Sanders have a strong history of working closely together with tremendous mutual respect, and as Mr. Cohen says "Everything I know about Bernie Sanders for 30 years tells me he would never speak like that, let alone to a woman he admires tremendously." When the rumors are completely out of character for the players and the only person that truly benefits is Trump then it smells like a setup. Salacious and damaging material like this should have been fact-checked a LOT harder before publication.

  108. @K & S Hearsay from third-party source... Why condemned here and considered gospel when against Trump ?

  109. @Mary you need a new shtick! Credible witnesses testified what Trump did. If you want the truth, be sure to call your senators and demand they allow witnesses to testify. Bolton, Pompeo, and Mulvaney should testify, don’t you agree?

  110. I would be ashamed to have my name on this "she said, he said" hit piece by CNN, NYT and surely many other mainstream news outlets. They are running scared right now in their acceptance that Bernie Sanders may very well go all the way (and that their own security within the professional class may be in jeopardy). A desperate measure by the Warren campaign, as well.

  111. Every Democrat should be an "anybody but Trump" person no matter her or his favorite among the Democratic candidates. Maybe each Democratic candidate should take a pledge to whole-heartedy support and work for the election of whomever the Democratic Party nominates.

  112. There is no reason to believe any of this story is true. Bernie encouraged Warren to run in 2016! Obviously he thinks a woman could win the presidency. And with Warren refusing to comment and Bernie denying it, this is nothing more than a baseless accusation from some anonymous sources who were not in the room at the time. Let's all be a little more skeptical about things like this. If this was a solid story, wouldn't it have come out already during the campaign? Instead it happens 3 weeks before the Iowa caucus with Bernie surging in the polls and Warren trailing.

  113. @American Abroad You should hang out more with the people in Iceland. Get their take on it all. Who do they want to see as the candidate. They are objective.

  114. @Jacob Until recently, Sanders was not a serious contender and therefore there was no need to expose stories like these, which I take as solid. Sanders has coasted so far but I believe his rise in the polls is going to sink him with more and more of this honest investigative reporting.

  115. @Jacob 2016 was pre-Trump. Their conversation was in 2018, it's entirely possible that he was lamenting how un-progressive our country turned out to be. (Not saying that's why Clinton lost, she really didn't do a good job campaigning.)

  116. These two candidates are my favorites. It is sad to see them at odds about anything. Is it possible that this is a media-created storm where nothing real exists?

  117. @Gene S Not just possible. Likely.

  118. I have donated to both of these candidates and would be happy with either as nominee. That said, I figured it would be Bernie who went low, not Warren. As it turns out this has the Warren campaign’s hands all over it. It hurts both candidates and it should stop.

  119. @Jeremiah Crotser This is coming out on the heels of the Sanders campaign volunteers dinging Warren supporters in an effort to bring them over to Sanders. Honestly this doesn't seem like that much of a ding. There's a lot of truth to the idea that it's going to be harder for a woman to get elected.

  120. It’s very different to say, “Trump is going to use misogyny against you” than it is to say “because you are female, you won’t get elected.” If Sanders did the latter I would say that he’s not a good nominee. If he did the former, then Warren’s campaign is being dishonest.

  121. Between this and the Sanders interview with the Times’s editorial board, the Times is doing some exceptional hit jobs on the Sanders campaign.

  122. @Vin They're certainly putting in the effort. Don't know how good a job they're doing of it, though.

  123. @Vin I wish they were better, honestly. There's nothing wrong with asking any candidate tough questions about their stances on real issues, but the Times has been scraping the bottom of the barrel. Something Sanders might have said. Some people who work for Juul donated to your campaign, so would you ban vaping? Some people who work for a lot of companies have donated to his campaign. Everyone works somewhere. But there's a big difference between a small donation from a worker and a large donation from a CEO or corporation. Obviously.

  124. Luckily we have had decades of the real Bernie, examples of unwavering integrity and good judgement and good character, to know better. I don’t agree with everything but Bernie is my president. Bernie 2020

  125. This is all hearsay. There were no witnesses to the conversation. Just the M/M trying, once again, to torpedo Bernie.

