Circular firing squad in the debate. Ganged up
on Bloomberg - who is probably the most electable - over some trendy #MeTwo stuff. Republicans (and Russians) are licking their chops, hoping Bernie Sanders will run against Trump.
All these Democrats - maybe not Bloomberg - are born to lose. Let’s play trendy while the country is going down the plug-hole...
I am going to have to go with Chris Matthews on this "Bernie Rise".
America is gone.
The russians are the new voters, Bernie has been searching for all these years.
with Bernie as the democratic Nominee,
the Dream of our Founding Fathers has tragically come to an end, just like Europe fell when the Nazis invaded France.
Sanders is absolutely sure that his hardcore stance is the only path. The fact that he tried to primary Obama is the evidence of intransigence. I am worried of people that don't leave room for doubt. Even Trump was acknowledging that he may do some things but was not sure how. He is playing the Trump card: me against everybody, which may work to make him stand out. His demagoguery reminds me how Castro, Che Guevara, Mao, and others "for the working class" revolutionaries came to power: promising what people want to hear, and silencing dissent afterwards under the "working class enemies".
I am afraid Sanders will give Trump a reason not to leave office in the case he loses under the pretext "can't turn America to communism".
We don't need a revolution here. America is already great. Capitalism only needs protection against itself. Creating opportunity and training care of the less fortunate should not be that hard in the #1 economy in the world.
Can we find a decent, sane person, that can we can trust without being consumed every hour "what will come next?"
4
My takeaway is that even among the small number of democrats running for office, they all hate the other candidates and think them liars and bad people. I guess I'll agree with them.
1
Let em fight. But we need some knockouts pretty soon so Dems can decide left lane or center left lane.
Corporate media has been complicit in the debasement of American political discourse, which has reached its nadir in the Trump administration. Superficial and manipulated to deliver spectacle not substance, the Democratic primary devolves into a food fight, while Trump brazenly dismantles another democratic institution. I wonder what the endgame is going to look like? My guess is that corporations and the ultra-wealthy will be okay, while the folks in the MAGA hats gleefully cheer for the incarceration of the next political enemy of Orange Benito, will have no idea what okay even looks like.
2
@Arthur
Yes, media creates a monster and then spends time protecting us against it. I guess gives them job security.
Here's a quick solution to the problem of Democratic trolls attacking other Democrats: Just assume every one of them is working on behalf of Russia's GRU to undermine American elections - which, as it happens, they are. For whatever, reason they just don't seem to realize it.
I spend little time on Twitter.
So thanks for letting me know that the most pompous, vainglorious Poohbah ever to occupy Gracie Mansion thinks Pete Buttigieg should ‘show some humility.’
Some jokes write themselves, don’t they?
Special thanks to Joe Lockhart.
2
If the Dems would focus more on the issues instead of the issue-less attacks, they would be more “Progressive.” Yes Castro made Cuba the 2nd-most literate country in the world in short time. He sent Cuban doctors around the world to treat the people of impoverished countries. He, more than any initiative sponsored by the US or any country stopped Apartheid when Cuban soldiers backed up Angola in its fight against South African incursions and sent them running. And Bernie only mentioned the Cuban literacy successes...and I ain’t no socialist, or Castrophile.
3
When DeBlasio inserts his unimportant self into this Democratic rush to the low-road, I know we're really in trouble. "Who cares what you think" is an understatement, as our flailing mayor seeks to do anything other than govern our city, the job he was elected to and is PAID FOR. Considering that the Republicans don't have a stream of endless debates, it's obvious that the winner of EACH is none other than the gangster-president himself. He doesn't have to attack anyone with attack dogs like Warren out there making all sorts of baseless accusations, defaming her rivals in ways that are not relevant to the campaign. "You called women horse-faced lesbians, Mr. Bloomberg" she railed. My instant thought was: EVIDENCE? And so the Dems are sinking into the abyss, talking about uniting to defeat Trump and not showing any signs of doing so.
2
The “gotcha” tone of the Democratic debates shows the maturity I remember back in my junior high school locker room!! Is that the takeaway you want millions of voters to see?
Get it through your skulls that the critical situation our country is in under Trump makes gotcha moments get very old very fast!!!
The country wants to know what a Democrat President (and perhaps a Democratic Congress, if coattails are long enough) will do to right our ship of state and save all who sail in her. Under Trump our ship is foundering badly.
Skip the comments designed for the media sound bites. Get down to what REALLY counts! The nitty gritty! If you don’t, once again we will see the Democrats snatch defeat from what should be sure victory in the coming election!!
1
Stop taking Putin's bait, NYTimes. The Russians are trying to divide the Democrats be exacerbating the establishment's fear of Bernie Sanders. I think you know this, and it's pretty gross you're using it to the benefit of your favored moderate candidates. The people want Bernie. He'll win South Carolina and sweep Super Tuesday. At that point I hope this paper will stop letting itself get trolled.
4
Bernie’s thoughts on Castro raise serious questions on his critical thinking ability. Recall the 1980 Mariel Boatlift...presumably because Cuba under a Castro was working so well. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariel_boatlift
3
@Imperato
Did you say the same things about Pres. Obama?!
Because he said the exact same thing. But instead Dems. applauded him and said he was so brave and straight talking. Now they lose their hypocritical mind because Sanders said that Castro's authoritarianism was awful, but it did have some good results too. Such as one of the highest literacy rates and better health and health care than the US.
Both true statements.
Who is the one that is having critical thinking ability issues here Imperato?
1
@Imperato Sanders didn’t ‘praise’ Castro or say that Cuba was working so well. He said Cuba had a good literary program and it happens to be a fact. (It’s also on wiki, look below.) Why then would a pundit or so called ‘journalist’ want you to believe a version of reality that is different from the facts?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Literacy_Campaign
1
It is hard to believe that not too many election cycles ago, Ronald Reagan created and followed the "11th Commandment" - speak no ill of other Republicans. We've come a long way baby.
3
Am I the only one who thinks that all this risks--at the very least--doing more harm than good?
With so many candidates and so much social media, it was inevitable that the intraparty campaign would turn so negative.
But all the petty and very public squabbling can only play into the hands of the Republicans--the very last thing we want.
For example:when Buttigieg knocks Klobuchar for forgetting AMLO's name, and Klobuchar gets annoyed in response, It only diminishes them both. without elevating anyone else.
Everyone disdains the smoke-filled room these days. Here's some heresy: what if we were better off, and would still be better off, when/if party elders settled on a nominee, with one-miliionth the decibel level, and mutual tear-down factor?
It's not as though primaries and caucuses are "democratic." Very small percentages participate. And in the caucuses, irregularities and doubts abound.
And anyway, the appearance of democracy, in primaries and caucuses, is vastly less important than getting to a consensus nominee who has the full backing of the party--so she can win.
As long as all Democrats remain focused on our shared desire to beat Trump, I wouldn't worry too much about sparks flying during primary season. Whoever becomes the nominee must be hardened and battle tested in order to win against the smear machine operated by Trump, Fox, and GOP aligned PAC's.
Sanders has yet to face the intense scrutiny Biden endured while seen as the front runner. Tonight's debate may be "Bernie against the world. " He makes too many unforced errors to emerge unscathed, as his defense on 60 Minutes of Castro shows.
In this volatile and unpredictable cycle, things won't be settled soon. No one will get to Milwaukee with a majority of delegates, leading to a deadlocked, brokered convention, where almost anything is possible. Elizabeth Warren could be the only candidate who can successfully unite the disparate components of the Democratic party. Her stature grows as Bernie takes his hits, while Bloomberg and Biden's essential weaknesses prevent them from becoming the one anti-Bernie consensus choice..
2
@Doctor B
Yes, a politician that has been in 17 different elections over the course of 50+yrs. Of which he's won 14 of them.
To say he's never been vetted is kinda poor thinking.
As for the brokered convention, yes Warren's stature continues to grow all the way up to 4th place.
While Sanders falls to first.
1
Faith in the old Democrat coalition has been badly shaken since 2016. People no longer trust that the moderates can win elections after they lost an apparently un-losable race against Trump.
Among the many problems this crisis of faith has caused, probably the most perilous is the numerous would-be reformers and revolutionaries who are seeking to remake the Democratic party in their own image. Bernie Sanders is one such.
I worry about what Sanders is doing to the Democrats. He doesn't seem to care about building a coalition, he's simply building a cult of personality to control a large enough chunk of the electorate to hold the coalition hostage. He won't be president, but going forward the Democrats won't be able to do anything without his approval.
I think he knows he can't win against Trump, but I don't think he particularly cares. He's not proved to be very efficacious in office. In his entire political career he's advanced only 7 pieces of legislation, 3 of which were designating holidays and post offices, and none of which have a thing to do with healthcare or addressing inequality.
Sanders wouldn't be able to do anything even if he got power. He's had years of experience in that position already. He simply saw a chance to influence national politics by taking advantage of a weakened Democratic Party, and being the outsider he is, feels no compunction about holding an election hostage.
2
How can anyone who opposes universal health care, minimum wages, and free college tuition be described as center left? This idea that the right wing of the Democratic Party, which itself has drifted steadily to the right over the last 40 years, is actually center left is totally insane. Chris Mathews, Joe Lockhart, Carville, Kerry, etc are not center left, they may be pro choice and satisfy some other cultural signals that differentiate them from fundamentalists, but that doesn't mean they have anything to do with left wing ideas. There's been a tendency this election to describe anyone who opposes Sanders as center left, so that now includes Bloomberg and Lloyd Blankfein, 2 finance oligarchs whose only intention for this election is to ensure that the left wing candidate loses!
2
Clearly, during these chaotic and upside down times, in Bernie Sanders, it sounds like a considerable number of democratic voters are having a great deal of difficulty wrapping their head around a politician like him that, unlike the other candidates, isn't corrupt and will actually put his constituents needs ahead of the corporate donors, whose influence and money "Bernie doesn't need".
2
I wish the moderates would stop giving Bernie so much free publicity and focus instead on their own qualifications for office and how they would deal with Trump.
2
Democrats will defeat Trump by enunciating clear ideas with policies to back up these ideas: a need to narrow the gap between the very rich and everyone else by giving everyone health insurance; making higher education accessible to everyone; increasing the minimum wage. Only Sanders and Warren have done this.
It is difficult to figure out what Biden, Buttigieg etc are proposing other than a little bit of this and that around the edges. Mushy ideas never won an election.
4
A big mistake is being made by the media trying to throw a wet blanket of civility on the Democratic primaries. The stop Sanders efforts won't help either. While there are a number of voter who will obediently trudge off to the pols and vote it won't be enough to defeat the devil. These efforts are threatening to drain the life out of any enthusiasm for the issues, the party, or the candidates themselves. The Dems won in 2018 by creating a buzz. By getting folks interested and engaged. Trying to sit on a perceived lead and offend no one never works.
2
The Electoral College sets the rules and Sanders can't win the swing states in the general election. A Sanders nomination means 4 more years of Trump. Why is this not the lead story?
2
What I don't understand is how having universal healthcare, affordable college and trade school, fighting global warming like all the other first world industrial countries is so radical.
4
The more they attack Bernie the more people want to vote for him.
Go Bernie.
6
Putin is always happy when partisans on social media act like Russian trolls--aggressively bashing each other, and creating as much chaos as possible. Although this article doesn't mention it, some of the social media invective may BE the work of Russian trolls. It's good to take some brisk scrubs at any candidate's weaknesses, but let's stay on target against the true enemies of democracy: Putin, similar autocrats, and especially the wanna-be autocrat who asked Putin to find Hillary's emails.
1
@A Reader
Russia Russia Russia
5
If I have to see one more article about the divisiveness of an ELECTION I'm going to explode. The divisiveness is the entire point. Politics is about power. If Trump wins, poor people die. What good has civility ever done anyone that wasn't already rich?
2
Bernie Sanders is a socialist using the title democratic socialist. He has many of the same autocratic behaviors of trump and the dictators he admires. He is a bully as are some of his Bros. He has praised Castro and Hugo Chavez. IAsk any Venezuelan how well they are doing under this socialist government. Once a jewel in South American, it has deteriorated to a bankrupt nation. Bernie’s policies would lead us the same way. He has the same isolationist policies which would give Russia more power in countries we abandon. No wonder Russia is helping him. 24 years in Congress, only 7 bills with 2 of them for renaming things in Vermont. (Cruela Klobuchar with 14 years in has 22 bills.) Bernie can’t win. The 2018 elections had moderate Democratic candidates beat progressive candidates across the country. Consistently, voters in purple states, rural areas and independents have said they will not vote for Bernie but they will vote for A Biden or Buttigieg. (Unlike Bernie, Buttigieg brought in independents and rural votes we need to win in each of the contests so far.) Not to mention all of the true democratic voters who will never, ever vote for a self proclaimed socialist. I remember the slogan “ Better dead than red” so do many others. Thanks to Bernie, Democrats are focusing on a so-called revolution instead of maintaining focus on defeating trump and his fascist regime. My vote is for a progressive moderate, intelligent and a true democratic-Pete Buttigieg, NEVER Bernie.
3
@Lalitasays
Bernie does not want a socialist country like Venezuela.
That is a Republican talking point.
Bernie has always said he is a democratic socialist like Denmark.
Bernie wants universal healthcare, affordable college, and to fight global warming like all the other first world industrial countries.
Only here in the US are these called radical leftist ideas.
Even Buttigieg said in the last debate that it is easier for someone in Denmark to pull themselves up by their bootstraps than here in the US.
Go to Denmark sometime and see what you think.
5
@Lalitasays Venezuela was bankrupt before Chavez took power. The country lives off oil. The country is now bankrupt because of sanctions because ExxonMobil wants better oil contracts.
1
Well, they are passionate on issues rather than how big the other persons hands are!
It seems my party of choice has a wonderful skill. Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. In an election which the Democrats should win in an absolute landslide, their total loss of the objective could and possibly will assure the election of the worst president in our national history.
Here I repeat what should be the object. Get rid of trump, his policies and his supporters. Doing so should be a piece of cake. Just work on this administration's record.
3
Sanders once again praised Castro for introducing a literacy program for the Cuban people. He neglects to add that Castro's program was designed to promote his propaganda. Why be literate if the only thing one reads is a Castro-controlled press? Sanders seems not to know that Castro not only imprisoned poets whose writings mocked him, but that he jailed and executed some of the very revolutionaries who helped him gain power, but denounced him when he revealed he was a Communist. In short, Sanders is as nearly illiterate about history as the dunce he seeks to replace. Sanders saving grace is that he is a decent person whose heart is in the right place. It's his head that's the issue.
4
I will not watch bc it is too agitating to see the anger and attacking. I wish they'd discuss how "together" we can overcome a tyrant. Maybe a "team" approach would work for some of us.
2
Instead of destroying each other and giving trump a laugh, show me what you will do for the people and how you will pay for it. All of these candidates have a healthcare agenda show me what it will give me and how much it will cost. If my taxes are going up tell me, I'm a big boy I can take it. If you are going to fight climate change tell me how, and how you will pay for it. Most administrations throughout history have a chance to pass two maybe three major programs and that's only if the Congress is of the presidents party but tell me. Actually debate your programs so I can see the differences, tell me what and how you will pass this legislation. I don't want to hear that Amy forgot the name of the president of Mexico over and over again, I don't want to hear that someone is too inflexible I want to hear a coherent plan and how you will make it happen and how much its going to cost. I vote Democratic because I will NEVER hear anything like this from the GOP or trump.
19
@MLucero
Regarding healthcare, we spent $3.5 Trillion for healthcare last year.
The money is there. We are paying for universal healthcare, we just aren't getting it.
Take all the money we pay to private insurance and redirect it to Medicare for all.
And a recent Yale study said we would save $450 Billion annually.
Regarding education, student debt is currently $1.4 Trillion. The 2017 tax cut increased the deficit by $400 Billion per year. Put that tax back and we can pay for a lot of things.
W Bush gave us two tax cuts for the "jobs creators" and we got 3 Million jobs in 8 years. We could also put some of those back.
JOBS:
2011 - 2.07 Million
2012 - 2.17 Million
2013 - 2.30 Million
2014 - 3.00 Million
2015 - 2.72 Million
2016 - 2.34 Million
2017 - 2.11 Million
2018 - 2.31 Million
2019 - 2.09 Million
3
@MLucero
They can't come right out and give all the details because that will turn off moderate voters. Look what happened to Warren when she laid out her plan. The big ideas are nice in the abstract, but when people see the bill they change their minds.
4
@MLucero
Have you seen the 'How are we going to pay for it' page of his website? It goes into quite a lot of detail, if you're looking for an answer.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-does-bernie-pay-his-major-plans/
There is also this calculator which claims to give a rough estimate of how much your taxes will rise to pay for Medicare for All.
https://www.bernietax.com/#0;0;s
Sanders advantage is that his grass roots supporters are not effected by negative campaign barbs. That is why he is surging. When Bloomberg fully engages there will be a blitz in negative attacks on Sanders. Bloomberg's problem is that his campaign almost completely based on media advertising. Sanders has organized and mobilized all over the map very effectively.
3
The first qualification for a president is to put country ahead of personal ambition. With Trump trying to turn us into an autocracy anyone who insults or demeans another candidate is disqualified. If they can't bring themselves to welcome the other candidates to contribute what they can, they should not be running. At this point, all I care about is the Senate. We can't let those people who voted to not hear witnesses get away with such flagrant failure to their oath of office.
Democrats need to think about survival mode. I suggest a Democratic ticket with a sharing agreement between the candidates who could be progressive or moderate or the other way around with the vice presidential candidate being given a very large portfolio.
1
I wish those in the lead weren't so old.
Medical Records would be nice, honestly though---they are old, anything could happen. Especially since the job they are essentially interviewing for is a high stress, high pressure, wear and tear physical type job.
Papers keep printing that Sanders has a strong following, that the 4 states he has won will make him the nominee. I don't see it that way. What I see is a very small percentage of Democrats turning out to vote. How can that small percentage be considered as the correct will of the majority?
The Democratic candidate needs to be challenged, who better to challenge than their peers? I am fine with challenging, I am not fine with the Negative attacks. The negative attacks will cause division. If the candidates tear each other apart, their followers will take that as an example and do the same.
Here are my questions for the debates: Besides yourself, who would you like to see as President? Which one individual would you support for President? Considering your age, name some people you might consider as VP.
2
@Sheldon Owynes Dems (my old side) are far left these days. In general. Bernie is exactly representative of that fact. Sorry.
1
@Sheldon Owynes "How can that small percentage be considered as the correct will of the majority?" Historically Iowa and New Hampshire are good predictors of the final results and have accurately determined the nominee in most elections for many years. And the will of the majority is not necessarily expressed by who wins, but the will of whoever votes. If you don't like who is in the lead, vote for a different candidate.
