Sanders Supporters Use Russian Facebook Tactics to Divide Dems

[Elegiac]

A white person saying Uncle Tom is not racist.

It is, actually, since you as a white person are in no way qualified to say "who is black", which is the entire premise of the term.

It's also why goyim should stop trying to lecture others about "who is a jew", or why hets should stay in their lane with the "is it gay" nonsense. You are still fundamentally erasing the agency of those groups by denying them the right to define themselves.

And this, dear readers, is a perfect example of brocialism in action. Social justice is not an end in of itself, it's a cudgel that they use to bully others with.

[Skroe]

No,
The Bernie set really hates every Dem.
“Warren is a snake."
"Kamala is a cop."
"Biden is a republican."
"Pete is a CIA agent."
"Bloomberg is an oligarch.”
Anyone think that if Obama was running, he’d be a Kenyan?

Again, quotes from from his senior campaign staff and most visible supporters.

You think Warren or anyone else wants to be in an administration with these people?

IF Bernie is serious about Unity, or serious about actually governing, he should start by firing all his bomb throwers.

He won’t. I mean, he can’t. His so-called political revolution looks quite a bit more like your average meh campaign that polls around 20%.

To put it plainly, you’re not inciting a political revolution when you at best tie in Iowa, lol.

He got people in his base so rilled up they’ve became yet another cult of personality. Getting them to calm down would mean they would start to ask tough questions about the Sanders campaign. Questions Sanders would rather. Or answer.

This is typical of hard left political campaign. Pointing criticism outward is motivating for the movement and a defense mechanism against internal dissident.

The best thing Democrat’s can do once Bernie loses again and blacklist anyone who worked on his campaign for a decade or more. They can’t allow his shit to become normalized.

[Vash The Stampede]

No,
The Bernie set really hates every Dem.
“Warren is a snake."
"Kamala is a cop."
"Biden is a republican."
"Pete is a CIA agent."
"Bloomberg is an oligarch.”
Anyone think that if Obama was running, he’d be a Kenyan?

Again, quotes from from his senior campaign staff and most visible supporters.

You think Warren or anyone else wants to be in an administration with these people?

IF Bernie is serious about Unity, or serious about actually governing, he should start by firing all his bomb throwers.

I just Google'd and yea there are some Bernie supporters who really hate Warren. I'm honestly shocked considering how close their policies are. I tried Googling if those are from Bernie's senior campaign staff and I can't find any info.

So yeah, they'll hate Warren, why not?

Because Warren and Sanders policies are nearly identical? I wouldn't care which of these two would win, as long as one of them wins. Warren seems slightly relaxed in her policies compared to Bernie, but still a vast difference from other Democrats and Republicans.

As I've said before, however, anyone actually interested in affecting change in these United States would very much realize that removing Trump from the white house is the single most important facet in doing so. Removing Trump from the white house after a single failed term serves as a condemnation of him and the republican party as a whole, places Trump under the full scrutiny of legal justice, prevents him from installing further judges, and removes his ability to harm the nation both on a national and international scale.

Personally I don't think Trump has a chance if the Democrat party is united, which it currently isn't. Trump is so idiotic that I wouldn't worry about "if" we can replace it, but I wouldn't want something as bad or worse to take his place. Hillary to me would have been as bad or worse.

Anyone "okay" with Trump being able to continue his systematic destruction of the American legal, judicial and executive branches because "the candidate the democratic party picked wasn't Bernie" is an absolute fucking idiot.

Not really. If we had Hillary we would have to have 8 years of her corporate bought center left ass running the show, which could have pushed us into a war with Russia. Four years later not only we have Bernie but Warren as well, and both are very popular. I claim that Trump served a purpose four years ago, and that's to teach voters that you should have voted for Bernie. Trump would have been responsible for Bernie becoming president or someone like Bernie, which we now know is Warren. That was a prediction I made back in 2016. Trump would also be responsible for the death of the Republican party. Do Republicans think that by voting to not impeach Trump that it won't have dire consequences?

If we don't get Bernie or Elizabeth Warren then I personally won't vote during these elections. I'm not voting for Pete Buttigieg or Joe Biden, as I see them learning too far to the right to justify putting them in office. I would rather let Trump win for another 4 years, just to teach another lesson to the Democrat party. Trump would destroy the country in those four years, but sometimes we need things to break all the way before anything can actually be fixed.

[Skroe]

I just Google'd and yea there are some Bernie supporters who really hate Warren. I'm honestly shocked considering how close their policies are. I tried Googling if those are from Bernie's senior campaign staff and I can't find any info.