  126. @Mary Maybe because Trump is a known liar and hearsay is more reliable than he is?

  127. @Observer Why should "hearsay " be ignored here and not in tha case of Trump ?

  128. "Sanders Is Said to Have Told Warren That a Woman Could Not Win the Presidency" Well .... he is not entirely off the mark, considering: 1. The Democratic candidate has to go toe-to-toe with Donald Trump, who enjoys abusing women verbally. Does anyone remember Donald Trump attacking Megyn Kelly, Fox News anchor? Does "[she] had blood coming out of her eyes" ring a bell? 2. If Sanders has based his statement on the history of the United States of America, then he cannot be blamed. There has never been a US president, or even vice president, in the history of the country. Given that this is year 2020 (and not 1820), let's hope that the US electorate can focus on what each candidate brings to the table and act based on the interest of the country, and not on perceived self-interest.

  129. "Lying." My well-wishes to both Warren and Sanders. However, there is now only one liar we should be concerned about. Come on! Please pull together to defeat the incumbent.

  130. Unfortunately Bernie might be correct at this point in US history.

  131. People are acting like this is a he said she said. The story comes from an secondary source. It’s a classic: anonymous said- he responded- she declined to comment.

  132. Why is hearsay from a year ago being reported as if it's gospel? This has all the hallmarks of desperation leading up to the Iowa caucus.

  133. NY Times To Do List; 1) Smear Sanders 2) Remind voters that only Biden can save private insurance compan.... er, we mean, defeat Trump 3) Complain about Trump’s manipulation of facts. 4) Publish stories based entirely on hearsay, provided they... 5) Smear Sanders again. 6) Repeat as often as necessary until Sanders is defeated and Biden, Bloomberg, ot a “centrist” is elected. 7) Spend next four years lamenting the fact that our democracy has been gutted by Trump and wondering how Biden could possibly have lost this election and gotten rolled across the Midwest. 8) Secretly sigh huge sigh of relief that as bad as Trump is, he saved us from the horrors of universal healthcare, student loan reform, and universal free education for those who want it. While also saving parent company and Wall Street readers from increased taxation. Because, really, we are a for-profit, pro-capitalist, and anti-working class paper.

  134. @Andrew Excuse me, who is smearing Bernie? I haven't heard any smears on Bernie. The person who is really being smeared is Joe Biden. First he's attacked and lied about from Trump, the GOP and Russia. Why didn't the Dems stick up for him then? Now he's also getting smeared by some Dems and media. But Joe keeps getting back up and staying on message, we need to get rid of Trump to save this country.

  135. @Andrew Excuse me, who is smearing Bernie? I haven't heard any smears on Bernie. The person who is really being smeared is Joe Biden. First he's attacked and lied about from Trump, the GOP and Russia. Why didn't the Dems stick up for him then? Now he's also getting smeared by some Dems and media. But Joe keeps getting back up and staying on message, we need to get rid of Trump to save this country.

  136. @Andrew Yup. 100% accurate.

  137. Here we go. " In a private meeting in 2018 between Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Mr. Sanders said that he did not think a woman could win the presidency, according to two people familiar with the discussion. Ms. Warren subsequently told associates about Mr. Sanders’s comment, according to people with knowledge of her remarks." Read that carefully. Who are these two people “familiar with the meeting”? Members of the Warren campaign, perhaps? When is “subsequently”? Last week? In any event, does anyone think Sanders would be dumb enough to say such a thing in the first place?

  138. @Bunk McNulty Yes, I think he'd say it in a one-on-one meeting as long as he thinks it is private.

  139. @Bunk McNulty precisely. Moreover, it would be completely out of character for him to say something like that. It's not at all how he thinks or operates. He's been empowering women, and particular women of color, to run for office and be the best they can be. AOC's statement at the Queens rally was poignant in that regard. She said he made her feel as a worthy human by pointing out it wasn't her fault, that the system was rigged. I still tear up when I think of that moment and what I personally felt as she said it.