1
@Sheldon Owynes
Frankly, Sheldon, you might have written "They are young; anything can happen." I'm older, so much so that I'm the type who reads obits regularly, and I'm appalled by obits of young people from natural causes. Lifespan, and presence of a keen mind within individual lifespan, are quite a crapshoot. I'm from a family in which lifespan is long and dementia does not occur. You can certainly look at statistics on such in choosing a presidential candidate, but I'm not sure that's a wise course.
Many people find Bernie divisive. While I’ll admit that his rhetoric can come across as combative and victim-based, his policy positions are extremely inclusive.
Republican voters, like anyone else, generally love things like Medicare, social security, and good infrastructure. They’ve been duped, of course, by the oligarchical-backed Fox News propaganda machine, into thinking that Democrats and their policies will destroy the USA as we know it.
Bernie’s strength is that he’s able to articulate progressive policies in a way that is simple and easy to understand. When moderates and GOP voters see what he’s ACTUALLY trying to do - create an all inclusive social safety net, and to take back some of the wealth of the 1% to put toward the betterment of ALL of society - it will be hard to paint Bernie as partial to a select portion of the population.
4
If the candidates are attacking each other so childishly, they are only being encouraged by social media users and trolls. I’ve felt myself pulled into momentary, trivial non-event skirmishes online with others and it doesn’t feel great. Now I mute every single person who tweets out politics—after a couple weeks of this my Twitter feed is back to reflecting who I am and what my true interests are, and I’m able to click on inspiration and personally-relevant information rather than infighting and tantrums.
I highly recommend it.
2
Again--an article that erases the existence of Elizabeth Warren as if she didn't exist and wasn't even in the last debate even though anyone who watched it, her performance was the most fierce. Is there some kind of drug that reporters take to make women invisible to them?
10
It’s not erasure. She was getting tons of press when she was leading. The recent trend is her spiraling to the bottom of the polls. I’m fine with them not spending a lot of time writing about someone who finished in single digits in Nevada.
5
@Talia
Have you forgotten Hillary Clinton already? You know, the last Democratic nominee for president? As bad a candidate as she was, she still was better than Warren.
Last week Elizabeth Warren beat up on the sitting duck Mayor Bloomberg. Let’s see if Sen. Warren can carve some daylight between her and Sen. Sanders. She is still my candidate but I would sure like to see her challenge Sanders. If she doesn’t it makes her look like she’s afraid to offend his base.
7
How does she set herself apart from Bernie outside of an abstract (not quantifiable) track record of “getting things done”
1
@Oliver
Their positions on the issues leave little room for disagreements. Rather, theirs is a difference of style. Bernie makes almost no effort to respect those people who disagree with him. Warren is a better listener who will have a much easier time forging compromise solutions when faced with insurmountable opposition to some of her proposals.
That makes her a candidate who is more acceptable to a broader crossecttion of the electorate and will make her a more effective POTUS.
1
My sister just got a "Vote Socialist" door hanger placed on her front door with a picture of Bernie Sanders on it. Somehow, I don't think Sanders' campaign was responsible, considering "socialist" is a hot button for so many. I hope it wasn't a fellow Democrat. I am all for seeing how Democratic candidates do under pressure as they compete with each other. It has helped me narrow my choices. But please, not this underhanded stuff. Reminds me of the campaign Bush operative Karl Rove designed to hurt McCain in South Carolina. Fight, yes, but fight fair.
2
Even if, by some miracle, Sanders were to win the presidency (and I seriously doubt if that will happen, too many moderate democrats will stay home if he's the candidate, republicans who hate trump will either not vote that line or hold their noses and check the box, and like it or not, the dems need those votes to win), the down ticket choices are likely to be more conservative/moderate, and the following mid terms will follow suit. So 4 years of Sanders being boxed in every time he sneezes, a few corrections via exec order and some slightly saner appointments to key positions, but no "revolution". And his supporters will probably keep whining that it's the DNC's fault.
6
The real threat to civil discourse are "people familiar with the matter", "intelligence community officials", and "anonymous officials close to the situation"
These people are part of an unelected shadow government fueled by billionaires and corporations.
And this paper is especially guilty of giving them a bigger voice than they should have.
4
I am not a particular Bernie fan, but for God's sake who could disagree with his mild comment that the great Literacy Program initiated by Castro was a good thing! No one would excuse Mussolini's horrors by reminding us that he made the trains run on time, but literacy is a very different thing, and Bernie wasn't "excusing" Castro but simply admitting that this was a good program. Bernie's remark shouldn't have elicited the truly stupid and coarse comment from one of the CNN commentators narrating a short video of Bernie's past interviews, nor should it have tempted the current Democratic candidates (Buttigieg last night, for example, in his CNN Town Hall segment) from lashing out at Bernie for stating an obvious truth: sometimes dictators do a good thing or two, especially at the beginning of their run. I was going to participate in early voting in my city today, but I've decided to wait until after tonight's debate, even though that entails traveling to a much farther "early voting" site on Friday. If any of the less radical candidates continues this rant against what Bernie said, I just might change my vote and go for "revolution"!
6
Bottom Line?
Trump has divided the Democrats into 3-4 camps. The DNC changed their rules because of their 2016 loss, somehow now delivering a hardcore Socialist with a $50T plan who cannot be stopped. They are confused and now have no idea where they want to go, let alone how they will get there.
9
I dont think this "nasty" behavior is anything new from the Dem's. They act like they are all buddy buddy in the early stages but when someone emerges as the frontrunner so does the vile hateful behavior thats been directed at Trump for 4 years.
Tonight might be the best example of this yet. Now who is acting "un-Presidential"?
6
I will just say it; Joe Biden needs to step down. He stumbles over every word, he looks likes a painted figure with all the makeup used to cover up his obvious age. The DNC can do better than Joe Biden.
11
Here's an idea: Get the correct info out there before the smears arrive to distort the truth.
For example, you'll be hearing that Sanders honeymooned in Russia. Bernie was elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont in 1981 and was re-elected three times. In 1988, he and Jane (O'Meara) Sanders married and shortly thereafter traveled to Yaroslavl, in the Soviet Union. The Sanders "jokingly referred to it as a honeymoon," according to a 2015 profile of Jane in the NYT (12-28-2015), but had their real honeymoon a year later in St. Lucia. Yaroslavl had been made a sister city with Burlington in 1988, so a visit from the mayor that year makes sense.
For those wanting to impugn Vermont for having a sister city in Russia, the Wikipedia list of states with Russian sister cities includes Alaska, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana (2), Maine (2), Massachusetts (4), Minnesota, New Hampshire (2), Oklahoma (3), Utah, and Wisconsin (3), as well as Vermont.
Corrections welcome.
7
@Penn
Not only that, but Sanders travel led there with a delegation of other American city mayors.
How horrible and controversial that "sister city" initiatives would consider people in Russia as actual human beings worthy of getting to know beyond the big Red Scare.
And it's all documented on a 3.5 hour video in the Vermont public tv archives.
Politico wrote an article about it.
1
@Penn
It is called "cherry picking" to serve the narrative of the "naysayers".
1
I couldn't stand on the sidelines for the 2020 Campaign. So I volunteered to do phone bank and texting, aiming to 'get out the vote' for Democrats, not just for my preferred candidate.
The experience has been eye opening :
80% of the people I make contact with are courteous even when they support another candidate
15% are curt but otherwise civil
4.5% launch into angry rants
0.5% go beyond with vulgarities and graphic descriptions of what I should do
5
No mention of negativity from Bloomberg. Is he going to turn out to be the adult in the room in addition to being the most moderate and with a reliable source of funds to run his campaign?
6
@Rita Tamerius
If you want to see negativity from Bloomberg, then check his Twitter campaign. That shows he is neither the adult in the room nor a guy with an actual platform or objective (beyond stopping Sanders and Warren, obviously).
3
Bloomberg has been attacking Sanders and was called out for his cheap shot during the debate.
It's looking a lot like our unestemmed and criminally-inclined con man will likely win reelection. How and why is this happening?
The Democrats are dithering and infighting. They have no clear plans for voters to wrap their minds around and they don't seem to grasp the fact that the more they prolong this process, the more they play into Trump's hand.
We need a strong candidate. They don't need to be Caucasian or male. What we need is a leader who will energize and calm the electorate with clear, concise verbiage and ideas.
What we have now is a mish mash of desperate ideas, one-liners and bickering. It's not helpful and it's showing signs of such desperation that voters are backing off and looking for anyone, absolutely anyone, who will bring the party together and appeal to voters "better angels."
Who will rise to the occasion?
1
Mr. Buttigieg, rapidly nearing having a billionaire underwriter for every week of the year has the gall to lecture any Democrat? This guy is so compromised even Bloomberg probably hedged his bets with Mr. Cool early on.
Wait for Bloomberg to address the health care crisis by advising everyone to forego the sugary drink & buy a packet of antihistamines & a bottle of aspirin at the dollar store. Economical practices like this, by extension, he will say, would allow the minimum wage to actually be reduced rather than raised, creating even more jobs. Remember, he can't be bought. He merely buys.
8
Bernie's campaign can handle the negative attacks from his Democratic rivals. But the bigger challenge is the now patently obvious bias of the mainstream media.
MSDNC has simply gone off the deep end. Anderson Cooper's 60 Minutes performance was more an interrogation than an interview.
And we can't leave out the venerable old NYTimes, which has turned their editorial page into an "anyone but Bernie" platform.
What we are witnessing isn't the typical preference for one candidate over another.
Bernie stands for the simple proposition that corporations are exercising an inordinate influence over the polices of the country to the detriment of working class people and our very democracy.
The so called "moderates" in the campaign don't believe that's true.
But a carefully crafted study by noted political scientists found that congress is more responsive to corporate lobbyists than they are to their own constituents.
We are in effect paying members of congress to spend half their time raising money and another 40% of their time crafting legislation to benefit big business.
The media bias against Bernie reflects their bias toward a status quo that also pumps billions in advertising dollars into their accounts.
There is still some good journalism being done. But the anti Bernie bias is so obvious that the editorial pages are hardly worth reading anymore and the bobble heads on cable TV have become mere puppets.
At the end of the day, people do know what they want.
13
@Drspock
The MSM are acting like "out of touch aristocrats" who fail to understand what is happening in the country and why Trump got elected in the first place. Their time is running out and they are hanging on for dear life trying to protect a system within a country that has become a dismal failure to those that recognize it for what it is. "Crony capitalism" at its worst.
If Sanders becomes President, it would be very difficult for the Establishment to deal with one of the very few high profile politicians at the peak of power who isn't corrupt.
3
Candidates started dissing each other when Jefferson went after Adams (and vice versa). We had a somewhat politer hiatus in the second half of the 20th century but Trump has certainly stoked the boiler of nastiness for some time. Can’t say whether the Democrats attacking each other is helpful until they settle on the final candidate, wish it wasn’t so but that is the way it goes in politics today.
Hopefully they settle on a moderate as It is doubtful that a progressive pandering to Main Street with unrealistic promises will have a chance against Trump. As noted in the NYT today Sanders hasn’t inspired a landslide of turnout. And, in my experience the largest block off voters - independents - tend to be in the middle.
3
Heads up everyone. These discussions are mute. The Republicans, with help from foreign countries, specifically Russia, are going to take this election regardless who the Democratic nominee, similar to the 2016 election. In fact, I think the Republicans are plotting how can they delay or postpone indefinitely the 2020 election, very much like the way they stole the Supreme Court Nominee. Basically, our Democracy is gone and it left us long ago. Why? Because nobody is paying attention except Trump, Putin and Netanyahu.
2
The Nevada debate was the first one worth watching, specifically BECAUSE the candidates challenged each other and pointed out their differences.
Thanks to the Nevada debate, we saw that Bloomberg in person doesn't come close to living up to his ads. He was awful. He showed himself to be a weak, unprepared candidate. Without that "divisive" debate (cue the ridiculous handwringing), we wouldnt have learned what we needed to know before the general campaign against Trump.
4
Say what you will about Trump, he is politically a brawler. He LOVES the counter attack. Which can not be said about Bernie (or probably Bloomberg). Which is why Dems will lose.
9
Joe Lockhart is the former press secretary for former President Bill Clinton. He couldn’t be more irrelevant.
Who cares what HE thinks?!?!?
8
If this nastiness within the Democratic Party doesn't stop, we all lose in November. Wake up people! It's not about YOU, it's about saving our democracy.
4
I'm confused. Bernie is advocating the exact same policy changes the Democratic party has been promising for decades. Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Moderates have not made headway with these policy changes. So what's the problem again?
8
@Kristin
The DLC rule is to run to the left but govern center-right. Taking the rhetoric seriously is too radical for them and results in fear, loathing and viscous attacks.
4
I was surprised that after the Nevada results Warren continued to bash Bloomberg in her concession speech. She congratulated Sanders on his win. I believe she and Sanders have a pact to act as defense for each other. Perhaps they are thinking of a Sanders Warren ticket. If that doesn’t cement a Trump victory, nothing does.
15
The Right has it's Trump. Why not let the lefties feel The Bern. Strife is the father of all things.
5
The primaries have turned into an opportunity for the media to extract every single morsel of impressions and advertising dollars.
Exhibit A:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/25/us/politics/democratic-debate-south-carolina.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
The candidates happily go along to give us the worst of themselves.
I will not be watching the debate tonight. I am one meaningless vote but I will not let it get decided on these ridiculous terms.
4
Without the slightest sense of irony Bill De Blasio has the audacity to lecture anyone on their lack of humility. I also saw him been interviewed last evening suggesting that Democrats must come round to Bernie . This remark created quite a bit of eye rolling among the other panelists as the subject matter was how or when Bernie was going to reach out to Democrat’s that don’t support him .
Tonight’s debate should be interesting I am confident that between the 2 Mayors , VP Biden and Senator Klobuchar Bernie will be shall we say a talking point . That all his arm waving and shouting will do little to nullify how weak a candidate he really is .
8
Wouldn't the attack actually signal his strength? Not to mention his popular win in three Dem contests?
2
Our leadership crisis has been ongoing for some time now and I say that based on my experience in the corporate sector and observation of political leadership. There are no FDRs, Trumans, Eisenhowers in the mix and I don't think they exist anymore. The populace appears to equate leadership with the public "persona" as presented by heavily managed image management. Narcissism appears to dominate personality traits among CEOs and indeed has become a requirement. Washington who didn't want to be president at one end of the spectrum, contrasted with yelling/pointing/name calling petulant candidates who try to outdo each other with negatives. All without specifics as to how they would restore America's stature, rule of law and checks and balances.
We've been infused with the belief that "new is better" starting with new and improved laundry products to iPhones. Sometimes the old ways are better, and yes, I'm old. I bought into the "new is better" stuff until I turned around and looked back where I had been. It isn't always true.
Two Dems should form a united front for Pres/VP, present plans to address Trump's excesses/deficiencies and put in place timelines to find a way to provide universal healthcare, balance income inequality, hit infrastructure and rebuild foreign alliances. And if wishes were horses, fools like me would ride.
3
Warren's immediate attack on Bloomberg in the Nevada debate did not impress me. It disgusted me almost as much as you know who does. I see no possible path for a Bernie victory. He reminds me of a Don Quixote like figure except that instead of tilting at windmills he has decided that he will take on insurance corps, wall street,banks,pharmaceutical industry, oil industry,public colleges and universities, all republicans, fox news, moderates ect I have no confidence of a blue wave of new voters suddenly appearing at the polls. Bernies no compromise view of a future of course sounds great until you remember that we are in an era of record high deficits. All issues are very complex. I spent 35 years as a Medicare provider encouraging my patients to eat healthier and exercise. You really can't compare the health cost of a U.S. citizen to a Swedish or Norwegian citizen as their countries populations are much healthier. Oh well, i hope I am wrong.
10
How come that health indicator for Americans under 65 are worse in comparison to the other developed nation, but much better for those who is older than 65?
2
No easy answers. I recommend researching projected costs for U.S. treatment of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer that are directly related to lifestyle and environmental issues. We all need to work together on these serious issues .
1
I agree!
After all these years of triangulation by the democratic party, shutting out its progressive wing, the least the moderate wing can do is support if ONE TIME the progressive wing wins primary fair and square.
10
Yes but enough of your progressive's just wouldn't hold their nose and support the 2016 ticket so please do not blame us. The Progressive'e are poised to lose 8 years, hope I am wrong.
1
McAuliffe and Ferguson have the better argument. A candidate who has not been hit hard in the primaries is not a candidate anyone should want in the general election against Trump or any other party candidate for that matter. The current Stop-Sanders effort that is pulling out all stops now is doing him and, should he be the nominee, the party a favor. Democratic voters are hungry for a fighter who can take and throw punches and show some outrage, not make nice and pretend everything is fine except for Trump.
The idea that the last debate descended into a brawl is a curious one, comparing that debate to those of past presidential campaigns and especially to the Republican primary debates of 2016. Note the nastiest fighter of that one won the Presidency. His voters were not turned off and neither were the rest of Republican voters. Indeed, the last Democratic debate was the only one so far worth watching. Despair over it seems mostly confined to those whose preferred "moderate" candidates were bruised, who think that just a return to normalcy, but of a Democratic flavor, is American voters want. But normalcy, aside from the fact that the past normal was not too good for most Americans, is hardly an inspiring rally cry. It sets the powers that be at ease but it does not win elections.
2
So we want the nastiest fighter like that one? What’s the difference??? I’d prefer a candidate who can manage the economy and social issues and climate change, not continue the gridlock producing of an arm waving ideologue..just because they shrilly won a debate demeaning other candidates with shock overtalk or misusing issues they have themselves have skirted such as Biden’s attacks regarding complaints by women or complaints regarding criminal justice reform or not being open regarding mistakes...lol! Or let’s take cherry picking things dredged up from years ago which aren’t current or relevant or tell the entire incident (see Washington Post for the full story re usage of ‘horse face’ proving it was a silly gotcha...throwing other debaters off who then can’t recover and have time to responsibly and fairly discuss their ideas and policies. A complete mess up match up...edged on by goofy looking tv personalities. Can you imagine Dan Rather as a moderator behaving like an ET channel host? There’s no coherency with legitimate follow up questions, only staging, empowering the most salacious without any questioning by the panel or enabling any effort for a real response, or with then the losers briefly showcased by the media as winners of the debate!!!I hope I hear no moaning regarding low brow Trump tactics by HIM...
I really support the stand of Bernie Sanders. I have for many decades. But the 37 year old seems to be mother-trucking smart. How bad could that be - to have a really smart guy as the contender?
11
He is old in soul. Bernie's attitude is ' yes, we can and we should', Pete's is 'No, we can not and we should not'. No wonder he appeals mostly to people over 50
3
After more than a decade of using it it in part for education-oriented activism, I have over 4000 Facebook friends. I can spot many potential 'trolls' trying to 'friend' me in order to get access, in turn, to my Facebook contacts. Usually a visit to their homepage is enough. Once, though, I had someone using the middle name "attackbot" try to friend me. More recently there was a woman whose chosen (or assigned) tactic was to repeatedly post demeaning articles or 'memes' (captioned graphic images) about Melania Trump.
I'm not interested in such shenanigans no matter who you're against. As an old community organizer colleague, Marty Strange, once said:
It's not what we're against that makes us strong; it's what we're for."
Some of the sniping in the last debate was due to the moderators' narrow questioning on minor points, which encouraged the candidates to attack each other. I want to hear their views on foreign policy, infrastructure, etc. (Not Medicare for All, which is a well worn topic. If viewers don't know their positions by now, they aren't paying attention. ) I also think the moderators lost control of the debate or else encouraged the excessive talkovers. The previous debate was better run & more substantive.
4
Because Trump brought politics to a new low with his insults, the Democrats felt they were above that. They're politicians do t forget. The audience in the Nevada debate sounded the same as a Jerry Springer show. The media loves it indeed.
4
McGovern: Did Democrats learn the lesson?
You CAN’T win where large segments of your party are estranged, and railed at condescendingly for it.
Senator Sanders: whom will you blame?
7
He may break the tradition and take responsibility. Running for the President includes the possibilities of losses. Ask the centrist candidates: Gore, Kerry, Clinton.
Mr. Gabriel, the media asked for this. Main stream media was complaining left and right about how the democratic candidates were in a “love fest” and would not call their opponents out for their shortcomings or “differentiate” themselves in a negative way from their opponents. You could just see the annoyance from commentators on MSNBC and CNN (and some of the opinion writers with the NYT) that the candidates on the debate stage were being so nice to each other. They wanted to see a fight, they wanted fur to fly ... then they got it, it was very ugly, and here you are writing about how terrible a scene it was. What did you expect? Clarity?
The candidates started out fully united in their desire not to alienate the supporters of their opponents, knowing they would need the vote of every one of their opponent’s supporters to beat Trump when the party finally zeroed in on a candidate. It was working. The policy differences between the front runners were clear and the party was focused on which one could beat Trump and restore civility and normalcy to the country where the tough problems created by Trump could be tackled. But, no, the pundits wanted excitement, controversy, he-said/she-said, hair pulling, breaking news, etc. Sigh ...
We depend on you and your compatriots to help us figure out what’s in this nation’s best interest. Please try to convince your fellow pundits to stop forcing the candidates to eat each other.
3
Bernie is espousing policy that has worked in all the Nordic states for over 50 years. These governments are all true democracy's (unlike ours) and they are all capitalist market economies. They are also the most educated,healthiest, and happiest people in the world. That could be us if you just don't buy in to the red baiting propaganda...most people don't anymore that's why Bernie's winning ....Bernie the real populist will beat the sham populist with the fake tan...
5
@plamb
Except for the fact that those Nordic states don't follow Bernie's plans and they have very high taxes which don't affect only the rich. Income tax rates max out in the 60-70 thousand range and there is around a 24% VAT. Everyone pays, but mostly the middle class.
1
Can a Socialist still be Red baited in 2020? Can the public still be frightened by any hint of a shadow of a partially non-hostile reaction to the Bolshevik devils, the evil Communists who threaten our freedom loving American way of life? . . . Or do the young voters favoring Socialism just want a better future than a lifetime of low-pay, temp jobs and crushing medical and education debt? As Fearless Leader would say, "Stay tuned" . . . .
2
Unfortunately Donald Trump has laid a platform of very ugly politics for the United States that lacks civility. The media doesn't help either. They pit the candidates against each other, like fighting dogs, claiming that each one cannot win unless they show a very ugly side. The divisiveness, name calling, intentionally spreading misinformation (by the media too), revenge and so on; is so strong, we cannot even communicate in a civil manner with our neighbors and even more so our family and loved ones. The influence of the president has created a very unhealthy environment for us all, especially for our children. The candidate that rises above the fray will impress me the most.
The debate formats themselves encourage divisiveness and do little or nothing to hammer away at dangerous moves by the tRump administration. I have learned way more about the candidates by listening to individual interviews, notably on public radio. The PBS moderators did the best job of sticking to issues with their questions. What we need—more questions from We the People. I’ve got some: How do you plan to deal with Mitch McConnell and his stonewalling? How soon will you reverse all of the air and clean water protections that have been lifted? Meanwhile the opioid crisis rages on, attempted cuts in funding to CDC and public health, etc.etc.
11
A few candidates that the press said scored major points, may have badly miscalculated. Beyond individual positions, another criteria people look for in a leader is being cool under pressure. If someone is attacking their opponents in an unhinged manner, I would love to know how reporters can spin that as a win if they show anyone viewing the exchanges that they aren't acting with the Presidential behaviors that sane voters prize.
4
It is one thing to say "The other guys ideas are okay, but mine are better". It is quite a different thing to say that "the other guys ideas would be a disaster and the end of Democracy."
Spirited debate over issues is fine, personal attacks are not. They have forgotten the Reagan rule (actually little observed by him) "Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican (substitute Democrat)." Someone will win the nomination and Democrats will want to coalesce behind him/her. The nature of some candidates attacks are making that difficult and close to impossible.
5
I don't think any candidate is going to get overwhelming support like Trump did in 2016. Trump got not only the white supremacist vote, which fits perfectly with his views, but the evangelical vote which was surprising since he is not religious. Sanders has primarily support from the progressive wing of the party and Warren has some support from both wings, All other candidates are supported by center-left voters. I think for most Democrats the question is who can defeat Trump and help carry the House and Senate. If that is correct I believe the ultimate winner will be either Biden, Warren, or Klobuchar. But certainly populism could win the nomination for Sanders and money could win it for Bloomberg.
5
Support for Trump in 2016 was hardly overwhelming - he lost the popular vote. He won the Electoral College that allows to win even if majority against the candidate. The moderate candidate was not able to create passion that would excite people to go to polls because she offered no new ideas. Sanders is different. He has new fresh ideas and he excite the electorate.
1
@yulia Well, I dare say, there can be both positive excitement and negative excitement that will drive people to the polls. I canvassed for McGovern, and banged on Democratic doors up until the polls closed; they told us they had not voted and were not voting, period. The other party were real excited to vote.
1
NYT- Please stop treating these debates and the race as a sporting event. Let's have the media encourage dialog and solutions. Everyone will be better off if all the candidate focus on relieving the country of Trump. Build a collation not a competition.
See Friedman's recent op-ed
Thanks!
6
Twice as much in taxes. To get a strong social safety net (healthcare + free education)like Scandinavia, you need to be willing to pay roughly twice as much in taxes - that is how much the citizens in those countries pay.
These are Bernie’s biggest planks and his claims have had appallingly little scrutiny. I hear genuinely wrenching stories from his supporters about health conditions and crushing debt but I think he is selling something he cannot deliver and the details will sink him when examined more closely (or when Republicans start airing “Bernie wants to double your taxes!” TV commercials every five minutes until Election Day).
15
That is why the moderates are losing to Sanders. Sanders runs on 'Yes, we can', the moderates run on 'No, we can not do it'. Warren was correct if you can not do it, don't run for the President.
5
If you think there was chaos in Washington during Trump's first term, with the Mueller investigation, the impeachment, and other so-called "scandals," just wait until Bernie is in the Whitehouse. The deep-state (whatever that is) may dislike Trump, but they will loathe Bernie. The military and health industrial complexes will not sit idly by while their power and wealth is threatened. They will fight tooth and claw.
If you want total legislative grid-lock, endless investigation, partisan bickering, horrific Supreme Court nomination processes, and party infighting ten times the fury of the last three plus years, then vote for Bernie.
8
What I do not like about a state to state democratic caucus system is that it feels like a road show that’s trying to sell me a narrative for a stock. I don’t like being told what to buy.
The debate format does not follow Roberts rules of order, the fundamental guidelines for debating from high school on.
Debates have become a media spectacle, no more interesting or authentic than a wrestling match. Too many people without a chance are piling on as if it were a brawl instead of honest to goodness debate.
This is not Douglas versus Lincoln. This is CNN versus Fox.
5
Will we see front page stories about how social media and other media are being used to manipulate public opinion-- in ways that the public can not see who is placing ideas into the public sphere?
1
Let us not forget the Obama said basically the exact same thing about Cuba's literacy and healthcare programs. Where was the outrage then? There wasn't any because it is a true statement. This smacks of hypocrisy.
4
Ah social media, an absolute scourge and frankly we were much better off with out it.
6
“ Senator Sanders, the current front-runner, has not faced true sustained scrutiny in either of his runs for president,” Mr. McAuliffe said”
Like much of the anti Sanders vitriol in this column, the statement above is practically delusional.
It would be difficult to find anything but fact-less and vicious “scrutiny” against Sanders in 2016 and again this year. Elites, threatened by the progressive agenda, will continue to pile on.
Go Bernie!
6
What's new, these are politicians, only thing worst are used car dealers.If they had any integrity they would have supported Bloomberg, who was the only viable candidate,whot could beat Trump.
2
Bloomie has integrity? Wow, I didn't notice when he bent the rules to run for third term. Total disregard for laws.
3
Warren's derogatory comment about Bloomberg's height, i.e., "We don't have a tall problem, we have a big problem" turned me off the Senator. Making fun of someone's physical stature is a Trump tactic. Warren has sunk to a new low. I hope she gets out of the race before other candidates think making fun of their opponents physical characteristics is a good way to raise money for their campaign.
14
Trip Gabriel exaggerates the extent to which Democrats are lobbing "personal vitriol." What we're seeing is democracy in action -- a lively and impassioned exchange of ideas about things that matter. The intensity of this campaign is neither extraordinary or unprecedented. As the first line of this article notes, "No one has tagged a rival with a bully-boy nickname like “Sleepy” or “Liddle.” Nor have Democrats lined up behind such bullies, as the Republicans have. I'm enjoying the campaign's vigor even when it comes with some sharp edges.
7
Quite remarkable, isn't it? What does this say about the judgment of the Democratic candidates? Are they Presidential material? Or merely Trumpist material? Will they so weaken each other that none of them can impress enough voters to beat Trump in November. It was Kamala Harris who first sucker-punched Joe Biden, only to see her ratings fade. Others, believing they had to deliver a knockout blow, did the same to fellow debaters. And their ratings fell, and they disappeared from the stage. Many cheered Elizabeth Warren for her assault on Bloomberg. And her ratings fell. What some -- especially pundits -- find to be tough and proof that a candidate can stand up to Trump is seen by others as churlish and disconcerting. By the time the Democrats finish savaging each other, Trump will have all the attack material he needs to step in and deliver the coup de grace.
9
Once again here we see the unpleasant aspects of our life blamed on others, specifically the media.
The media in general function as mirrors of us.
The reality is that nowadays we, the people, have become selfish, egocentric, angry, disrespectful and unwilling to accept responsibility for this or most other issues in life.
The divisiveness is from we, the people. Just go out and try talking to the average American and you will see all of the above, not corporations, media, or other excuses.
2
DeBlasio is clearly "auditioning" for a role in any Sanders administration cabinet. Think about that America, think very carefully about that!
13
Who read Tom Friedman's Team of Rivals editorial? Just as important, the overwhelmingly favorable reaction from readers? We're ready for a fresh approach, that's painfully clear. Let's hope candidates are listening!
1
The DNC and the Corporate Media are the biggest and most well funded and organized trolls against Bernie Sanders and the 99%'s rebuke against neoliberalism.
1
Getting elected is the only sure sign of electability.
“America will never elect a black man named Barack Hussein Obama.”
“America will never elect a race baiting, game show host.”
“America will never elect a democratic socialist.”
The best indicator that Bernie’s (and Warren’s) ideas are needed will be the concerted efforts off all the corporate media, corporate PACs, and all the politicians they own to take him down. They were never this organized against Trump, because they really don’t care about right. They care about their bottom line. Any threat to the economic status quo sounds good to me.
4
Let's just hope the CBS moderators can maintain control and get into actual issues tonight, unlike the disastrous NBC fiasco a few days ago, spearheaded by the unwitty, self indulgent, smirking showman Chuck Todd. I wasn't sure if I was watching a debate, the World Wrestling Federation, or a scene out of Idiocracy.
The participants deserve better, and quite frankly, so do the American People.
9
I agree. Chuck Todd was the WORST!
1
This juvenile nonsense has to stop.
As citizens charged with the redemption of our republic, we can no longer afford to ascribe our own civic failings to “the media” or “Twitter” or even the disgraceful example of the current president. Unlike many other nations we are endowed with freedom of speech, and we have a responsibility to use it to pursue the cause of universal human dignity. Instead we exploit it to further our own agendas and pursue some childish, bullying sense of emotional vindication.
Yes, the profit-driven media is routinely irresponsible. Yes, Twitter is a sewer of stunted and sensationalist garbage. Yes, the president is an ignorant demagogue with no sense of common decency, willing to do or say anything to get what he wants, no matter how much harm it causes.
That doesn’t mean everyone else should be too. On a human level, regardless of our politics, we reap what we sow when we choose to take our behavioral cues from a man like him. And we have only ourselves to blame.
I think a few of the candidates should drop out at the end of March, knowing they will not win. Wait for a cabinet position!
1
All Democratic candidates who are holding a smoking pistol after the debate this week after beating up on any other potential Democratic nominee for president should be considered a Trump supporter. The Democratic candidates need to point out Trump's failings, not the weak points of their Democratic rivals. If Trump is re-elected in November they will all be held responsible for helping Trump, by weakening the Democratic front runner, whoever that might be by the end of "Super Tuesday".
1
I think it's despicable the way the media has treated Elizabeth Warren. She is barely even mentioned, even after her impressive performance in the last debate. I consider her to be the most qualified and able candidate of all of them. There is just no comparison with Klobuchar and Buttigieg, who are getting so much attention, and she is more clear headed and realistic than Sanders, who never seems to address exactly how he intends to accomplish what he says he's going to do. Warren also hasn’t resorted to slinging insults at the other candidates. Klobuchar and Buutigieg appear weak and childish, and Sanders is just flirting with disaster. He seems to have no interest in broadening his base to include the people outside of his circle of supporters, which even though substantial is not the majority of the country.
8
We all know that some Cuban-Americans hate Castro for his overthrow of Batista, leading to many wealthy Cubans fleeing Cuba. Fidel Castro was unconventional in many respects but he was not the demon many Cubans would have you believe. He was instrumental in the release of Nelson Mandela when South Africa was forced to negotiate with Castro to remove his Cuban fighters out of Namibia. I'm with Sen. Sanders. Castro is not the demon America and the West would have us believe.
5
@OGI
Uh, didn't he conspire with Nikita Khrushchev to put nuclear missiles within a hundred miles of American soil? A move that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, that very well could have ended in a global disaster?
6
Media should stop picking and exaggerating every little comments from the candidates. These insults are nothing compared to the insults and jabs Mr. Trump took at his fellow Republican candidates in 2016. I know media gets a lot of traffic from these sensational news items but it is time for the media to do its job and report on the important issues and not on these petty comments.
1
It would be great if the debate moderators focused on the candidates each individually explaining where they stand on important issues and making the case for themselves WITHOUT mentioning any of the other candidates. And, give each equal time. But, that would be substantive, informative journalism rather than ratings fireworks gold, so I'm not holding my breath. The ports had done an incredibly terrible job fulfilling their public duty - we need to go back to the League of Women Voters moderating!
3
I liked it when Kamala Harris went after Joe Biden because he's been such an unprofile in courage all his political career. Sooner he's over as a possibility, the better.
But I hated it when Elizabeth went after Bernie over a private conversation and did the old Nixon gambit of lecturing him while the cameras were still on but the mikes were off.
And I hated it when Warren went relentlessly after Bloomberg over sexism at his company.
That's history, not now, and this is a guy who has evolved as a business leader, mayor and leading contributor to Emily's list and he's got 60 billion dollars he's giving back to the country.
Would General Lee attack Stonewall? Not presidential.
I would prefer that all the candidates against Trump would form a common front and divide up the responsibilities.
But it doesn't look like that's gonna happen. It's pile on Bernie time.
I don't know and can't say, maybe God is on our side this year and it will help. .
But my brain says these candidates from Bernie to Bloomberg and including all reasonable ones in between, need to form an agreement, like parties in England or Israel, and move against the clear and present danger -- Donald Trump, Ignorance, Hate, Waste, etc.
1
This isn’t the Russians. It’s an adolescent culture we all have a role in creating. And it’s not going away any time soon.
4
It's still early days. Remember what Cruz, Rubio, and Graham said about Trump before became the nominee? Be patient, there's plenty of time left for the Dems to come together.
2
@Robbbb. That's Republicans. Democrats tend to hold grudges longer.
4
In my short life of 70 plus years, voting as a Dem was easy. But, it was often that the Presidential choices were a choice of not good vs. terrible. McGovern over Nixon, Clinton over Bush, Obama over McCain & Romney. The vote for Trump over Hillary was the no-brainer of all time. So; with the current field of Dems, Trump will win easily. Like it or not, the important basic indicators for the majority are good. At the final debate tonight, the insults will fly. Nothing new there, it happens every 4 years. But, the real problem is the media conspiracy with the Dems and the lack of their reporting. These candidates have plans (crazy) but it will take decades to get any of them thru Congress. Stagnation vs progress - vote for Trump to really move forward and not have 4 years of turmoil from a Dem.
9
I don't know if Sanders weighed a primary against Obama.
What I do know is that Biden refused to take the claims of an African-American woman seriously and to call witnesses that would have supported her accounts which ended up saddling us with Clarence Thomas who probably has voted for upholding more laws that are meant to limit the rights of African-American than any other Supreme Court justice in the last century.
If anyone considers the action that Sanders might have considered and that he certainly didn't take is far worse than what Biden did, then they should vote for Biden.
And as to Buttigieg's response to de Blasion, yup, it sure sounds like Mayor Pete wants to reach out and get all Democrats together. What better than to insult them.
7
What is really troubling the Democratic Presidential race is lack of a qualified, main-stream candidate. The USA is not ready (and hopefully never will be) for Socialism - put forth by Sanders and Warren. Biden is losing his mind in front of the people as he campaigns for President. Buttigeg has a severe lack of experience as well as problems with getting support from minorities. Bloomberg is trying to buy the election. The rest have little support of voters as shown by current standings.
10
@G G
Biden crowded out moderates and kept serious contenders from running. Of course, Trump is a formidable contender whom insiders believe will win so maybe it's for the best stronger candidates sat this one out.
Bottom line? We'll all survive. (Yes, we will. Really.)
3
That's time to check. Let's see if Sanders can win. We know that a mainstream candidate definitely could lose - we do it 4 years ago.