  140. @Bunk McNulty No it's not in character for Bernie to be dismissive of a female candidate. For a man who has fought for Medical for All for decades, I can imagine him saying 15-20 years ago "I don't think we can get a Medical For All bill passed in the next couple of years." That would not have mean't that he'd give up the fight for that. He's a man who recognizes the difference between a battle retreat and the long road to victory. So, if he may have said it to her in privately in 2018 it wasn't in the context with which it is now being painted. He would never offer anything less than encouragement for the long term struggle. Given him his just due respect.

  141. Of course it's a lie. Bernie Sanders has been a public official for decades, and there is no way that he runs around saying something like that out loud. He didn't say it.

  142. @Ann What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

  143. It's not like he's completely wrong with this statement to be perfectly honest at this point in our nation's history. As we are getting closer and closer to the election we will unfortunately begin to see candidates resort to middle school he said/she said gossip tactics.

  144. All I can say is, it's about time this contest became what primary battles are supposed to be in the first place: junior-high redux. Let's you and him (her) fight!

  145. This is the kind of controversy Democrats just don't need. They should be going after Trump, who's an easy target on so many issues, not each other. There's another piece in NYT this afternoon about Biden gaining ground in Iowa, and this may be one of the reasons why.

  146. "In a private meeting in 2018 between Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Mr. Sanders said that he did not think a woman could win the presidency, according to two people familiar with the discussion." And out comes the unsupported rumor mongering about Sanders now that it looks like he can win the Iowa caucuses. Either find a recording of Sanders saying this, or drop it.

  147. @Yaj or at least have Elizabeth Warren confirm and own the rumor. In the article, she does not comment.

  148. @Yaj in fact, there's footage of Bernie saying the exact opposite. @MeaganDay on Twitter.

  149. @Yaj Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

  150. Of course, a woman can beat Trump - just not Elizabeth Warren. Give me Amy Klobuchar any day

  151. @Chris She's a bully, and while I will vote for whomever becomes the nominee, I consider her no better than Trump in her disdain for people.

  152. This is CLEARLY an attempt by the media to draw a wedge between Warren and Bernie supporters, thus hindering a liberal coalition from forming when one of them bows out to support the other & all but guaranteeing a Biden win. Ignore all these articles claiming "bickering" between the campaigns. This is a low for this publication & it's peers.

  153. @Very Silly A low? Yes. Unprecedented? Hardy. The press declines to cover Bernie until they have to and then they do it in the most negative way possible.Could this be part of a NYT/msm/DNC smear campaign of their own? I wouldn't put it passed them.

  154. This "revelation" may destroy a candidacy, that of Elizabeth Warren. Too bad, she's a much better candidate than Biden, Buttigiegg, or god forbid the republican Klobuchar.

  155. Elizabeth Warren was a Republican until her late forties and is a counterfeit progressive. She could’ve endorsed Bernie in 2016 if her purported progressive convictions were anything more than lip service. This desperate and slanderous accusation will only be the final nail in a campaign that began to flounder once voters realized her commitment to Medicare For All is tenuous and unreliable.

  156. @Anthony, thank you for telling the truth.

  157. I think the odds are the only person who will be able to beat Trump is a center, center/left/right/center white heterosexual Christian man 55-57 who was once a star athlete.

  158. It is utterly outrageous to make a claim like this against Bernie Sanders. (A) I can't imagine him saying this and (B) there's absolutely no way he believes such a thing. These 11th hour revelations are nothing other than dirty politics and this is the last thing the Democrats need to engage in. Whoever rises to the top, we had better be behind 110% or else it's four more years of you know who and you know what.

  159. Politicians say a lot of things. In November we'll get serious.

  160. It’s serious now.

  161. Maybe this is a sign that the oligarchy are getting nervous. Good. About time.

  162. @Lilly If they are, it's not Bernie they're worried about.