It took me a while to get past the comment about Bill de Blasio chiding Pete Buttigieg. It must be grating Bill that a small town mayor is being taken seriously in the primary while he couldn't even get out of the gate.
12
Has it really gotten worse or are we just now seeing it all out in the open? Was it better when opposition research was clandestinely obtained and kept removed from the candidate? Does anyone doubt that it's always been dirty behind the scenes?
Plausible deniability and secret political warfare have always been the norm in both parties. Trump doesn't do "secret". He does "in your face." Quite frankly, I'd prefer that.
5
Everyone, Stop Tweeting!
Twitter is no way to run a campaign, or a country.
I would like to see all candidates pledging not to use Twitter during the campaign or as President.
In the primaries, the Democrats should focus on attacking Trump, not on attacking each other.
In November, we need a “Big Tent” landslide repudiation of Trump and Trumpism at all levels, in order to preserve American Democracy.
Vote Blue, no matter who!
5
Chicken or egg? Are the candidates setting off their online surrogates, or are the surrogates emboldening the candidates?
And despite the "both sides" approach, Sanders's hardcore are take-no-prisoners, vicious, toxic fighters. (If some of them are Russian, they are exploiting real people who already exist.)
And that war includes personal threats, doxxing and other unacceptable forms of harassment.
And a lot of it does go back to the current occupant of the White House, who has perhaps permanently lowered the bar for public conversation.
1
Listening briefly to MSNBC this morning, I was struck how much they sounded like the old Fox News in 2016. They have been politically polarized to the exclusion of reason.
16
I find it refreshing that the people who want to be president are showing their true colors.
Now, America can see this.
Also, Trump can use this library of attacks to his own advantage. Just like the Dems used his nastiness against him.
2
Excerperation prevails between a socialist and a xenophobic racist, what would independent voters do? There simply not enough young people to be converted to socialists to win the election and many independents will be sitting at home and let Donald have his way for 4 more years.
1
@tedc
This Independent is not a socialist, and won't be staying home. At least for the primaries, the only election where my vote counts in my state. And that vote will go to Sanders, the only candidate who has consistently stood up for the interests of the working classes over many decades. At some point a corrective is needed to get us out of the mess the Repubs and Dems have put us in over the years, and it's well past time. (I also happen to be the anti-war voter.)
I could have easily gone for Warren as an alternate, but sadly i think she's toast.
I’m also an independent. Warren will not be toast if everyone who likes her but worries she is (which seem to be quite a few) votes for her in upcoming primaries - especially Super Tuesday. Super Tuesday will tell us if she really is toast.
Ultimately I think she is less polarizing and more able to get things done than Sanders. It’s worth giving her the best shot!
Of course no problem with voting for Sanders or any of the non-Bloomberg candidates in the general election.
2
@M
Sanders is my first choice. If their positions were reversed, I might have gone for Warren. Bernie being so far ahead makes my Super Tuesday vote an easy one.
Good. Stop trying to tame people. The empty suit Buttigieg needs to be knocked out tonight, and sent back to his delusional neoliberal world. We are not buying what the so-called 'moderates' are selling.
13
And divided we fall.
1
I found Krugman's reference (in his column) to "vanity candidates" still in the race really apt. They are there for our entertainment and, as one commentor put it "another spectacle to generate advertising dollars." I am finished with watching these stupid "debates" which are really low-brow slamming matches not unlike a televised dozens game of insults. Who needs this stuff? Do something useful with your time like knitting a sock.
5
Not only are all the Democratic candidates destroying each other, but almost all of them (especially Sanders, Warren, and Biden) seem to be perpetually angry and shouting!! Personally, I am not sure I am ready to lectured by the crazy uncle (Sanders) for 4 years straight. Plus everyone is so old!! Whoever wins the nomination will be so damaged that Trump will pile on top of it and destroy him or her. Almost makes you wanna sit this one out.
2
Americans have forgotten that the brunt of Russian meddling in the 2016 election was focused on the Democratic primary contest between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, not the general election that followed.The Mueller Report notes that Julian Assange despised Hillary Clinton, who he described as “sadistic sociopath.” It reveals that Wikileaks contacted Guccifer 2.0—the persona of Russian intelligence operatives—and asked for “anything Hillary related” because the Democratic National Convention was approaching. WikiLeaks told Guccifer 2.0 that “we think Trump has only a 25% chance of winning against Hillary so conflict between Bernie and Hillary is interesting.”
Guccifer 2.0 sent WikiLeaks 20,000 emails and other documents stolen from the Democratic National Committee computer networks. They revealed the DNC had been stacking the deck against Bernie to ensure Hillary won the Democratic Party nomination. The WikiLeaks exposé, which forced the resignation of DNC cochair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, angered and energized Sanders supporters, but Hillary won the nomination anyway.
Source: Muller report, Vol. 1, Page 45
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/18/us/politics/mueller-report-document.html?auth=login-email#g-page-52
2
There is a video of President Obama praising Cuba's Educational System.Just saying...
8
Like most of these pieces, there's a lot of input by people associated with the Clintons, and virtually nothing from the Obamas.
"The former press secretary for former President Bill Clinton"? How is that possibly relevant?
3
Recipe for failure: Slam the heck out of your most popular candidate.
3
Yes, and it came to a head in the last debate when Elizabeth Warren ambushed Mike Bloomberg and the rest piled on, it was an embarrassment. Mike Bloomberg said it best, “this is ridiculous”, he is the only candidate who has avoided personal attacks on democrats and focused on Trump, I hope he isn’t drawn into the morass of stupidity.
2
A Democratic candidate praises a Communist dictator's literacy program, and everyone starts hyperventilating.
The Republican president defends Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince after he has a Washington Post journalist murdered and dissected, and everyone agrees: "Well, that's just Trump being Trump."
277
@Adam
Florida's a swing state. Cuban-Americans are a sizable percentage of the population in Florida. Cuban-Americans who fled Castro and to a lesser extent their children and grandchildren don't take kindly to presidential candidates praising Castro.
And that's why everyone on the democratic side is hyperventilating.
20
@Adam I wonder how much most Americans know about the Cuban revolution in which the military dictator Batista was overthrown? You can read about it in Wikipedia. The post there includes the following quote from JFK, the President at the time.
"I believe that there is no country in the world, including the African regions, including any and all the countries under colonial domination, where economic colonization, humiliation and exploitation were worse than in Cuba, in part owing to my country's policies during the Batista regime. I believe that we created, built and manufactured the Castro movement out of whole cloth and without realizing it. ... I approved the proclamation which Fidel Castro made in the Sierra Maestra, when he justifiably called for justice and especially yearned to rid Cuba of corruption. I will go even further: to some extent it is as though Batista was the incarnation of a number of sins on the part of the United States. Now we shall have to pay for those sins."
— U.S. President John F. Kennedy, interview with Jean Daniel, 24 October 1963
26
@Adam How, exactly, does that false symmetry play against the valid specifics behind the concern, namely the importance of Florida in the Electoral College?
Over and over, we are seeing emotional "arguments" that somehow feel right, but that don't address the only issue at hand: who wins the College. The fact that this paper itself gets swept up in the emotion is dismaying.
13
It doesn't help when the paper of record blatantly lies about Sanders. On 60 Minutes he most assuredly did NOT praise Fidel Castro. He stated that Castro sponsored a massive literacy program, which is true. Why can't you people be honest???
12
Agreed. Cooper showed Obama who had said the same about Castro. I guess it is a deep search to find something to hit Bernie with...
8
It's ironic when other candidates complain that Sanders does not have broad appeal or is leaving people out when Sanders is trying to make sure that everyone has health care, a decent education, and a liveable planet. I would like to see the so-called moderate candidates trying to explain their incremental platforms to a family without health care or to a young person who got accepted by a good college but cannot afford to go there or to a family living in the midst of a fracked gas field. Why should millions of Americans be treated as if they just don't matter?
5
Interesting-- there's the usual argument that Bernie has never faced sustained examination and criticism, combined with a barrage of criticism from his opponents, including vicious anti-communism--and of course, as that notorious Bolshevik Dwight Eisenhower can tell you, you don't need to be an actual Red to attract red-baiting.
Meanwhile, Bernie sticks to the issues, gathers in contributions, and racks up delegates .
2
The divisiveness has overwhelmingly come from so called news pundits who seem to have been triggered by Trump style reactionary rhetoric. Like Trump, what they accuse others of doing is just projection of themselves. In comparison to the onslaught from pundits, the candidates look like they’re behaving responsibly.
And Btw speaking of responsible behavior, Cuba does have a very strong educational system despite its economic and leadership challenges. Obama managed to get off the high horse long enough to understand this, and he understood how to chip away at their military establishment. Even today they’re still wearing Obama tee shirts long after they’ve disappeared here at home.
The degree of animosity is off the charts this year. Some of it is simply gratuitous animosity - pure nastiness with no connection whatsoever to the comment, except in the degree of ad hominem toward the commenter. But again gratuitous, with no connection to knowing the commenter in terms of age, gender etc.
Then there are the attacks during a debate. The last one for me was already too nasty. And I may not even watch (or watch very long) tonight.
This whole mess is leaving me very pessimistic about this nation, about the election, and the future.
I’m old. This virus could end my life. Who knows if I’ll be around to vote in November?
I lost my dear husband last April. He grew up in Franco Spain. Was born just after the Spanish Civil War and saw some terrible things as a very young child. So, while I never saw these things, I can see the legacy of a dictatorship on the psyches of those who experienced it, especially as children. How it affected his parents and grandparents. Adults fearful of confronting the regime or the Church, to which it had tied itself. To the degree that when my dear spouse was physically abused by 2 consecutive priests, there was nothing his parents could do... Except send him away to live with relatives in a city - which itself was not good for his psyche ether - to be separated from home, parents, brothers and sisters.
So I worry. Not just for myself. I at best have a couple decades left. But for young people. For anyone.
1
Priorities USA Action currently rates Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Florida as toss-ups, and never mind what anyone else says, that makes sense with an eye to November, not last week. Yesterday this paper reported that, in fact, Sanders is not magically increasing turnout, and it's a pesky fact that for 50 years the 18-24 vote never delivers. Excitement in N.Y. and San Francisco won't mean a thing when the unforgiving logic of the Electoral College plays out. I hope there's a big constituency in Florida excited about Castro's literacy programs.
3
@Blair "I hope there's a big constituency in Florida excited about Castro's literacy programs"
Florida is really three states, politically speaking.
South Florida has a small number of aging Cuban exiles, who always vote Republican. Despite this Democrats always win south FL.
North Florida is very conservative, Trump country, if you will. They will absolutely turn out for right wing issues like gun control, religion, etc. Not sure how they feel about sugary soft drinks, but suspect you would have to pry their cold, dead hands off their mountain dew.
In between, there is central FL, the battleground.
A very large number of Puerto Rican voters have settled around Orlando. They could care less about Castro, and Cuba.
My advice for Bernie is to send AOC to Central Fl to organize the PR vote, which lean democratic, and Vastly outnumber the Cuban population.
Note also that the progressive candidate (Gillum) beat out the moderate candidate in the Dem Gov primary
2
This kind of divisiveness and negative trolling is not only restricted to the candidates and their debates, it has also settled into the arena of public discourse where their supporters feel free to hurl insults at those who do not agree with them.
This is not only a problem being exacerbated by the mass media and popular social platforms, it has become a part of our lives and no doubt a result of the aura of negativity stemming from the White House twitter-sphere, since there's no way to ignore the "bully-boy" who is currently there.
And this behaviour is not only on fully display on a daily basis, but it has now part of the norm and transcends party-lines.
While most Americans look to those running for electability, we should be looking for their civility as well.
We're living in a time where it is sorely lacking.
1
“If we cannot we cannot help the many who are poor, we cannot save the few who are rich.” JFK
Eloquence is missing from this years presidential race. We need a candidate who can inspire as well as lead.
1
Let the people vote, then support the nominee. It’s that simple. Or just decide to accept another 4 years of chaos and permanent damage to our country.
The entire ruling corporate class is targeting Sanders as they did in 2016. Nobody else will beat Trump by enough of a margin to displace him, Just like 2016. Meanwhile the Justice Department, Supreme court and State Departments are under attack and the cabinet departments are being sliced, diced and sold along with our public lands. The only real choice for us is Bannon's fascism or Sanders' New Deal resurgent Democracy.
This squabbling among candidates is really uninspiring and disappointing. Democrats want to vote for candidates with a combination of the best ideas and the best chance of winning in November, not the best attack lines and attack ads. The infighting is totally counterproductive. It’s like passengers on the Titanic fighting over deck chairs while the ship is sinking.
2
Enough debates. We know what they are standing for. We've heard it 678 times. At least.
4
Both progressive candidates do very loud and angry very well. Warren’s attack on Bloomberg was over the top sounding more like Trump in its delivery. And Buttigieg’s and Klobuchar’s spat sounded like a couple of angry playground kids. I’m tired of the ad hominem attacks and I’m tired of the debate format that tries to score gotcha moments non stop. How about the issues, moderators? How about asking Sanders about his numbers to pay for his plans of how he’s going to try to ram his plans through a Republican senate? A piece of paper with some numbers that he’s hastily prepared? Ditto for Warren. Ask Sanders about his health records. Ask Steyer why he’s still in the race. The Dems resemble the gang that couldn’t shoot straight. These debates have been a disaster. And they will hand Trump four more years.
1
It's clear that Warren was spinning out off control with her comments regarding the Bloomberg quotes. Fact checking by every media site revealed that these statements were not made by Bloomberg to his woman employees and in fact they probably weren't quotes at all. Despite her supposed winning of the Nevada debate, Warren continues to fall in the polls and is just acting as a stubborn spoiler taking votes away from Sanders. Any candidate that acts like Trump is not going win an election. A majority of Americans are fed up with gutter politics.
Warren raised a ton of money 12million due to her debate performance and did rise in polls as well as doing much better with Nevadan voters who made up their minds the last days before the election. Don’t underestimate how many voters view Bloomberg unfavorably or how many women (and others) enjoyed the moment where a man responsible for a sexist hostile workplace was put in his place!
Plus I think she is more capable than Bernie of getting things done. Bernie’s socialist label doesn’t bother me but Warren carries no such baggage. A Republican who switched to being a democrat when she realized how corrupted against regular people our institutions are, an avowed capitalist - who fought against big banking corruption and returned billions of dollars to regular consumers. Someone who will fight for the integrity of our democratic and financial institutions.
She had to prove she could handle Donald Trump in a debate better than Bloomberg (who claimed he was the only one who could) and she did.
2
Divisive is putting it mildly. I was a Buttigieg fan until his attack on Klobuchar. Bernie and Bloomberg looked like they would spar on stage also. Trump is rubbing his hands together. As a life-long Democrat I worry we have lost our way. I will vote for whomever the candidate is but Bernie needs to know how to pay for his proposals. It is also time for some other candidates to walk away from the race for the good of the party.
Those terrible far left Democrats!
They want universal healthcare like all the other first world countries.
They want to continue public education with two years of trade school or community college.
We are the richest industrial country on the planet GDP / capita. But we have poverty those other countries don't and the highest incarceration rate in the world.
Those terrible liberals want to protect the air and water and stop global warming.
They want to give women birth control so they don't have unwanted pregnancies and don't have to consider having an abortion.
Shades of Karl Marx!
We pay around $11,000 per capita for healthcare compared to the $5,500 the other first world countries pay.
They get universal coverage and we have parts of the US with infant mortality rates of a second world country. Seriously, look it up.
With the savings to healthcare, we could pay for the additional two years of education.
And maybe that would decrease poverty and crime. Then we would get more people working and paying taxes instead of paying for welfare and prison.
I can't believe how far left these new Democrats want to take us.
What would the Founding Fathers be saying today?
In the meantime, the 2017 Republican tax bill just increased the deficit.
Again.
The deficit is increasing from $600 Billion to $1 Trillion.
To be paid for by ourselves, our children, and grandchildren. Every Republican senator voted for it. Not one Democratic Senator voted for it.
4
They should all emulate Mike Bloomberg, the only adult in the room, and save their animus for Trump, and instead focus on their plans to MAGA after he or she defeats Trump in November.
2
Bernie Sanders seems to be the presidential candidate the DNC had decided to lose with.
3
I wish each of these candidates would stop focusing on eliminating their colleagues to "win" and direct all of their energies to explaining why it is imperative to save the country from another 4 years of a tyrannical , vindictive, and increasingly sadistic President who has also systematically dismantled crucial American institutions, fawned over
dictators, insulted and alienated long-standing allies, and
repeatedly lied to the American people bolster his own self-image. Let them address how they propose to reclaim
a lost America instead of squabbling among themselves
and handing the Republicans talking points to attack the
eventual Democratic candidate. Show some maturity and
dignity for a change!
Over and over I am reading, "Most Democrats are moderates." "We need to nominate a moderate." "The only way to beat Trump is with a moderate." The evidence is staring at us in the face. Bernie Sanders' overwhelming support indicates that America does not want a moderate. The media thinks we do. Readers of the Times believe we do. Readers believe we cannot possibly win without the support of these moderates. If there is one thing 2016 made abundantly clear, it is that America wants change. They are not happy with the status quo and the election of 2020 may be just as unpredictable as 2016. Even if Sanders wins the nomination, many moderates will get on board with him because the other option is Trump, who is the most divisive president in history. He does not respect the Constitution and rule of law. How is that better than a man who advocates universal healthcare and a living wage for Americans?
3
If there is one thing 2018 made clear, it's that the majority of House seats gained were flipped by moderates. Also, if you look at the delegate count and add up all the candidates together, Sanders' opponents have as many as he does. When the race settles to Sanders and a moderate head to head ( just voted by mail for Klobuchar), then we'll see for sure where the majority of the party stands. Be prepared to have your bubble burst.
1
I am in despair. Most Democrats are moderates. It follows, then, that the Democratic Party, in its wish to lose this election, will nominate Sanders, who does not have majority support. There is no clearer evidence of just how disastrous this primary season has been, as the moderate Dems knock each other off and nominate a candidate who can’t win. Why does Russia support Sanders? That’s easy—Putin knows he will lose.
If the moderates really had our interests at heart, they would get together, pick the one among them who might just possibly be able to beat Trump, and all support that candidate. The rest should confine their roles to the one issue that matters—defeating Trump.
163
For decades the Democratic establishment has expected progressives to accept and vote for whoever their centrist nominee was so I think centrist/moderates can do the same for Sanders if he’s the nominee After all the lesser of two evils philosophy should apply to all
104
@Barbara8101
The Left was correct about Supply Side Economics, which NEVER works a as advertised.. Forty years of tax cuts for the rich and deregulation has LOWERED economic growth. Growth was 50% higher in the 60' and 70's than the last 20 years. Demand driven by worker pay drives the economy. Tax cuts for the rich removes cash from the US economy to be invested in low wage countries.
Losing your job to a machine, not because it is more efficient, but because it gets a tax break does not help the economy.
The Left was correct about unfetterred free trade. Creating OPEN BORDERS for capital so the mega-rich could ship $60/hr Union joins to low wage countries destroyed the US manufacturing base, giving China control of everything from steel to solar. The Right hired Trump to blame unfetterred free trade on Democrats! Don't help.
The Left was correct about deregulating global investment banks, letting them mingle their risk with insured banks, and deregulating derivatives. (Bernie made a speech about how dangerous this was before hand. Combined with firing the regulators and letting banks lower their reserves, this created the Great Recession. (Bloomberg blaming all of this on the end of redlining was pure Republican propaganda!)
The Left was correct about the War in Iraq, not believing the lies used to sell it, because they were historically inane.
The Left is correct about reproductive health.
The LEFT has been CORRECT about EVERY major ISSUE for FORTY YEARS.
80
@Barbara8101
The Left was correct about Supply Side Economics, which NEVER works a as advertised.. Forty years of tax cuts for the rich and deregulation has LOWERED economic growth. Growth was 50% higher in the 60' and 70's than the last 20 years. Demand driven by worker pay drives the economy. Tax cuts for the rich removes cash from the US economy to be invested in low wage countries.
Losing your job to a machine, not because it is more efficient, but because it gets a tax break does not help the economy.
The Left was correct about unfetterred free trade. Creating OPEN BORDERS for capital so the mega-rich could ship $60/hr Union joins to low wage countries destroyed the US manufacturing base, giving China control of everything from steel to solar. The Right hired Trump to blame unfetterred free trade on Democrats! Don't help.
The Left was correct about deregulating global investment banks, letting them mingle their risk with insured banks, and deregulating derivatives. (Bernie made a speech about how dangerous this was before hand. Combined with firing the regulators and letting banks lower their reserves, this created the Great Recession. (Bloomberg blaming all of this on the end of redlining was pure Republican propaganda!)
The Left was correct about the War in Iraq, not believing the lies used to sell it, because they were historically inane.
The Left is correct about reproductive health.
The LEFT has been CORRECT about EVERY major ISSUE for FORTY YEARS.
22
I am pretty tired of the Democrats trying to decide who instead of what. Sanders is doing well because most people agree that we need a shift to the left in our government. More Americans need to be able to lead better lives than they are able to these days. This means addressing income inequality and getting everyone to pay their fair share for the society and infrastructure we have in the US that enables prosperity. Those candidates who are engaged in the race to the bottom on their 'electability' just aren't listening to real people anymore.
11
@Paul - The correct statement would be that most Democratic Party primary voters " agree that we need a shift to the left in our government."
What does everyone else think? You'll find out in November, and it may come as a surprise.
2
@Jonathan - You're right - The sentence should instead read: "...most people agree that we need a shift towards enabling greater income equality from our government."
1
Mayor Pete has dropped way down in my estimation now. He is smart enough to know that Bernie's democratic socialism has nothing whatsoever to do with authoritarianism, which Bernie is vehemently opposed to (unlike Trump.)
Bernie's socialism is that of democratic Denmark, the government of which assures the freedom and security of all its people to thrive.
It is Trump that is doing his best to turn this country into a dictatorship. It is Bernie that is the strongest opposition to that. His honesty and compassion are priceless.
24
@Nancy O'Hagan
Sure, Bernie loves Denmark.
So why did he take his honeymoon in Moscow?
Some things are just too obvious to deny.
Denial, my left wing children, is not a good winning strategy.
3
Agree about Mayor Pete being a major disappointment in the past week. He has definitely dropped in my estimation and those of people I know.
I’m warming to Bernie and did love when defending himself on CNN last night, that he said “Truth is Truth”. We do need more of that in politics.
2
@Simon Sez
He honeymooned in Moscow because he was arranging a sister city thing between Burlington, Vt. and a town/city in Russia. I can't remember its name, but it's widely available.
I am not a child. I am old and thoughtful - possibly even wise. I am not denying anything. Nor is Bernie. It is the media, and lots of others, that are denying things like the fact that in Cuba, some good things DID happen. It is very Trumpian to color every single thing a person does because you don't like him. Bernie is far more realistic and fair, as he is with everything. No one can touch him on integrity.
1
It has all to do with the tone and tenor the media and identity pols have developed and exercised against their favorite target. A veritable arms race of invective now used to eat their own young.
8
@Woke
Yep, We progressives have been enduring the spittle and bile from DLC centrists for decades while being told to get in line and unify. It's been a disaster and we have had enough. We are the majority and most support addressing climate, having healthcare supporting Social Security and making a living wage.
1
I'm struck by the chorus of opinionators (including the NYT) who, after Sanders' Nevada win, responded like school girls who spent the evening chanting "I believe in Mary Worth" in front of a bathroom mirror before flooding out of the room in terror.
I'm not a Sanders fan, but I know he's not a monster. He's only a cranky democratic socialist with a sense of integrity.
We know who the real monster is. Editorial writers need to avoid sensationalistic headlines and articles and focus on the potential nominees' track records. We are only feeding the real monster, and increasing his chances of re-election, by chanting at the mirror in an effort to scare up ghosts.
12
In 2008, similar criticisms were leveled against Obama. The NY times ran editorials and opinion pieces (Paul Krugman, Gloria Steinem, etc) critical of Obama. How much did that help their chosen candidate? Endorsements, by individuals or newspapers carry little weight in today's world. Let the people have their choice.
8
Calling someone a socialist used to be bad in the democrat party. Now a socialist is the front runner. Saying that your opponent would open the borders and give free health care to all used to be an attack too. The front runner is in favor of that. Conventional attacks don’t work anymore. Time to find new ways.
1
@Jim
I don't believe Sanders is in favor of open borders.
What people are saying is to de-criminalize illegal border crossings and leave it as civil offense.
It is what Canada has.
The purpose of this is to no longer make it possible to separate children from their parents.
You mean sleepy Democratic Party politics has come to an end. Let's go back to the old days. I don't think so. Just read a few of Obama's anodyne tweets --- he's the Goop of Democrats politics now --- and you may appreciate politics with a lot of yelling. It isn't such a bad thing if you're a Democrat hoping to slough off, well, lifestyle politics of the so-called Third Way. As a clue check out Tony Blair's popularity in the UK. Moderate Labor, too, has hit a rough patch. Or look at France, Germany . . . . It's preposterous to think that ideological battles will be settled by lifestyle politicians. We loved them when they were there. It was kinda cute when Bill Clinton played saxophone on The Arsenio Hall show, wasn't it? It was an act He took the Party to the right. Now, new Party entrants are settling scores.
3
Those voting for Buttigieg shoiuld ask themselves; aren't they throwing their vote away. In what America, can a gay person run in the general election. and they say a socialist is unelectable.
4
Oh please, this is a bunch of drama about nothing. Politicians are politicians, not angels in 2nd grade. Get rid of that cardigan now.
4
Is part of the divisiveness due to Russian bots trolling the different Democratic candidates? We must keep this possibility open.
7
Will tonight be the night that Bernie swings back at Joe Biden by commenting about Ukraine, China and Hunter?
3
Yesterday I heard a smart critique of voters who are feeling frustrated with politics and have chosen Trump as a kind of "anti-candidate." The Kabarettist (satirical comedian) commented that making a choice like that is like going into a pub, deciding you don't like any of the beers on tap, and choosing to drink from the toilet bowl instead. Please, let's not have protest votes this year. Let's rally behind whomever emerges from the primaries, get that person elected, and then work to fix our cracked and damaged political system and our damaged reputation in the world.
4
How much time is spent on preparing for each debate? Couldn’t this time be better spent listening to the voters? I can understand the idea of debates between the parties, once the flag bearers for each party are chosen. But this constant harping back and forth between the candidates that are called debates really do not show us what the candidates are really like. I would like to see what the candidates really feel about the issues, not what Warren feels about Buttigieg holding a fund raiser in a wine cave.
Sit the candidates down with a number of journalists, from reputable news organizations form the center-right to the mainstream progressive, avoiding the more radical outlets, and ask the candidates solid questions about their qualifications, positions, and hopes. Boil this down to an hour show for each candidate and make it available on the internet for anyone to see. Leave out any attacks against other candidates. And perhaps put together an hour show of the highlights of all of them. Use the same sort of criteria for who gets to do the sit downs as who gets to be in the debates. Do all of this four times before the convention.
This would mirror the public part of being the president. Presidents do not do debates, they make policy statements, and try to use the “bully pulpit” to support their ideas. Save the debates to after the nominating conventions.
3
For about 25 years, so-called moderate Democrats (mostly corporatists, actually) have been demanding backing from progressives. Time to turn that around. If Sanders comes out of super Tuesday ahead, buy peace in the Democratic Party by demanding that the others back Sanders, and put the bickering behind them. Start the run against Trump now.
6
All of the pro Bernie Sanders points raised here may be true. But what is really disturbing is that no pro Bernie supporters seem willing to concede he has any drawbacks or flaws.
This is a really classic indicator of groupthink. The danger I'd like to highlight is that only your group sees him this way.
17
"Moderates" are not going to step aside for each other. "ONLY SO FAR" is not exactly a slogan they will unite around.
3
Whether they be Cuban exiles now in Congress or commenters in these pages, Americans might want to read what Bernie Sanders actually said about Cuba on 60 Minutes, rather than react to the highly (and misleadingly) abbreviated reference in this article. “When Fidel Castro came to office, you know what he did? He had a massive literacy program. Is that a bad thing? Even though Fidel Castro did it?” And when Anderson Cooper pushed back that Castro was responsible for political repression, Sanders agreed and condemned that. But the point he wished to make was that America can and should learn from all kinds of experiences, taking good ideas even from bad regimes. That, to my mind, is a wiser, more intelligent program that adopting a Manichaean worldview that rejects everything from governments we have learned to dislike (for many different, not always justified reasons). The best leaders are those that challenge their people to think more broadly, look more critically at the world. If Sanders is the Democrats' nominee, we will have to up our game and see the world in a more sophisticated, realistic way, not adopt the lazy conventional wisdom of the Cold War.
6
I think multiple culprits are responsible for the current hysteria: the media and the amplification of social media /Twitter verse hysteria, plus post-trump norms of political engagement and the resulting loss of civility.
Above all, though, something has gone terribly wrong with the American experiment such that such a large swathe of the American population responds to populist, angry tactics. While I believe that Senator Sanders is of superior character to our current president, the tactics used by each do have similarities: they appeal to people who feel disenfranchised by the system and who thus react positively to ideological orthodoxy and simple messaging.
To date, other candidates have attempted to harness this anger, with varying degrees of incoherence (Warren’s attempt at opportunistic pivots; even the class-based rhetoric employed by Klobuchar). In such an environment, Sanders is attractive based on his unyielding orthodoxy; people who have lost trust and faith in the system are much more interested in ideological purity than anything else.
Much of the division within the party that we’re seeing is just this: the effective deployment of populist tactics by the Sanders campaign, and similar (albeit more clumsy) attempts to harness the disenfranchised anger of the party. Tragically, an angry electorate reacts well to populist political theater - Warren’s calculated and cynical attack in the last debate and subsequent fundraising bump is tangible proof
3
Folks -watch the 1981 presidential debate between Mr. Mitterrand and Mr. Giscard [yes, I'm talking about a French presidential debate], then see how many comments along the lines of "look how statesman-like, respectful they were; how they refrained from personal attacks like today, etc., etc.]...
Yes, DJT is certainly a catalyst of incivility; however, there seems to be a world-wide deterioration of civility, restraint, respect, etc. " in the making " for a long time.
2
What am I missing here?
I keep reading comments by concerned Democrats that they will hold their noses and vote for Sanders, if that is what it comes to. However, nominating him is a recipe for being trounced by Trump.
If it is an “anybody but Trump” situation, and Democrats turn out as they did in 2018, why/how would Bernie be the new McGovern?
There’s a disconnect. It feels like there’s something amiss. The “socialist” label. Maybe?
Bernie Sanders has a very long, well-established record. I don’t quite get why there’s now this almost palpable fear that he’s a standard-bearing, Soviet-style, archetypal socialist.
“It’s one thing to tell people about your agenda, it’s another to show people how hard you’ll fight for it.” That is, to have the courage of your convictions. Whether or not one supports the man, Sanders has this. In spades.
Why the “hair on fire” reactions to his correctly pointing that that Castro did something(s) that, objectively, should be considered a universal good, as he also condemned the dictator’s overall conduct?
Elizabeth Warren remains my choice; the candidate to whom I committed BEFORE she ever ran for public office. I trust her.
However, there is something highly commendable about Sanders’ unflinching integrity; his willingness to defend what he believes, especially in the face of criticisms from sources that otherwise give lip-service to his oft-stated goals.
10
They need to focus on Trump, not each other. DJT is their political enemy. They need to show that they are capable of bringing the together. The Nixon practice of winning elections has hit its Zenith with DJT and needs to be brought to an end. Educating the voters without being verbose, condescending, or boring should be their goal. Perhaps we should restrict electioneering to a matter of months, eliminate Citizens United, and restrict the funding of political campaigns to people who are registered to vote. No voting booth should allow automatic party line voting. The net effect would be to facilitate better comprehension among the voters of what their candidate stands for.
2
Surely there are nationally and internationally generated bots and intentional negative answers. Why is nobody mentioning that?
2
Those Democrats, who are criticizing Sanders for praising Castro's education policy (and other good works) are nothing but very ignorant, blind party loyalists, and status-quo politicians. A sensible person, especially a matured politician, must learn to evaluate each issue seperately on its own merit and then either support it or oppose it.
I can surely support some of Trump's policies but very well can oppose all others. The same is true for Obama and any other presidents.
Educated and sensible people must not support or oppose something simply because someone we blindly like or adamantly oppose.
These blind party loyalists have done the most damage to American democracy and a larger section of American voters, even many of the "highly educated " ones in influential positions lost their ability to stay neutral while evaluating any critical issue.
3
I am sick of the Democratic bickering as well as the idea that all of these people should stay in the race until the end. The Democratic Party is fractured and it shows. I am a life long Democrat who is terrified that we have four more years of Trump because we can’t come together. I was a Buttigieg supporter but didn’t like his attack on Klobuchar. I am not a Bernie fan because he has no idea how to pay for his agendas. I fear we have lost our way.
5
Totally agree with the column. I watched the last debate and came away thinking it was a childish food fight. I have my mail in ballot for the Democratic primary in AZ sitting on my desk. There is not one person I want to vote for after the last debate.
The anger in our country is palpable and it's ugly.
We face huge problems and we have huge opportunities in front of us. This country which the world depends on for leadership, has gone off the rails. Defeating Trump will not solve that.
The country that most of us loved and were indoctrinated to believe in is gone. Yes the Democrats are better than the Republicans. Sadly they are pathetically mediocre at best when we need much better.
I always though Obama was a decent not great President. It's amazing in retrospect how great he really was.
6
As Rahm Emmanuel said on Colbert last night, it seemed foolish to spend one's firepower against Bloomberg at the last debate, as Warren, in particular, did. The center must unite against Sanders, because at this point, he is the leader in the game.
Sanders needs some serious vetting, and there is plenty of material out there. For example, Emmanuel pointed out that Sanders tried to primary Obama. That should sway some minds.
6
@pkbormes
you say they need to unite against Sanders.
I say that Sanders would make a better President than Trump, has more organic support, and they should all unite with him to help drive out the vote and push back against the lies that will emanate from the white house.
Emmanuel lied about Sanders trying to primary Obama.
We should be having thoughtful, wide-ranging debate on health care, immigration policy, tax policy, foreign affairs, global warming, and other serious issues.
But the debate last week devolved into name calling and petty insults, on meaningless themes such as remembering a Mexican president's last name.
Is this what it's come to in the democratic party?
Candidates, next debate, and for that matter, next anything, forget the name calling and show of disdain for each other.
Make your points respectfully, honestly, and stick to the question on the table rather than making cheap shots at the other candidates. Voters and reporters are smart enough to ferret out dishonesty or non response responses.
Debate moderators, do your job. Castigate, where necessary, those candidates who swerve from the path of respectful debate on the issues. Keep the discussion on the substantive, myriad list of nationally important issues of our day.
The best candidate will shine at the end. But sheesh....what a brutal path we've got to weather through to get to the end of this savage process.
4
"As the primary race becomes a battle of all against all, and the field suddenly seems to be constricting, the divisiveness and negative attacks are rising." And the media are gleeful, because even though our country, where they enjoy freedom of the press, is being utterly destroyed by traitors and clickbaiters, they make money.
2
Well, it's human nature to divide, I guess. They say in a group as small as three humans, two will team up against one.
I agree with others that the media love a soap opera (or middle school name calling) more than they love the sacred job they do. The NYT really kept up the "Is Hillary really crooked?" in 2016, and 'republicans say Obama is from Kenya; what do Dems say?'
Now we see lots of breathless coverage of the inner fight. And trump gleefully knows how to manipulate the narrative, as we've seen over and over. He'll make hay out of the snippets and sound bites provided by Bernie Sanders' Castro comments.
At first, we sneer at the huge Democratic field of candidates, than as it inevitably gets smaller, we sneer at the smaller field.
Meanwhile, does anyone know who's running against trump? He gets to squat in the White House and laugh, while his own divisive bigotry goes completely unchallenged by anyone in his party. Even worse; his divisive bigotry is amplified by FOX, Sinclair etc, while he just straight up says he's not answering any of America's questions. Putin doesn't have to, nor does Modi, trump's new soulmate, nor does Kim.
The Democrats exasperate me, but I'd rather be part of an openly faulty organization, with good ideas for national progress, than one spoiled man's gut, for whom his base must make increasingly insane excuses.
2
I know of a way to tone down the unnecessary divisiveness. Fire Brett Stephens and let's watch how he picks himself up by his boot straps.
3
The problem with false equivalency is that it creates a space for tyrants and bullies to exploit.
Its like refereeing an arm wrestling match when one of the contestants has brought a gun with them.
Rather than saying call the Police this must be stopped, the media attempts nuance and Trump rolls on.
The Democratic candidate is not being remotely battle tested in the primaries, Trump lies on a daily basis and should be called out as a liar every day. Republicans have coalesced around an autocrat who will tear the fabric of our society to shreds, and all you get from the "intelligent" media is false equivalence.
Please do your jobs better.
2
I expected the media to rip the republicans in 2016 for being "divisive". But to do it to the democrats...I'm stunned actually. It doesn't happen very often they say anything negative about democrats. Ummmmm, in case no one has noticed...this part of the process SHOULD BE divisive. Candidates are attempting to show us why they are better than everyone else running. It's not a garden party at Buckingham Palace. These candidates want to be the president of the United States...sort of a big deal. They have to challenge anyone that gets in their way...something we hope they would do when president. The gloves should be off. Playing nice is phony. That's not how politics works.