  163. Still plan to vote for Warren as the nominee. But if Sanders is the nominee, I will vote for him. This story changes nothing for me. Hopefully that will be the plan for everyone who wants to alter the dangerous domestic and international path down which Trump has already taken us. Vote your choice for the Democratic nominee, but if your choice doesn’t become the nominee, vote for whoever the Democratic nominees is. Imperfect as that choice may seem to you to be, that person will still be a far safer choice than Trump, as he had shown, will ever be.

  164. I'd love to see the Venn Diagram of Hillary supporters insisting that America is too sexist to elect a woman one side, and people offended by Bernie's supposed assertion that America is too sexist to elect a woman on the other. This is hilariously low and stupid for a campaign that has been in tailspin for the last month or so. Once the Clinton dead-enders like Brock and Tom Watson latched on, it makes sense we are now seeing this sort of embarrassing smears come out. It's a last ditch effort, and one that is based entirely on reopening the 2016 rift all over again. Like the Warren camp leaked this anonymously, Sanders issues a full denial, they refuse to comment, the hostile mainstream press repeats it as fact. However tomorrow on stage he's going to just ask her right there in front of everyone, did I say this? She can't dodge him then. It's such an amateur mistake that only the PMC's could make.

  165. If this came from the Warren campaign, SHAME! If Sanders did say it (and it’s not taken out of context now), SHAME! If it came from some outside source (such as another Dem campaign, Trump campaign, trolls (American or otherwise), Warren should publicly deny it and show her support for Sanders even while actively contesting him for the nomination. Only Sanders and Warren know the truth. Only a Dem, any Dem, can save this country from its decline and fall under Trump. Dems need to stick together, keep an eye on the prize, and win back the White House (and hopefully the Senate while retaining the House).

  166. Did Dems learn NOTHING from the 2016 race? If we can't civilly debate policy differences without devolving into maligning other progressive candidates, then maybe our democracy IS dead.

  167. Don’t despair. It’s what the oligarchy wants.

  168. @matimo - the Democratic candidates are not our democracy. What a silly piece of hyperbole.

  169. @Mkm the intended implication was that if we keep eating our own, we risk a Trump win in 2020, and I do fear that would be the end of our nearly 250 year experiment.

  170. Warren’s campaign has been tumbling downhill for months. This is getting absurd. Once I thought I could vote for her - but now? Forget about it.

  171. This feels a lot like conservative media trying to get a sound bite out of context or some kind of “project veritas” moment in order to create division in the Democrat party. There is nothing, NOTHING that the GOP loved more than watching all of the Bernie delegates walk out of the DNC convention. The media loves drama. Loves it. This feels like the media trying to manufacture more “politics as sports” infighting in the Democrat party in an effort to improve Trump’s changes at winning election.

  172. The part that rings true is that Bernie’s the anti-identity politics progressive. It also wouldn’t surprise me if Bernie told Warren some of the challenges she would face as a female candidate in a way that some would view as condescending/sexist and others would consider harmless. End of the day it’s just another thing that people can use in building their “choose your own adventure” political narrative. Now some people will view Bernie as sexist and the others won’t, just like some people consider Trump to have confessed to sexual assault based on his “grab by the” comment, and others see it as a nothingburger. Let’s get back to debating healthcare.

  173. One unforced error inspires another. As Bernie said, "both campaigns had hundreds of employees, who “sometimes say things that they shouldn’t.”" Every second spent on foolishness like this turns voters off (or overtly aggravates them), which is the exact opposite of what Democrats need; Democratic campaign staffers (and die hard supporters of both candidates, frankly) would do well to not turn themselves into circular firing squads. Duke it out on the merits - there's plenty of material for that battle - but remember that the fight is to build a better America.

  174. Many democrats agree with Bernie and the fact that he feels compelled to lie about it is not a good look for him.

  175. Hey Bernie...I'm a woman with a Jewish dad, and I have trouble believing either a Jew or socialist can win this election. Everyone in this field is lacking, IMHO. But I do believe Sanders has the best shot given the response at Fox's town hall, and that he will easily dismiss any ridiculous lie-based name calling by our current disgrace of a leader. I actually think Warren could do the same, but it's looking less and less likely she has the necessary support, and the backbiting rivalry among the candidates plus continually unfair scrutiny by the media is a big reason.