7
Manners are optional, but not phony. They may be a true attempt to civilise cruder facets of nature. Or do you also object to wearing pants?
2
@Tom
'all goves off' type of 'democracy' is anything, but. When you dig deeper and deeper, until you find something (anything) that could be blown out of proportion, you are trying to make gullible people (the voters) even more disoriented and disillusioned, let alone misinformed.
That is not democracy. That's an ugly slug fest, that won't produce the best leader as an outcome.
2
I am a physician- (OB-GYN). I would not accept the burden of trying to explain a complex medical issue to the patient and her relatives in one minute, then 30 seconds or so for questions followed by another some other little time for explanations. The format of the debates – is just that – a media circus. The most important job in the world is a game of evaluation of one-liners.
50
The state of media in 2020—*all* media, ranging from social networks, billions of online channels, and "The Mainstream Media" online and on TV—has produced a world where consensus is impossible.
Without consensus, democratic governance is not possible—there's only enforced authority by whoever can dominate at a given moment.
Sorry for the bad news.
4
I think it’s funny that everyone is now saying it’s Bernie’s time to be vetted. How many negative stories over the past few decades constitutes being thoroughly vetted? The problem the corporate media has with Sanders is that there isn’t a whole lot there to derail his candidacy. And what is there, doesn’t have the same resonance with the under 65 crowd.
Cuba is no longer an enemy and a lot of everyday Americans want to go there on vacation. I hear the diving is great! Obama to his credit made great strides reconnecting us with the Cubans, Trump has gone in the other direction. I guess, Cuba’s current government is not authoritarian enough to get his praise.
11
@iiTowKneeii If Trump could figure out a way to monetize the US's relationship to Cuba, he'd get on board fast enough. Cuba ought to offer him an opportunity to slap his name on something, and it'd get beaucoup US dollars.
3
Can't believe the pundits and Pubs are making a big deal out of Bernie's comments about Castro. I remember those days. People were going down to help cut sugar cane after the revolution, and it was a good thing because the U.S. backed Batista had been a ruthless dictator. Castro brought universal health care and the best organic farming in the world to Cuba(because of the embargo on fertilizer).
From Wikipedia:
"...receiving financial, military, and logistical support from the United States government, Batista suspended the 1940 Constitution and revoked most political liberties, including the right to strike. He then aligned with the wealthiest landowners who owned the largest sugar plantations, and presided over a stagnating economy that widened the gap between rich and poor Cubans."
Bernie is not denying the fact of Castro's brutality. And he's not being politically wise. He's simply stating the truth, that for most Cubans, not the wealthy landowners but everyone else, the revolution was a good thing. Castro was paranoid and imprisoned his opponents, which is something Donald Trump aspires to. The pundits are raking Bernie over the coals for speaking the truth.
7
I find it very noticeable how far down in the article Senator Elizabeth Warren was mentioned despite the fact that her debate performance garnered significant attention. Candidates doing worse and have not been been on the ballot yet are mentioned more.
6
The Russians want to divide us. Remember this whenever you read a post that is critical of Bernie or the other candidates.
We can't afford another 4 years of the disaster we now live through. That is the most important consideration.
5
Bloomberg's billions have only served to further fragment and divide moderate Democrats. His arrogant and ego driven message of division only serves to highlight the appeal of a Bernie Sanders who does all he can to elevate and represent the under-represented working class.
Sanders vacation home is on lake Champlain in Vermont, the state he represents.
Bloomberg's vacation home is in the tax haven of Bermuda.
Who does he represent?
20
How is the progressive left any different from the Tea Party. They are just an extreme left version of the radical right wing extremist. It’s my way or the highway and the victor will take all the spoils laying ruin to the beliefs of those who won’t come along. No moderation. No compromise just jamming down more extreme viewpoints on people in center who are stuffing from whiplash from four years of one extreme policy platform to another.
10
@P Taylor
Even if what you say is true, the alternative - four more years of flagrant corruption - is untenable.
1
Say what you will about the "Old Party Bosses"
working behind the scenes to find a candidate that
could win the election, but I don't think they would
have ever allowed so many candidates run for the
Democratic nomination at the same time.
I like Amy K and I think he policies stand the greatest
chance of being approved by Congress.
I think Bernie's polices on Health Care/College Loans
reducing America's Military commitment overseas has
a lot to be said for.
I don't know why Mayor Pete is running except out of some
sort of enormous ambition and pride and possibly being the
VP nominee or placing himself in a position to run for Governor
Indiana or for a Senate Seat.
I wish Warren were ten years young and less strident.
Mayor Bloomberg would probably do fine as President,
sort of like Obama and Bush I, nothing radical, but
a well run presidency.
Biden needs to exit stage Left or Right, time to hand
over the reigns of power to a new Generation.
Perhaps the candidate that slings the least amount of
mud in the next debate should win our votes.
4
Correction: "On Sunday night, Mr. Sanders praised Fidel Castro's literacy program on '60 Minutes,' while denouncing the authoritarian nature of Castro's Cuba."
This sort of omission is how the media deprives our society of having a nuanced conversation about real-world issues and forces public discourse into simple either/or statements. The NYT should work to be part of the solution to this issue instead of continuing to contribute to the problem.
37
I hadn’t paid much attention to reports that Warren has gotten short shrift from the media, but take a look here—Warrens’s name does not come up until paragraph 19.
11
@Martha Crites I like Warren but she’s a fourth or fifth place candidate so far. I think that has more to do with her loss of coverage than anything.
6
Sanders hasn't recieved sustained scrutiny in either presidential runs? Am I living in the same universe as McAuliffe?
Say what you may about the Vermont senator, but "not receiving scrutiny" is one thing you can't criticize him for. The New York Times regularly criticizes Sanders (in this article even). Half of the Washington Post's articles about the primary are negative pieces about Sanders these days. CNN and MSNBC regularly have segments with hosts criticizing the senator, and he regularly recieves difficult questions in town halls and debates.
I think the narrative that Sanders hasn't recieved enough scrutiny is based in personal biases. It is the same reasoning that leaves some Sanders supporters seeing conspiracies in Iowa or in media outlets. I think it is time for us all to consider our own biases and try to get an accurate view of what is happening in the current presidential election.
53
@Matt
Yes, and you left out that the Clinton opposition research machine has already vetted Sanders and couldn't find anything of substance to attack him on.
1
@Matt
Yes, and you left out that the Clinton opposition research machine has already vetted Sanders and couldn't find anything of substance to attack him on.
@Matt he is yet to be thoroughly vetted. @McGloin - they found plenty. They just didn't use it. They didn't want to risk alienating his supporters.
1
It's no longer a political party, it's a not-for-profit sponsor for a bunch of individuals seeking the presidency. Where's the leadership within the party, making sure the basic platform is reinforced by all the candidates (what is the Democratic Party platform? The website has the one from 2016). The party leadership should coordinate campaigns and restrict the number of candidates, to give voice to divisions within the party without completely fracturing its base support into competing groups.
A good example is Buttigieg. Why isn't he running for Senate? Why is Warren still in it, when she should be back in the Senate governing? Why do they allow Bloomberg to muscle his way into the race, under the party banner?
Where's Howard Dean when you need him?
13
@mijosc
Sadly, Howie is a lobbyist for Big Pharma now. We probably don't need him anymore.
4
The moderates need to get together and decide who is going to fall on their swords and leave the race. There are too many of them and they are splitting the vote so no one can win. It has to happen before Super Tuesday so voters have a path forward and can make a choice that makes a difference.
5
Check these numbers before you proclaim that Bernie Sanders has started some sort of massive movement or been such a massive draw for voters.
Regarding turnout, the latest numbers show that 176,436 Iowa Democrats caucused this year, compared to 171,290 in 2016 (just a 28.7% turnout). That was down dramatically from 2008 when 239,872 participated.
For the Nevada caucus, 105,195 participated (despite Early Voting incentives), far short of the 118,000 turnout in 2008. That’s only 17.2%.
In the New Hampshire primary, 300,742 ballots were cast in the Democratic primary. Bernie Sanders received just 76,358 votes. I'd note that 6,185 write-ins were cast in the Democratic primary, including 1,219 for Donald Trump and 4,777 for Mike Bloomberg (who wasn't on the ballot).
What’s really insightful is a comparison to February 2020 voter registration statistics (Democrats, Republicans, Other=Total).
(1) Iowa: 615,512/634,498/756,358=2,006,370.
(2) New Hampshire: 276,385/288,464/415,871=980,720.
(3) Nevada: 610,911/527,641/463,337=1,601,889.
In percentages for Democrats - Republicans - Independents/Other that’s: (1) Iowa: 30.7 %, 31.6%, and 37.7%; (2) New Hampshire: 28.2 %, 29.4 %, 42.4 %. (3) Nevada: 38.1%, 32.9%, 28.9%. In other words, in 2 of the 3 states, independents are the largest voting block.
Bernie’s getting about 1/4th of 1/3rd of the electorate. How does this qualify as some sort of juggernaut? And how is the cockiness for November success justified?
8
I remember 2016. Then the claim was that turnout for Dems at that year was highest since 1992 except. 'exceptional' 2008. So, in 2016 the turnout was viewed as a positive sign, but in 2020 turnout that beats 2016 is not good enough? Really?
3
If Democrats want to campaign against Trump, as they should, on character with civility, human decency, honesty and integrity, "going low" into the politics of destruction and negative attacks on one another is the best way that they'll be crying "We can't win for losing!" this November. It will be up to Bernie Sanders, as the current front-runner, to show the restraint and to demonstrate that he has the character necessary to win, but also to set an example for his fellow nominees.
2
The knives will come out now that Sanders has broken away from the pack. The other Democratic candidates will make Bernie’s Cold War flirtation with Moscow and Havana an issue. If Joe Biden doesn’t well in South Carolina, they will make Burisma an issue.
3
They might be going after one another but there is one thing that we can count on and that is Elizabeth Warren challenging Bernie Sanders. It’s obvious she’s afraid of his base but maybe she doesn’t want to give the Republicans any sound bites to run on.
1
@Oliver
She is not afraid of his base.
Her base is his base. and vice versa.
The are both true progressives, and agree on most issues.
I would vote for either one to become president.
8
The Sanders surge has given Trump another four years.
Bernie’s sticking to his menu of trillion dollar programs, even though he said on 60 Minutes he doesn’t know the cost, will scare away so many moderate and independent voters, especially after the Trump campaign blasts him as a Cuban communist-that this may be a McGovern-like rout.
And Bernie ought to know better about universal healthcare. The other 22 advanced nations have lower healthcare costs and better outcomes. They’ve cut out the insurance industry which takes 30% off the top, and squeezed pharmaceutical companies and hospitals, and yes, even doctors, to get costs down. So it won’t cost $60 Trillion, a number that he threw out that will haunt him.
And the obvious: there’s no way all these programs can be implemented without Congress. In fact, Bernie’s coattails may brush away Democratic candidates in the Senate and the House. Then the Bernie Bros will not get their wishlist even with President Sanders.
Now suppose Sanders isn’t the nominee. The Bernie Cult-and it’s as much a cult as the Trumpistas-will pout and stay home. Then how long will it take-never-to get universal healthcare and other desirable social justice programs after Trump completes his destruction of democracy and government institutions. And by year eight he may have enough dictatorial powers to appoint himself President for Life, just like a banana republic, Russia, and China. It’s a sad day for America.
5
@Grey read this first before considering how it will all be paid for-
https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-does-bernie-pay-his-major-plans/
Bernie is a great day for America.
8
@Grey
I'm tried of this nonsense. Either you are afraid of an actual threat - Trump - or a made up hypothetical threat - "spending too much money"
Even if you gave equal weight to both, one is clearly a more pressing threat.
The idea that moderates and "independents" won't see Trump as a large threat is why this is all so very, very frustrating. Instead of making that argument, you are more than willing to concede to their argument instead (afraid of Sanders).
This is why I quit Twitter last night:
“Now, “there’s the ability for people to have their own platforms,” (Mr. Lockhart) said. “I tweeted it, and got back to my dinner.”
The problem is, I read that exchange and couldn’t get back to my dinner. Twitter (and other forms of social media) are designed to thrive on conflict and hate. They call it engagement.
I’m sick of it. You do indeed see it in all candidates, and of course primarily from our president.
I quit Facebook after the Cambridge Analytica revelations and believe I will survive quitting Twitter, too.
#BeBest
14
On Sunday night, Mr. Sanders praised Fidel Castro for Cuba’s literacy program on “60 Minutes.”
Revolutions have reasons: Czarist Russia, Batista's Cuba, The Shah's Iran....all responses to oppressive authoritarian regimes guilty of clear abuses of human rights. Recognizing those reasons and some of the improvements to the lives of the general populations while condemning the rights abuses of the new systems does not make one an authoritarian or an admirer of authoritarian regimes. And, of course, we (the US and other western powers) have our own sins to answer for....The Shah's Iran, Batista's Cuba, Pinochet's Chile, The Saudi Family's Saudi Arabia and countless other regimes supportive of Western hegemony.
You know what they say about glass houses.
16
The media are largely responsible for the tone of this election.
In 2016, the media fascination with Trump's meanness and the drama he created, helped elect him.
In this election, the blood-thirst desire for drama between the democrats has media pundits begging for the take down of the clear front winner in this race.
Where will this end? With Trump in power.
4
@Mel I agree totally with you, it’s a paid for blood-thirst desire for drama, and the $billionaires have the media and their spokespeople at NYT, MSNBC, CNN, WaPo, etc. in their pockets big time. Where do you think all of those news anchor spokespeople get their money?
1
On the stage they have said things to each other in a tone they would never use in a private personal situation. The rude behavior appears to me a foolish attempt to mimic Trump. It hasn't worked - the low road they are on is distressing and I fear will produce an unelectable ticket.
9
@RJH You are right talking of the "foolish" attempt to mimic Trump, because Trump never used that tone.
And we know .is the tone which makes the music...
The establishment Dems don’t want to turn off Big Insurance, Big Pharma, and Big Banks. They would rather lose to the right than win with the left.
26
Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren should drop out. In the first three caucuses/primaries the best either of them has done is third. Why are they still in the race? And what is Steyer doing??
16
Much ado about nothing. They will all line up behind the eventual winner.
3
If you want to know how this play out, consider this. Where is the smear campaign from the right against Bernie Sanders? There certainly is one against Joe Biden. But Bernie has been relatively unscathed. Why is that? Because the Republicans want Bernie to win the nomination.
So far in the debates, Bernie has been barely attacked by the other candidates. If he wins, he will be the recipient of incoming from the GOP like you have never seen.
Bloomberg, on the other hand, has been attacked for stop and frisk, and workplace misogyny. Conservatives like stop and frisk. They think that is being tough on crime. Conservatives like macho male dominance in the workplace as they favor a patriarchy.
The negatives for Bloomberg on the left are positives for him on the right. Bernie has problems on the center and the center right. The GOP will attack Bloomberg for banning large sodas and attack Bernie for being a red commie socialist. Bernie loses that battle.
When a child tells mommy, I want this, this and that. Mommy says, you can have this, but not this and that because we can't afford it. Bernie wants this, this and that.
Trump has 44% under lock and key. That is almost enough to win the electoral college. Last time, 46% got him elected.
It's going to be very close no matter who the opponent is. We need the center right to defeat Trump. That the reality. We can't have this, this and that. Just the this and that's not Bernie.
10
Sorry, it’s Bernie or Bust!
2
@Bruce Rozenblit Hillary Clinton encouraged Trump's campaign in the Republican primaries, because she thought he would weaken the party and be a weak opponent in the general. How'd that work out for her?
Let the Republicans help Bernie, it won't change his policies or integrity. Besides, one of the fundamental rules of war is: never interrupt your opponent when they're making a mistake.
4
@Bruce Rozenblit read this, this, and that-
https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-does-bernie-pay-his-major-plans/
Painful, simply painful to watch nomination process play out. How in the world could the Democrats be less prepared? You have a current president who is the worst of the worst - he can hardly speak coherently and clearly can't think of anything else but himself. How can there be an easier person to defeat?
They had since 2016 to find, groom and prepare a good candidate. A man or woman that could unite a country against an insane person currently in the Whitehouse who was/is supported by a foreign power.
It is a no win situation that Mr. Sanders is even in the race for the leadership of this party. He has his supporters and his left wing ideas and should have stayed as an independent. The US will not be turned into socialist leaning country by November.
Please Democrats get it together fast. The world is watching.
8
civility needs to return to our disagreements. Now.
2
What happened to the days when candidates professed the good they were going to do and not focus on attacking rivals? There are simple questions. What are your goals and plans? How does your goals and plans help or protect the general populous? How do you envision enacting your plans? Anyway, something like that. There are many ways to address and resolving problems. Fighting amongst ourselves is not one of them. What is it going to take to get us out of this name calling and schoolyard tactics. Why do we succumb to the bully technics of Trump? Because he was successful in his approach? Shame on us. I will vote for the candidate that steps out of this obnoxious arena.
2
I find it ironic that Sanders is accusing Steyer and Bloomberg of trying to “buy the election”. At least Bloomberg is using his own money.
Sanders is also trying to buy the election with very expensive programs like Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, free college, college debt forgiveness, universal early education from birth and many more. These are great programs, but during his 60 Minutes interview, he stated that he had no idea what they’d cost, but somehow he was confident that he could pay for them. Sanders is also buying the election, but he’s using taxpayer money to pay for it.
As reported in CNN and other outlets, economists have calculated that Sander’s proposals will add $60 Trillion to $100 Trillion to the Federal budget. That would double or triple Federal spending, increasing Federal spending from 21% of the gross domestic product to 40% to 60%. That is economically unsustainable and Sanders needs to address this issue directly instead of providing vague reassurance.
8
There is big difference to buy the office by paying for your campaign and to get elected in the office because you propose programs that help all American citizens I am pretty sure Sanders would have nothing against Bloomie if he buy the election by paying his money for M4A and free education.
1
@yulia
Bloomberg gave away $767 million of his own money to charitable donations last year alone. Among other accomplishments, he's worked with the Sierra Club to close nearly half of America's coal fired power plants.
Why do Sanders' supporters give Bloomberg no credit for his astonishing philanthropy?
2
@David Because if there would be system of more equal distribution of the wealth, there would be no need for charity
Yes, indeed they are all working exceedingly hard to re-elect Donald Trump.
“My bags are packed, I’m ready to go…don’t know when I’ll be back again”.
1
Just a reminder that divisiveness is normal. They are competing against each other. Calm down folks.
12
Sadly, Trump is looking better and better.
7
The longer the moderate challengers stay in the race the easier it gets for Sanders. But all the moderates have egos that are too large for them to step aside. So Sanders will coast to the nomination.
3
@Oliver
Well, unless it ends up being brokered. Never say never, I put no faith whatsoever in the innate wisdom and decency of the Democratic Party to do the right thing.
1
@Oliver You seem blissfully unaware of the size of Bernies ego.
2
The only hope we have to overcome such divisive leadership is through collaborative leadership. The reason why so many of us feel uncertain that any one candidate can win against Trump is because, intuitively, we know that it will take a combination of all their collective strengths and weaknesses. The sooner the candidates realize this, and start talking about how they will work together to rescue the country, regardless of who ultimately is selected, the better.
3
The media are responsible for much of the divisiveness.
The world is on the brink: Climate change, income inequality, social discord, opioid addiction, attacks on the rule of law and institutions, unchecked corporate power, foreign attacks on our elections and -- probably -- an imminent viral pandemic on American soil.
And yet the media treat the Democratic primary like it's a reality television show.
No candidate is an angel. But every Democrat running is a hundred times better than the current leader. But rather than focus on having the candidates constructively and thoughtfully debate their real and legitimate policy differences, the media focuses on each candidate's flaws. Sadly, a political version of The Hunger Games makes for great entertainment.
It seems fitting that the Nevada debate was sponsored by NBC Universal, the same people who ran The Apprentice for ten years. For most of the media, the Democratic primary is just another spectacle to generate advertising dollars.
This isn't democracy anymore. It's a mutant for of entertainment capitalism cannibalizing democracy.
558
@Reality Checker The media is responsible for fanning the flames of every issue in this country from politics to racism to climate change. FOX, CNN and CNBC are hate mongers that love to stir up any and all issues. They are not news. They are bias and commentary.
51
@Reality Checker the media and congress are just a reflection of society at large. Elizabeth Warren has spent her entire campaign focused on policy which is what you want the debates to be about. When she went in the mud after Bloomberg she was rewarded with millions of donations above and beyond what she had brought in weeks before. The media is not the problem, congress isn't the problem trump isn't the problem we are the problem.
39
@John
On the other hand, Sanders has focused ONLY ON ISSUES and policies, and he's been called the divisive one. Yet he leads.
27
As long as they eventually coalesce around a nominee, I’m fine with it.
What you’re going to see from Trump and the Republicans will make this look like child’s play. And that’s been true of the Republicans since the Tea Party and “You Lie!”
I, for one, am glad that Democrats are finally waking up to the world we live in — for better or worse. It’s important to model good behavior and try corrective action but if you deny reality it’s going to slap you across the face.
And as a Sanders supporter, I welcome the lightening rod he has become for attacks and will be tonight on the debate stage. All these people saying he has serious deficiencies and can’t win a general election — let’s find out. I think you’re wrong but if you’re right I’d rather know it now. And you know what, we wouldn’t be in this mess if Democrats had employed a similar test on Hilary Clinton’s candidacy in 2016.
15
One person sums up Biden: Justice Thomas. That legacy continues to haunt us and from the reports of his charming wife and pillow talk, will continue for some time.
12
Your article has a glaring inaccuracy.
Mr. Buttigieg's campaign raised the issue of irregularities in the Nevada caucus (which by the way, news reporting yesterday evening indeed confirmed there were inaccuracies). Mayor Pete did not questions Sanders' win but stated that the margin between second and third was so close that precision and accuracy matters (shouldn't it in an American election?!). Note that Sanders questioned the Iowa caucus results as well. (As an aside, caucuses need to go as they are prone to error, are less democratic, and cumbersome).
I would expect accuracy from a NYT article, and not such mispainting of an issue.
8
@JessD Buttigieg raised the issue to try to undermine Sanders’ decisive victory. Nobody cares about a far-distant second place. Buttigieg wanted to suggest the entire thing was flawed.
1
@Tim yes, just like Trump questioned the legitimacy of the popular vote count in 2016!
1
Gee, guess Dems aren't worried anymore about damaging the nominee or disunifying the party are they. Much less giving Trump GE ammo or whatever other blather they've been screeching on about for 4yrs.
Hypocrites Unite!
If we aren't gaslighting we're lying.
Remember to vote Blue, no matter who....lol...
14
Klobuchar should drop out. I cringe at thought of her melt down--"we wish we could all be as perfect as you, Pete". She got way too personal. Her response to Buttigieg's candor was extremely unprofessional. She's polling in the single digits and she was happy coming in fifth in Nevada?
33
@That's What She Said
That's what I meant - the most important job in the world is a comparison and evaluation of one-liners. It should not be that way.
1
@That's What She Said : Buttigieg’s candor? Seriously? He attacked AK for forgetting the name of Mexico’s President and then acted as if that was the worst possible mistake a candidate could make.
He was desperately latching on to anything to diminish Klobuchar, and came across acting like a petulant child.
Maybe Pete should drop out.
4
Who knew speaking obvious truths about an economic system that has served so few and left so many behind could be so divisive, and amongst Democrats no less. This divisiveness might tell you something about the current state of the Democrat Party, which seems to be desperately clinging to its recent past of corporate friendliness and has completely forgotten what should be it’s more enduring past as the party of FDR and his reappraisal of values. That’s what’s happening today with Bernie, we’re reappraising our values as a country, and it seems some would rather simply maintain the status quo. That’s the divisiveness right there.
27
@Doug exactly correct, bravo! Here’s Bernie’s FDR plan-
https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-does-bernie-pay-his-major-plans/
4
For a year we've been watching, hearing about these Democrats in their endless debates which were boring enough that TV ratings diminished over time. Of their once 25 candidates, most were wholly unqualified to become president, yet there they were with their devoted following. So now they are fighting one another. In both of their caucuses we learn that they can't add correctly. Yet this is the way we choose a president. If this melodrama appeals to us, we should not complain about the result we get.
7
Democrats are utterly determined to give The Chosen One many more years to ruin the country. They sure have proven that they lack leadership skills as well as an agenda of value to The People. I see no reason to vote. It's hopeless.
5
I am not American, but like many others around the world I am deeply worried about what would happen to the world's major power if Trump gets re-elected. The majority of Americans that feel the same are not alone.
it is increasingly likely that Sanders will win the Democratic nomination. If, if not when, he does, you all need to form up around him. Whatever worries you might have, he is far, far better than Trump. Trump is the truly, and dangerously, radical alternative.
15
People are overwrought or cynically smug about early primary showings. If one looks at the win and loss columns of the 2016 primaries, it's clear that Bernie Sanders is, despite what divisive journalists or self-important pundits write, by no means in the clear for the nomination at this point
5
@K. Norris he’s won the popular vote in each of the first three states. That’s a clear front runner. I’m not saying he’s already won the thing, but to say otherwise is incorrect.
1
@K. Norris I agree, if you take the first 3 primaries as a representative statistical sampling of the whole country, like all of the polls conducted constantly by legitimate polling organizations, Bernie has already won the nomination.
The NYT and its op-ed writers blame Trump for the dog-eat-dog campaigns of the Democratic candidates. Nonsense. Most of the candidates have been talking about their programs for months to no avail. They, and the party, are getting desperate. When a candidate gets desperate and needs a sound bite to wake possible voters, they quite often go for the jugular.
As the old saying goes: You ain't seen nothing yet. (Particularly if Bernie remains the front runner.)
7
The split in his movement over Israel and Palestine will undermine Bernie Sanders more than anything rival strategists could dream up for tonight's debate. And if that is what happens, Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear will be thrilled that we are doing their work for them. All those dropping the gloves and going negative had better be careful what they wish for.
3
@Mark Lebow I look forward to the “pragmatists” upcoming attempts to label the first serious Jewish candidate (in recent memory, at least) as an anti-Semite.
5
@Mark Lebow You are probably right. Any mention of Israel's suppression of Palestinian human rights in the 20th century's last colonial project where European Jews attempted to carve out an Arab-free state in the heart of the Arab world is bound to disturb both fundamentalist Christian zionists and traditional zionist community.
1
The Dems had a perfect opportunity to show that they are the party of unity, intelligence, and compassion. They are squandering that opportunity with their infighting and unprofessionalism. Good luck beating Trump and his disciples with that approach. Trump is smiling ear to ear and enjoying the Dem meltdown.
5
Democrats are in grave danger of missing the bus. There is one issue this year, and it isn't climate change, or healthcare or income inequality, vital as all of those are. The only issue this year is getting Donald Trump and his corrupt cronies out of office.
Any Democrat will improve health insurance and healthcare for Americans; Donald Trump will make them worse. Any Democrat will take steps to fight climate change; Donald Trump will aid and abet it. Any Democrat will work to reduce economic inequality; Donald Trump will exacerbate it. The question of which candidate is best poised to defeat Donald Trump is not just the most important issue for Democrats, it is the only issue.
14
@JJM So, if Bernie wins all the primaries, will you still be saying "Vote Blue No Matter Who"?
1
We should not be surprised that the candidates are turning on each other. The NYT suggests that it is Trump’s fault. So is the sun rising in the east. In reality we should expect this to happen. This is the most ideologically, diametrically opposed field of candidates in my lifetime. The positions have hardened, purity tests are defined, there is no room for compromise. Primaries is not a team sport. It is the winner takes all and the candidates will establish new lows. Just watch.
2
Whether or not Sanders is too far to the left, he will certainly be portrayed as such by the Republican fear machine and he will lose in PA, Oh, Mich, Wisc,Fl and Iowa resulting in a Democratic defeat by the ghosted GOP and we will all be haunted by Donald Trump for another four years (at least).
4
@Mr. Buck How I wish Sanders supporters understood this. Bernie has not expanded his support as another NYT article explains. The GOP fights dirty and they are going to destroy Bernie.
4
@Mr. Buck manufacturing jobs continue to disappear. Let’s hope they wake up and see that Trump doesn’t care.
2
Actually, I am not convinced by the analysis. First of all, caucuses are pretty close, but even primaries are viewed as mostly Party affairs. So, if Bernie expend his support among independent they may not show up for primaries because they don't feel like they belong to the Party. Secondary, why the analysis didn't ask for whom the first timers voted? It will be more direct way to see how many new voters Bernie would bring.
2
That is disengenuous to say Sanders "praised". He said it wasn't all bad. That is hardly praise. This Democratic Party needs to coalesce and dissent baiting by media hardly helps.
55
Sanders will not win again Trump. He’s the Democratic Trump. I am voting Bloomberg.
Sanders Guns nope, the country has had enough.
9
I’m a 67 years old, and I am sick of hearing the ancient carping of aggrieved Cuban Americans who represent only 3.5 % of the Hispanic population here, yet garner 50% of the media attention in our country. As a side note, I went to grade school for a while, w a displaced Cuban exile kid that lived w a neighbor. We were great friends. I assumed that he was poor. One day, we were playing pool and he ran the table & destroyed all of us playing w him. He grinned afterwards, and said that his parents had a full Brunswick table in their parlor. I learned later that his family had been landed gentry in Havana.
Castro was a dictator and thug, however, many of those “ poor “ Cuban exiles, were the 1%, in bed, in a rigged system, w the fascist Batista & propped up by US corporate interests & the mafia, & the CIA. And they have nurtured a 60 year grudge over the loss of their status & property during la revolucion cubana.
133
Bernie - “And he could have achieved full literacy without being a dictator, certainly.” Part 2 to your Fidel answer.
15
@CanadianAlly Kinda the way the US can achieve Medicare for All, free college and a fair taxation system without being socialist...
2
Yeah, Elizabeth Warren attacked Bloomberg — she was totally on point to do so. But when she announced in a Seattle rally that Bernie had one Nevada, her supporters cheered him uproariously. There’s unity to be had among Democrats. It’s behind big, structural change.
221
“Won” — sorry!
10
@Avi Glickstein
Likewise, after Warren's debate performance many Sanders supporters were cheering for Warren.
It is possible, by focusing on policies and issues, for democrats to unite.
21
@Avi Glickstein
yes, the transcription app makes a lot of mistakes when one is dictating texts.
1
Buttigieg calls Sanders someone who “believes in an inflexible, ideological revolution that leaves out most Democrats, not to mention most Americans.” Far from that, Sanders is tapping into an inter-generational and multi-ethnic discontent with rising inequality, which is exemplified by people’s stagnant wages, diminished upward mobility for the next generation and ridiculously high costs for higher education. If Sanders wins the majority of delegates (and hopefully the Democratic nomination) he should start painting Trump with the same brush and referring to him relentlessly as a “dangerous revolutionary”, pursuing an inflexible, ideological revolution that leaves out most Republicans, not to mention most Americans.
252
@Another NYC woman Many of us agree with Buttigieg about Sanders. How about Sanders taking some constructive criticism for a change and try connecting with moderate Dems instead of treating us like we're the enemy?
66
@Jolton I have watched all the debates. I see no indication that Sanders is treating moderates like the enemy. Just because Buttigieg says it, doesn't make it so. Buttigieg has been petty and very critical of all the candidates from the get go but sure can't take it himself. Please some examples as to how Sanders is treating moderates like the enemy. I am not a Sanders supporter by the way
35
@Another NYC woman , you can count on the Democratic National Convention going to a second ballot. Then the 764 "Super Delegates" will step in to vote for the next strongest candidate to put him/her over the top. Sanders must not be the nominee or Trump not only gets another term, but a GOP Senate and House as well.
12
The candidates need to be careful with their rhetoric. If Bernie becomes the nominee--which is increasingly likely--it is going to be a hard shift to say "I'm with Bernie" after spending so much time claiming he is dangerous and can't be trusted.
254
@Jon
Or maybe you can be an independent thinker and not just blindly support whoever wear's your team's jersey.
It's entirely possible to say that someone is a terrible candidate but they are less terrible than the alternative.
18
@ML Yes, but this is America where nearly everyone is ruled by their televisions, facebook and their emotions.
2
@Jon I disagree. Vet him. Throw everything you’ve got at him. 1) it makes it old news when the Republicans do it later; 2) if he truly can’t stand up to scrutiny let’s find out now. And I say this as a sanders supporter.
31
“...there are many examples of Democratic rivals turning negative in past primary races...In 2016, Mrs. Clinton accused Mr. Sanders of smearing her for receiving donations from rich people.”
In this era of outrageous income inequality, pointing out that a candidate is backed by the largesse of the wealthy is not a “smear”, and is not “turning negative”. It is a relevant fact that should be crucial to one’s electoral decision making.
88
Thank you for pointing this out. I found this sentence to be outrageous in how far it reached to attempt to deliver a point.
7
@Ed Watters Hillary was playing by the rules as they stood at the time. Additionally, she supported down ticket candidates. Bernie accused her of being patently dishonest. There's a big difference. And he was the one who turned negative - not her. She was correct. He ran a smear campaign.
1
The media are the ones trying to drive division in the Democrat party. In 2018, the Democrats elected the most diverse Congress in history, in one of the most overwhelming victory margins in US history.
The media is trying to turn Democrats against one another because stories that talk about how everything is okay don’t get clicks and ad revenue. So they’re creating wedges and cracks because they need “drama” to make money.
59
@Austin Ouellette
There is no Democrat party. The party I think you are referring to is the Democratic Party. The term "Democrat party" is a Republican slur that has been used for generations--as if my party is not due the respect of learning its name. Sadly, the slur has passed into common enough usage that even some otherwise responsible reporters and news organizations use it. Still, we should resist it, to encourage civilized debate if nothing else.
6
@JJM
If you’re a member of the Democratic Party, you are a Democrat. I don’t think the use of the word Democrat to refer to the party itself is a slur, even if it started that way.
Besides, I think there’s more pressing matters at hand than a missing suffix, like, literally saving the Republic from authoritarianism.
3
@Austin Ouellette Blaming the media is a trump tactic. Would you prefer NO media? Sanders supporters don’t think there should be any article that doesn’t praise their dear leader. Another trump tactic. Stop.
2
Please! Do not turn this into the vindictive cruel show of the last debate!
We need votes for the sane! Not a crazy shouting match that only gives the opponents, especially Donald Trump, pleasure.
The goal should be - who can plea his or her case with the most civility? That’s one thing we’ll be watching for.
After all, if the president is a global figure, we need someone kinder, saner, smarter, more civil, more concrete than the likes of what we have right now in our White House.
Shine the Dem light - not make it dim.
(Bernie - stop shaking your fists, please. Tame it down, man)
37
@MIMA My focus is on the Democrat turnout and races in the states for local and Congressional elections. No matter who wins the WH in 2020, let's make sure they have a solid Dem majority as a check and balance. The behavior of the presidential runners is just backbiting and back stabbing a la trump. I feel let down, angry and disgusted especially after the stellar work we did in 2018 to get out the vote and bring home a historical win. Heads up, DNC, you need be changed.
1
@mima The last debate was a joke. I have never seen anything so ridiculous. So poorly run, candidates waving their hands like little kids in a classroom. Yelling, screaming, name calling, close to tears, arm flapping.
The only one with the keep calm was Bloomberg, even under pressure he didn’t lose it. I can’t say that for anyone else.
10
@MIMA
Vindictive cruel show?
The last debate was filled with substantial information and it is the job of candidates to talk about policy differences.
I'm not looking for civility, I am looking for the candidate who can motivate the highest number of voters to beat Trump. Right now that candidate is the one who shakes his fist when he speaks passionately about the issues.
3
I think we (Democrats) will be fine if we can find our way to nominating a progressive capitalist.
3
Trump is uniting the Republican Party. Sanders is dividing the Democratic Party. What does that say for the chances that the Democrats will win the White House?
34
@Barb Campbell
Sanders has a 75% approval among Democratic voters. More then any other candidate. The main division in the party is between new progressive left wing activists and the old establishment guard that thrives in "money in politics" current system that the left threatens to destroy.
42
@Barb Campbell How dare Bernie mount a primary campaign, right??
4
@Robert. Don't say we aren't trying to warn you.
“Bernie Sanders has so far prevailed by expanding his appeal among traditional Democratic voters, not by driving record turnout.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/24/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democratic-voters.html
3
Moderate just don't get it. So what if lower income and median income have risen, the spectacular wealth of the American oligarch has soared. Progressives are willing to make the sacrifice of having their own incomes move down, even by a third or more, so as to not have to live day to day knowing that people like Blumberg have $56 BILLION !! Progressives believe that we should all be willing to give up a major portion of our income and stock market wealth (to the extent there is any) so that no man has materially more financial resources than any other man. All citizens poorer, but all citizens equal, and no more wealth envy polluting Progressive minds, which will sleep much better as a result.
3
@drcmd it does sound like a beautiful dream, but how do you propose to achieve it?