  176. Sanders campaigned for Hillary Clinton. Do you honestly think he won't campaign for Elizabeth Warren if she gets the nomination? If Sanders becomes president, he'll probably appoint Warren to a major cabinet position. Even if what Sanders said were true, it is of infinitesimal importance in the big scheme of things. I would not expect any voter to make their choice based on gossip.

  177. Either of these candidates would be far better than the current president.

  178. I guess I had better send Bernie more money. But don't worry Liz, I'll vote for you if you get the nod.

  179. I acknowledge I'm a Sanders supporter, but I find this story hard to believe. A) Why would Sanders believe that a woman couldn't win the presidency? (it's only a matter of time) B) why would he be so stupid to say it to Elizabeth Warren? (I don't think he is) and C) Why were they acting like best buddies until the last two weeks, if this conversation happened two years ago? It seems far more likely that their truce has broken down in the past two weeks and everyone's shooting from the lip. Sanders needs to tell his staff to chill out on Warren. Warren's people need to regain their cool. This silliness serves nobody but Biden and Trump.

  180. Whether he said or not as a private opinion estimating what the electorate might do with a woman in the ballot, who really cares? The Democrats, beyond these two, sure fire, general election losers, better get focused on what it is going to take to win back the Presidency. This needless navel gazing and self-destructive preoccupation with gotcha, identity politics, will simply kill any chance they have of beating the existential danger currently occupying the White House.

  181. It is surprising that so many are surprised, as well as outraged, (and shocked, absolutely shocked), that Sanders could even be accused of saying something as outrageous and awful as this. Where have people been? This is hardly a surprising statement from anyone who has seriously listened to what has been said, or read what has been written, since 2016. You don’t need to leave the Times, just look at the pieces Michelle Goldberg of the Times has written pushing back against all those who publicly stated that a woman can't win the 2020 election. (And yes, this unfortunately means a candidate must win the Electoral College, as there's no question that Trump already decisively lost the popular vote to a woman yet still became president). One should rightly suspect those who try to dismiss this as desperately wanting to protect Sanders from being accused of saying something so many in politics said before 2018, and he very likely said, but can't be associated with now if he wants to consolidate the political left outside the Democratic Party, and those to the left inside the Democratic Party. Read, "The Future Of The Democratic Party Is … White Guys?" by Clare Malone, senior political writer for FiveThirtyEight, and see that this was something which many said before and after Sanders was so outrageously and unfairly accused of saying it. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-future-of-the-democratic-party-is-white-men/

  182. The proverbial tempest in a teapot.

  183. Unless one is working undercover, saving up such "gotchas" for a strategic release usually strips them of all meaning or credibility even if they had any in the first place and were not taken out of context, otherwise distorted or pure fabrications. See "Trump and Ukraine" or "Trump and Iran" or "Harris and Biden" for some recent examples.

  184. I smell carbon fiber. It's coming from somewhere. Look at the way this article is written: it starts out saying Sanders made this statement as if it were a matter of fact. Then in paragraph 3 it says that Sanders denies it. Why didn't it start out saying Warren campaign alledges..., and then say Sanders denies it. Carbon fiber is a very polite way of saying just what this is. I hope it backfires when people realize what is going on here. Bernie's old. He's a curmudgeon. He's a lot of things. But what this article implies he is not. However the article does imply a lot of negative things about the writers and the publisher in regard to how they feel about Sanders. Here's what I say to them: go to graph 2 at: bit.ly/EPI-study Notice how the median (meaning everyone's) wage went up with GNP from 1945 to 1972? Notice how the median wage has been flat for the last 48 year despite the GNP going up another 150%+? Is that right? Doesn't that imply everything that is wrong with our society? How are you going to fix it if you do not address that problem? How can you ignore the salient fact of that graph and then pretend that keeping things the same is the way to go? The only person talking about this is Bernie.

  185. @Tim Kane People talk about this without often mentioning the role of computing technology. Corporations can relentlessly collect data and experiment and be less beholden to the knowledge level of most of their workers. No government policy was likely to both keep the economy competitive and counteract this effect over the long term.

  186. @Tim Kane Ditto your critique of the Times' editors. That headline is terribly misleading, implying, as it does, that Bernie doesn't believe a woman can win ... while later on the reporter seems to say that Bernie made some type of remark but only in reference to the 2020 election and because of the horror show that is the current resident of the White House. Terrible, and shame on the The Times.

  187. If Bernie said that, I think he believes it to be true. Trump is a reprehensible human being, a person lacking integrity and morality, and yet Hillary lost to him, with the help of our undemocratic Constitution and the intentional efforts of the Republican Party to throw minorities off the voter rolls. Most people, women as well as men, feel threatened by a strong, intelligent, articulate woman. I hope for a Sanders/Warren ticket. That would easily win the nomination and probably the election. Alternatively, Bernie could appoint her Secretary of the Treasury.

  188. @Diogenes Or save her for the supreme court, which I believe is where Warren could do the most good for the longest amount of time.

  189. That volunteer script is far from "trashing" Warren. Sanders and Warren have to explain why they're a better candidate than the other at some point and potential voter base is a fair point of discussion.

  190. As, according to The Times, Sanders and Warren were the only people in the room then I believe it is incumbent on it to name the people who are claiming that is what Sanders said and when Warren reportedly told them. I do not see what reason there would be them to remain anonymous. If they were so upset about the remark, I doubt they'd be working for Sanders so don't have to worry about losing their jobs and if they work for Warren and are telling the truth, they wouldn't have to worry about that either. And isn't it funny that whomever it is kept their mouths shut about it for so long.

  191. Well, I expect that there ARE folks out there who simply wouldn't vote for a woman. Even though they might be reluctant to admit that openly. Or... they might not even consciously recognize their own bias. And perhaps enough of them that it would be more difficult for a woman to win. NOT saying that is good or desirable, OR that this should dissuade anyone from voting for whichever candidate they feel drawn to. Warren is a strong candidate in my estimation, and I'd have NO difficulty voting for her.

  192. If only more of us tried to be aware of our biases...

  193. @Darlene . yes, you should try ...

  194. It would not surprise me in the least to discover that Neera Tanden of Center for American Progress was behind this. She was involved in similar acts in 2016 as a top Hillary advisor. She has been a prime mover behind the Stop Bernie movement among the DNC establishment and ran ads in early 2019 to that effect. Bloomberg has said he would drop out of the race if Biden is in the lead, but he is gunning to stop Sanders as well. Buckle up, this is going to get nasty. The smear mongers are firing up their engines.

  195. @nora m Good one , Nora. Thanks.

  196. A candidate desperately resorts to lies and innuendo to boost her faltering campaign - and the corporate media goes along for the ride.

  197. I have no use for Sanders, but really this does sound like him at all. It is particularly specious given Hillary won the popular vote.

  198. "Mr. Sanders said in a statement...that it was 'ludicrous' to think he would have" said he "did not think a woman could win the presidency." Quite apart from Sanders' longstanding economic-political and identity-political statements siding with women... ...is it REMOTELY plausible that a veteran progressive politician - a politician who underwent racial and gender "identity" attacks in 2015-16, would - on the most narrow, purely self-interested political grounds - say anything that could be REMOTELY construed in such a way? Don't think so. This is simply one more piece of the establishment Democratic and right wing attacks that have sprung up at the very moment that the Sanders surge has made him a viable candidate - now in first place for IA and NH.

  199. Unfortunately, Sanders is correct. This country will not vote a woman president.

  200. Now isn't this interesting, just watched a clip on twitter of Bernie. from at least 25 years ago telling a class of maybe 3rd graders that girls had just as much right in politics as boys and they could be president, that times were changing for girls but not fast enough. Nina Turner submitted it. Bernie had brownish hair then and more of it and it was messy I admit, his one crime. Also did you know that Bernie tried to convince Warren to run for president in 2016, and then decided to run himself when she refused. So why again would he try to convince Warren to run if he thought she could not get elected? I am sure those who are terrified of Bernie winning will think up a nefarious answer to my question. Well we will see if this gets printed, I have my doubts.