Let’s say two musicians write, sing and perform songs. Many people are willing to pay $X to hear one of the musicians; fewer people are willing to pay $X to hear the other. Should the total amount raised from ticket sales from the two concerts (minus venue and publicity costs) be divided equally between the two musicians and their teams and the venue staff? Or should the musician who had the larger audience manage the proceeds from her ticket sales (keeping some for herself and paying her manager, back-up singers and venue staff their agreed amounts) and the less popular musician manage the proceeds from her ticket sales. If the more popular musician keeps her net proceeds, should she then be taxed so that her after tax income is equal to that of the less popular musician?
Even if we could magically wipe the slate clean so that no one has materially greater financial assets than anyone else, that situation of “equality” would only last if you prohibit individuals from making choices as to how they spend their resources. If, as in the example above, people are free to make choices about how to allocate their resources between various possible forms of entertainment (or food or consumer goods, etc) the producers of the products and services people prefer to buy will eventually have a greater share of financial assets.
1
@drcmd poverty and equality for all is just not a winning argument. Soclialism and Centralized Government Control simply have not worked wherever they have been tried on this large a scale. It’s a sure fire loser.
2
@drcmd
All needed changes. But there aren’t enough Progressives to vote Trump out. Some progressives are in an echo chamber who believe everyone thinks this way, and that fair distribution of wealth is a good thing. But the Republicans have brainwashed their lot into believing the rich are job creators, and maybe someday you’ll be rich, too. It will require gradual changes to implement these goals: wealth equality, universal healthcare, fair immigration policies, reasonable college costs, etc, as we bring the brainwashed on board.
Electing Bernie won’t cause it to happen immediately. Not electing Bernie-almost a certainty-will leave Trump alone to run rampant over all of us, even his supporters who aren’t smart enough to understand it, and this huge setback will require decades to overcome.
We must get rid of Trump first, then begin to recover and move forward.
The candidates are in the final laps of the race. Tensions are high, so much is at stake for the campaigns over the next two weeks, Super Tuesday is at hand.
Understandable to me, as they say, "politics is a contact sport".
3
“ On Sunday night, Mr. Sanders praised Fidel Castro for Cuba’s literacy program on “60 Minutes.” ” As written, this is a distortion. Sanders condemned the brutal aspects of Castro’s regime, but said that Castro did some good things—which is absolutely true. Why is it forbidden to tell the truth about Cuba just because the older exiles in Miami, who apparently benefited from the racist dictatorship that Castro overthrew, prefer to avert their eyes from Castro’s easing of racial discrimination and his effort to educate the poor? While the USA was supporting a brutal, apartheid South Africa-backed insurgency in Angola, Cuba sent troops to fight that insurgency. One of Castro’s exports to poor countries was doctors. Sure Castro was a brutal, freedom-quashing dictator. But many such people were invited to the White House and treated as America’s good friends throughout the Cold War and to this day. Saudi Arabia’s reactionary brand of Islam has helped spread terrorism, and contributed to the 9/11 attacks, but the brutal MBS is almost like a surrogate son to Trump. So all those tearing hair over Bernie’s Castro remark, give me a break.
208
@Mike
If you dig through the record, you can find "good" things that just about any leader has done. It's just that most people have the decency and discretion to not search for something good to say about Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, or Stalin.
Please tell me some more great things about a person who rounded up gays and sent them to forced labor camps for being "counter-revolutionary." Need a source?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cuba-castro/fidel-castro-takes-blame-for-1960s-gay-persecution-idUSTRE67U4JE20100831
10
@Mike as a Cuban American I can’t agree more, well said.
18
@Mike Nobody mentions that the Cuban exiles were extreme right wingers. The Castro regime was wrong but that doesn’t mean we look to this rather tiny and unrepresentative slice of one state for all things Latin America.
22
Twitter truly is the gutter of the world. I wish politicians would rise above it.
87
I could not agree more. Twitter needs to change its symbol from songbird to vulture.
2
It's the media and the New York Times who sew rancor and distrust. You have been publishing negative articles about the front runner since the beginning. The call for unity has been revealed as the hollow promise it was, it seems that unity is only applicable when the candidate is a centrist who will change nothing and maintain the status quo. Thanks a lot
90
@Joe Do you not understand how government works? You have to get a majority of voters to elect members of the House and the Senate, plus the President. Then you have to get a majority of the Congress to pass legislation and send it to the president. Your comment (i.e., complaining about a centrist who will change nothing and maintain the status quo) assumes that the President operates with impunity and Congress (and the voters who select them) have no role.
If you want change, you need to convince a majority of voters to vote for the same type of change, elect members of Congress and a president who agree with that change. Electing Bernie Sanders as President accomplishes NOTHING if Republicans maintain control of the Senate.
So what are you doing to make certain that Democrats pick up at net 5 Senate seats and hole their House majority? Also what are you doing to ensure that state legislatures shift to Democratic control so that when redistricting is done in the coming year, the Congressional districts aren't gerrymandered to give Republicans a disproportionate number of seats that favor a Republican.
2
@SanDiego
I have a healthy dose of cynicism but the idea that "nothing gets done" with a divided government is old news. I'm also not a fan of full control, as that seems to generate more backlash down the road than actual sustained change.
You have to remember that everything in Congress is supposed to be debated. I know with the full control argument you don't need the other side's support, but really you don't even need their opinions, buy-in, or thoughts at all. It's not great government. A better way is to have a starting point and move towards each other. If you start in the middle, where else can you go but right of center? If you start on the left, you can still move center without capitulating. So when people say the left is unwilling to compromise I disagree - they are the ones actually in a position to compromise (which requires changing your position) while also moving the needle forward.
5
The primaries have to be tough in order to deal with the thug-in-Chief Bloomberg is equally bad news on so many levels that hopefully he’ll be ran out of the Democratic Party. He’s really Sheldon Adelson slightly lighter. Sanders’ health issues and politics are a big obstacle as well. Mysoginists and anti regulation people are afraid of Senator Warren, the only truly honest and smart enough to have a fulsome platform.
7
Sigh. Thanks (sarcastically) NYT for writing a summary of what we have all seen playing out (if one pays attention to the news). With the lead word, "Divisiveness..." This is little more than the equivalent of an office water-bubbler conversation: the reporter makes a few phone calls, gathers some quotes, and writes what is essentially a conversation about the conversation, in other words, a form of gossip. Or rather, clickbait.
38
Anyone remember Hillary Clinton’s “3 AM” ad? Literally saying you can’t trust Obama to keep your children safe. It’s an election. Candidates campaign to win. Relax.
26
@Telegram Sam
Exactly.
Republicans brutally attack each other in primaries then come together after. They only hold grudges against Democrats.
It’s clear that Bernie can’t win against Trump. Why is he getting support from Democrats? Because there is no viable alternative yet. Why on earth would you propose a loser as your candidate? Wake up America.
11
@MaccaUS All objective data says you’re wrong. Bernie wins in poll after poll after poll, and in the actual elections too! Why do you reject that?
4
@MaccaUS
Base on what? The polling data shows him the strongest against Trump. I have a strong feeling that this is just personal bias. And the people saying Sanders can't win are the ones that where saying Clinton can't lose. Welcome to new reality where old wisdoms don't apply any longer.
6
'On Saturday night, after Mr. de Blasio, a surrogate for Mr. Sanders, tweeted at Mr. Buttigieg, saying “Dude, show some humility,” Mr. Lockhart immediately replied to the New York mayor, “Who cares what you think?”'
The worst Mayor of NYC in my lifetime lecturing anyone is "mind blowing". If only he had stayed on the campaign trail. We, the citizens of NY would not have to deal with his petty arrogant attitude.
7
Far, far better to get in the mud and show that the Party can deal with the darker parts of democratic elections, than just have a quiet tea time of an election, and not show the electorate that Democrats have dropped their fear of fighting.
For when the face Trump, it will be as dirty, and as mean, as a family fight over grandpa's will.
Hugh
17
So if Democrats fight and engage in name calling, it’s still Trump at fault.
13
It sure is a reality tv show. In addition to the media carnival ginning up the rancor, the DNC is determined to safeguard its privileges and access to the powerful interlocking elites who currently rule the country. Ergo: multiple influences pressing for the mud wrestling spectacle we see in the debates.
7
I am supporting Warren, but I do not want to see any of potential nominees to be smeared, or branded with false labels. Attacks without substance, like the “considered” primary challenge to Obama, will only hurt the attacker. Do we have a fealty test now?! Isn’t this a bit too Trumpian?
We need to win in November. We need whoever emerges the winner after Super Tuesday to be strong. Tested but not smeared or caricatured. There is a strong chance it will be Sanders.
You guys in the media contributed greatly toward electing Trump. Please find the decency to report objectively and in a balanced manner. Sanders is immeasurably better than Trump. Concentrate on that.
60
WaPo can't manage nuance when it comes to Sanders. What Sanders said was that while Cuba is an authoritarian regime, and he does not support authoritarian regimes, they had a major literacy program that worked for the people. Could have also mentioned they have universal health care. Clutch your pearls if you must but show even handedness.
92
If Cuba has such great universal healthcare, why have Cubans fled by the hundreds of the thousands in boats? Is that the healthcare Sanders intends to bring to the US?
8
@CJT Universal healthcare - where you have to bribe the doctors, bring your own sheets and food, procure your own medicine. I lived for many years in former communist countries and have experienced universal "healthcare". No thanks.
3
@CJT
Because healthcare is just of many things that determine if people want to live somewhere. You can have good healthcare and bad economy for example. It's not that complicated to understand.
6
Rather than suggesting sound policy, or debating the actual policies, the "debate" was a gameshow with 90 second tirades and attacks. Attacks, mud slinging, mud raking, and undermining. These are the good guys?
Do you want a President who is the best debater?
Or, a President with clarity of thought, ethics, intelligence, a history of success, and competence? To me, Bloomberg is the clear choice, but I respect others' views.
Attacking other candidates emotionally, rather than civilly debating policy, is a disturbing trend.
Similarly, we've dehumanized Trump and Trump supporters for way too long. OK, we have different views and different policies.
My wish is that the country return to civil discourse and mutual respect.
15
The Dems have to stop this circular firing squad and focus on the main issue which is a referendum on Trump's performance in the White House and how they will fix the damage to our country. The Republicans will vote for Trump and the Democrats won't. The key is the non-aligned voters who usually determine these elections. Unfortunately, they are currently being bombarded with negative comments against each other by the Democratic candidates and in the end will take those thoughts to the ballot box. Just think of Hillary Clinton in 2016.
6
Can Dems learn from 2016? GOP leadership & donors did NOT like Trump. But after he won the nomination they jumped in line behind him. Now Dems prophesize doom if Bernie wins the nomination. Will they become so stuck in their own specious arguments to make them self-fulling?
7
@AmendNow they will run attack ads “to vet him” and publicly wring their hands about his electability until they have in fact made him unelectable. And then claim they were right all along when this trails him to the general.
6
And this my friends I why I just voted for Pete BOOT EDGE EDGE on my mail-in ballot last night for California’s March 3rd Primary. Pete has the smarts, guts and steel to aggressively push back against not only Bernie Sanders, but also Donald Trump. Bernie Sanders is not an option for me. I shudder at the thought.
9
Pete’s a republican. Done and done. After SC and Super Tuesday he won’t be relevant. He’s a white man’s candidate for white states. Couldn’t even handle one race issue as mayor. He’s a robot. Bye Pete!!!!
8
@Jet Phillips Pete's just a kid who's never even won statewide office. He also has the support of dozens of billionaires backing his campaign. Too inexperienced, too arrogant, too eager to tow the line for the wealthiest people... Sanders is the superior choice.
5
What matters is beating Trump. I suspect there are a good number of Democrats who, like me, could care less which of the contenders is the next president. The contenders, it appears, have not got the message that, individually, personally, they do not really matter.
7
Disregarding ite Democratic infighting, the Chairman of the Aiken, County S.C. Republican Party (and I am sure other county chairs) publicly came out today pushing S.C. Republicans to vote in the Democratic primary, to select "the weakest candidate." Knowing what i do about S.C. voters they will do so in large numbers to create chaos. Therefore we must take the results with a grain, or perhaps a full shaker, of salt
6
@GSS
I wouldn't count on too many people wasting their time. It sounds good, but then they have to actually take the time and effort to do it. If we ever get to a point where voting is as easy as checking your email, then we may have to worry more about the "sabotage" vote.
1
It is time that the moderates step aside and let the progressives have their turn. The general population, including some on the right, are tired of the same old and want real change. This has been the case for the last many election cycles and the time is now given the hoax that our current leader has proven to be.
People don’t want to work their whole lives and save the little they can through sacrifice just to become prey to the Medical Industrial Complex when they become ill. It is clearly time for national healthcare of some sort.
201
@ACD
But then they lose the support of all their corporate donors, Washington bureaucrats, and “the intelligence community” who will never let the progressives win. Look for more leaks about “Russians” helping Bernie Sanders.
13
@ACD
The elderly have medicare. Not saying that is perfect but we have a working solution to the imaginary problem you presented.
10
@ACD In a democracy, you have to "win" your turn. Sanders needs to connect with moderates and his supporters need to stop vilifying everyone who doesn't agree with them. Toning down the cultish Messianic talk would also help.
32
About half of American households invest in the stock market, the highest ever. Sanders must explain the details of his "speculation tax" which will impact tens of millions of Americans who are not billionaires or millionaires. Who pays, how much, what is "speculation"?
43
I agree the details should be explained. But, isn’t there a difference between investments and speculation?
9
@Judy Agreed. All forms of retirement savings, including pensions, include stock market exposure. It is grossly unfair to level taxes on the millions of us who don't have access to tax-dodges like the rich do. I am tired of being treated like I'm some kind of "elite" when I'm just a middle-class person doing the right things for myself and my family.
20
@Judy Here’s how Sanders pays for each of his proposals spelled out- https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-does-bernie-pay-his-major-plans/
The tax is a fraction of a percent on trades. The specific amounts depending on stocks, bonds or derivatives are different. You can find that info by drilling down on the link above.
13
I have a problem with both the moderates and progressives. The moderates can't remember how Obama won on the promise of hope and change and don't recognize that Trump won with the same promise, although it was a charade. The progressives seem to have forgotten that their plans require the buy in of moderates and they seem to fear that the moderate populace won't understand that the big problems we face require big solutions. If these attitudes had been prevalent in the 1940's and 1950's we'd all be suffering under either communist or nazi governments.
We proved in the 1040's that democracy was capable of handling big problems. Big business and labor came together to defeat the Nazis. We proved it again in the 1950's when we held communism at bay and built the United States into the dynamo that saved Western Europe from communism.
We can do it again as long as we understand that we're all in this together. The continued sniping between progressives and moderates over the edges of their various platforms prevents this. What we'll be left with if this continues is the charade of Trump and his loyalists in the GOP not to mention a country whose claim to fame is on the verge of collapse.
We are truly at a watershed moment in our history. To survive it will require the kind of unity we haven't had in 60 years.
29
Lets face it, the divisiveness is in part being fueled and reveled in by this very newspaper! I counted at least three articles published yesterday evening, all of them visibly featured, that were critical of one and only one candidate... Bernie Sanders. I do not think he is above criticism, trust me. But it continues to appear that there is something particularly disagreeable about Sanders to this newspaper. And the exact same thing was going on in 2016... Until the NY Times can approach his front runner status with an unbiased view, and let go of the impulse or edicts to tamper with the narrative... I personally am going to continue enraged and disappointed about it. You may call that divisiveness, but it’s crafted in these pages.
355
The NYT also consistently published negative articles about Trump in 2016.
That all but assured his victory.
Basically, whoever the NYT attacks will win, so Bernie is in good shape.
14
@F. Jozef K. Every candidate who is a serious contender for the presidency gets scrutinized by the New York Times, and every other leading news outlets. It is simply the nature of elections. And the better that a candidate is doing, the more that reporters are going to be digging. That's their job, and as a serious reader of news, and a voter who wants to be informed, I say more power to them. To say that all this venom is just directed at Sanders alone is simply not true. Just look at what Hillary Clinton had to endure for years and years, on the news pages and in opinion columns. Sanders is currently leading the pack. It really doesn't help his cause for him and his supporters to complain everytime someone writes something less than laudatory.
11
@F. Jozef K. And last week it was Bloomberg.
3
This piece sure does ring hollow, considering that outlets like the Times actively create the conditions that lead to the melodrama in the first place. If a candidate refused to fight in a campaign, you’d run pieces saying “they appear weak to voters”. Once they start talking tough, you say “why the lack of civility??”
304
The Democrats are doomed. Whoever survives the primaries has no chance against Trump.
10
Except Michael Bloomberg.
Why he couldn't answer the shrill criticisms lobbed by the other candidates during the debate is a mystery. Lots of reasonable answers:
"I am not a racist. I've created hundreds of thousands of jobs for Black men through job-training programs and other initiatives. As for 'stop and frisk,' while the implementation might have been wrong, my main thought was that for every gun seized, there'd be one less shooting of a Black man. Or as too often the case, a Black child caught in crossfire."
"It is no sin to be rich if you made the money yourself and use it to benefit society. My money has been directed to medical research, colleges, cultural institutions, the environment, gun control, family planning, and defeating this new, radically conservative GOP, to name just a few. My daughters are already taken care of; the bulk of my money will be given to various institutions and initiatives when I'm gone."
Just the facts, Mr. Bloomberg, just the facts. They'll suffice.
8
I am unsure at this point about Bernie, but I do know he has to stop saying nice things about Castro, Irtega, etc. Their socialist experiments have ended with repression of the people they purport to help.
54
@JDW113 Sorry - "Ortega"
1
US embargo repressed people more so.
10
@JDW113 Getting to know a little bit of history might make you appreciate Bernie's answer to questions about Castro. People conveniently forget the US-backed dicatator he overthrew, Batista. More troubling are the simplistic answers from Buttegeig and Biden, who need to be reminded that a dictator like Castro is partly the result of US reaction to Castro. What choices did we give him. I'd rather vote for the guy who understands it's not black and white than the ones who'll say anything to be elected.
Why not concentrate on our own dictator, Trump?
34
Before Bernie Sanders ever gets to lose this election to Tsrump, if he would, big IF, the Democratic candidates' behavior will do that very well. It's shameful.
12
This is what (we) Democrats do. This is simply the latest iteration of the process. This bunch believes that they can hurl charges, insults,etc. at each other and everything will be forgiven and forgotten. It won’t be...it never is. If all of the wrangling were over political philosophy and how to govern, that would be just fine.
But, it gets personal...they take a page from Trump’s playbook, they get consumed by their own selfishness and their own egos.
No wonder that so many people in the country don’t bother to vote. Oh, I’ll vote...but grudgingly.
15
@Patrick alexander much like the vast majority of Sanders supporters who voted for Hillary in 16. Yes, I know people like to blame sanders supporters for her shortfall but in fact more Hillary primary voters in 08 turned and voted for McCain than Sanders supporters who turned and voted for Stein / Trump.
2