  201. I’ve seen the exchanges between Sanders and Warren camps on Twitter. Really nasty and purple. As a long-time progressive, I’m disheartened by their tactics. I don’t believe for a minute Sanders said that about Warren. They better rethink this approach or else see Trump re-elected.

  202. This sniping between the campaigns reaffirms one reason why neither of these candidates appeals to me...that and the fact that I think both are entirely beatable by Trump because their nomination will bring out the worst in the Republican party.

  203. @Mford Can you name a single campaign ever where candidates did not snipe at each other at some point?

  204. Whatever, Who cares? It doesn't matter... I'd be happy to vote for either of these fine people... It may seem like it, but no one who is of age to vote is a 10 year old...

  205. Well, in Sanders own words (within double quotes), "How nice of him" to mansplain to Warren that 'that such attacks would preclude a woman from being elected' (I understand the single quotes is from an unverifiable private source). But given his history from early past (read rape-fantasy essay), recent past (misogyny in his 2016 campaign), and general discounting attitude towards a female rival (against Hillary in debates, now his campaign smearing Warren), I am not surprised. I was caught between the top candidates, and now have decided to go Warren.

  206. I believe he said it. I simply don’t trust the man and have nothing but contempt for his Bernie Bros gang.

  207. What does it mean to say a woman could not win the presidency, anyway? No Catholic candidate could win the presidency... until one did. No black candidate could win the presidency... until one did. I'm sure the analogy could be extended in a hundred different directions.

  208. @Steve The political climate is completely different today. We are fighting to take back the country from King Don. It is an unfortunate fact that more people will vote for a man than a woman in 2020, 4-6% is a lot in a close election. I am not willing to risk the future of democracy on ideals at this time.

  209. @Steve Well played, sir.

  210. @Steve We still haven't proved a Jew can win the presidency. How about letting Sanders disprove that.

  211. Here we go! The dems eat their own. Don't they understand that they're just giving more ammunition to Trump!

  212. Here we go, the lefty side of the Dem party is starting to eat its own.(And no don't pile on me because I've been a progressive most of my life.) I read the NYT editorial interview with Bernie – wasn't too impressed with his answers as they seemed rather stale and too dialed in to his relentless "revolution" speech and short on pragmatic steps to achieve the kind of changes he endorses. He didn't talk about corruption once in regard to the great need to pass an amendment to overturn Citizens United and pass the HR1 bill sitting on McConnell's desk. Frankly I think Bernie is too old to be president. His interview answers reinforced that belief for me. I also think he tips a little too far toward demagoguery for my taste – just from the hard left. I'll vote for him if he wins – though I doubt he will and it wouldn't make me very happy because I think he'd alienate a lot of Congress like Carter did and be less effectual. Yes, it disappointed me that he decided to run again instead of giving way to Warren. I think Warren would be a better president because she is whip smart and more pragmatic. But it looks like they are going to cancel each other out. We'll see. This country is in serious trouble. "It's the corruption, stupid." Nothing will improve unless we demand reform that will curtail the corruption. I wish Biden was stronger on that issue, he's not. I've started referring to the "B" boys. I'd be happier with Warren or even Klobuchar who is a pragmatic liberal. Blue in NV.

  213. First, it is widely reported that Bernie wanted Warren to run in 2016 which contradicts this whole thing. Second, this is literally all hearsay. It was a completely private meeting between the two. Perhaps Warren herself should make a public statement to corroborate this if its something that she even feels mildly strongly about. If not its just someone from Warren's camp "leaking" something that may or may not have happened a couple of weeks before the primary.

  214. @grusilag It's completely hearsay and sure looks like it was grossly misconstrued. But apparently the NyTimes considers any salacious hearsay "fit to print" as long as they can come up with a click-bait title and it harms progressive candidates. They've got a long history of publishing these slanted attack articles against first Sanders and now Warren and Sanders.

  215. @grusilag It 100% was a conversation about how this country is sexist and so she will have a tough time winning because of that. Not that she *should not* win because she's a woman. Those two are completely different, but it would be very easy for a spiteful campaign to misconstrue it as "Bernie is sexist." Lost a ton of respect for the Warren campaign today. So very disappointing.

  216. @grusilag Very interesting: in case of Trump, "hearsay" is good and valid, in case of Sanders is negative and therefore dismissed ...

  217. This might be the ideal time for Sanders and Warren to issue a joint statement of solidarity, pledging strong, unequivocal support one for the other no matter who is the Dem nominee, likewise if neither of them is. They can hit all the right notes about their own battle on the ISSUES, and how they trust voters to make the right decision on those issues. They can close the statement with a ringing endorsement of voting blue come November and a stark reminder of the so very grave stakes. Think of this an opportunity, Liz & Bernie: do NOT let it pass.

  218. Great idea!! Sanders and Warren campaigns, please make this terrific idea happen. We don’t need or want this divisive nonsense among the Democrats.

  219. @Marty I agree. Both candidates need to get out in front of this. I’m a Sanders supporter but I like Warren and if she wins the nomination I would do whatever I can to help her send Trump back to Mar a Lago. If this is just media pot stirring or the DNC establishment throwing the kitchen sink at Sanders or most likely a little bit of both then it stands to reason that the goal is to bring down both progressive candidates. It also stands to reason that this division will accrue to to N Biden’s and eventually Trump’s benefit. So Aunt Liz and Uncle Bernie bury the hatchet and let’s get on with the campaign.

  220. @Marty Both of them have already said REPEATEDLY that they'd support the eventual nominee, even if it's Biden. If anyone's looking at conspiracy theories, I'd suggest the most plausible one might connect an anonymously sourced CNN story with tomorrow night's CNN debate. Personally I'm a lot more cynical about CNN than I am about either Bernie or Liz.

  221. Ok, Bernie, you're leading in many of the polls, so please get ready for the kitchen sink and every other missile in existence to be hurled at you with the gleeful support of the mainstream media. This time, though, it won't matter. The record of decency you have established speaks for itself.

  222. @TM As opposed to any other frontrunner? That's politics. The biggest difference between a Bernie supporter and any other candidate supporter is one is personally attacked when their candidate receives negative attention.

  223. @TM I can't wait to finally hear in the MSM media about how Bernie dumped the single mother of his child faster than a hot potato. Unlike every other candidate Bernie never talks about his background. Voters are about to find out why. His slogan is "Not me. Us ". I admire the chutzpah.

  224. @TM "The record of decency you have established speaks for itself." That would be the 2016 record of sexism pertaining to both campaign staff and supporters? What we are looking for is a repudiation of that record.

  225. Let’s assume, for the sake of the argument, that Sanders indeed said that. Based on the poor reception of Kamala, Klobuchar, Gabbard and Warren as well as low excitement over Hillary, the Democratic Party has to finally grapple with the issue that a female candidate does not resonate well with religious minority voters. That’s the whole conservative secret of poor performance of women (as well as the complete deafness of minority voters to gay candidates, such as Mayor Pete).

  226. @Paul And yet...a dozen guys had to drop out while Warren and Klobuchar are still in the top tier.

  227. 10 to 1 Sanders said the equal to Warren. Either that or Warren is an acolyte of the way the president tells the truth.

  228. @NOTATE REDMOND Wow. You really know how to analyze and put things into perspective.

  229. @NOTATE REDMOND You know, a comment like that could easily be made while just running out the pros and cons. It is true that a woman, a gay, a minority, or a Jewish candidate could all suffer from bias from white, protestant voters who want "their country" back. It takes someone else to spin it to sound insulting. Like, maybe even the editors at the NYT? Heaven knows they did it in 2016.

  230. I don’t believe for a second that Bernie said that. Not in today’s world. But since she maintained she was Native American maybe she did allege he did.

  231. Or maybe a woman who lied about being a Native American is lying about Sanders. I don't believe all women, especially those who have prevaricated before.