Because Warren and Sanders policies are nearly identical? I wouldn't care which of these two would win, as long as one of them wins. Warren seems slightly relaxed in her policies compared to Bernie, but still a vast difference from other Democrats and Republicans.


Personally I don't think Trump has a chance if the Democrat party is united, which it currently isn't. Trump is so idiotic that I wouldn't worry about "if" we can replace it, but I wouldn't want something as bad or worse to take his place. Hillary to me would have been as bad or worse.

Not really. If we had Hillary we would have to have 8 years of her corporate bought center left ass running the show, which could have pushed us into a war with Russia. Four years later not only we have Bernie but Warren as well, and both are very popular. I claim that Trump served a purpose four years ago, and that's to teach voters that you should have voted for Bernie. Trump would have been responsible for Bernie becoming president or someone like Bernie, which we now know is Warren. That was a prediction I made back in 2016. Trump would also be responsible for the death of the Republican party. Do Republicans think that by voting to not impeach Trump that it won't have dire consequences?

If we don't get Bernie or Elizabeth Warren then I personally won't vote during these elections. I'm not voting for Pete Buttigieg or Joe Biden, as I see them learning too far to the right to justify putting them in office. I would rather let Trump win for another 4 years, just to teach another lesson to the Democrat party. Trump would destroy the country in those four years, but sometimes we need things to break all the way before anything can actually be fixed.

I’m in awe of your extraordinary moral cowardice.

The only non- Trumphadis who are willing to see another 4 more years of Trump under any circumstances are people with no responsibilities and / or nothing to lose.

Personally I’d like my 4 day old nephew who means litterally the world to me to grow up in a liberal democracy, not what we we are on the verge of becoming, least of all because progressives are all mad that their guy or girl won’t be chosen.

So I’ll say it again as a conservative who will vote even for Bernie ducking Sanders to stop trump: I am in awe of your extraordinary moral cowardice.

[Sorshen]

https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1225979380939313153

Maybe cause Warren is fond of lying every now and then.

[Sorshen]

Lyin' Liz can't stop lying. I wonder how much money Wall Street had to pay her to tweet out that lie.

Careful now, that's an egregious hateful attack on a woman, as per Slacker76 and CNN.

[Skroe]

I hate to tell you cultists, but Our Revolution is a PAC.

/pat

[arandomuser]

sanders is trump and republicans biggest asset right now, more than toolsi

[Skroe]

Your ideology is going the same way as the Soviet Union right now. You just don't realize it yet. Same as they didn't.

Sure whatever you say m8.

Our Revolution is still a PAC.

- - - Updated - - -

This is where the cult BSODs and reboots.

[Telogrus]

I hate to tell you cultists, but Our Revolution is a PAC.

/pat

She said super PACs tho

- - - Updated - - -

It is, actually, since you as a white person are in no way qualified to say "who is black", which is the entire premise of the term.

It's also why goyim should stop trying to lecture others about "who is a jew", or why hets should stay in their lane with the "is it gay" nonsense. You are still fundamentally erasing the agency of those groups by denying them the right to define themselves.

And this, dear readers, is a perfect example of brocialism in action. Social justice is not an end in of itself, it's a cudgel that they use to bully others with.

Ok but I’m not using it criticize other black people, I was using it to emphasize how apologetic some of these people are to the DNC. Even if I was calling a black person an Uncle Tom, I still don’t see how that’s racist. Racism is believing that one race is superior to another, and calling a certain black person an Uncle Tom isn’t racist, especially since by doing so, you’re telling him to stop letting white people walk all over him. Honestly, saying that a white person cant say Uncle Tom no matter what kinda reminds me of how some SJWs attacked Justin Timberlake for rapping, which they believed to be cultural appropriation since apparently, only black people are allowed to rap.

[Skroe]

She said super PACs tho

Our Revolution is a 501c3 that operates pretty much exactly like a more transparent super pac. It’s a distinction of degrees.

But If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

But this is exactly how Bernie Sanders always works. Plausible deniability. With the cult. With the bullying. With the ridiculous accusations against actual Democrats.

Not to be too on the jaw, but the guy really is your typical socialist shitweasel who has to play underhandedly because they know the intrinsic unpopularity (compared to the alternatives) of what he’s selling.

I mean, a political revolution that will not be able to decisively win two states? Yeah. That’s not a revolution. That’s a meh campaign with an inflammatory slogan.

[Milchshake]

Our Revolution is a 501c3 that operates pretty much exactly like a more transparent super pac. It’s a distinction of degrees.

But If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

But this is exactly how Bernie Sanders always works. Plausible deniability. With the cult. With the bullying. With the ridiculous accusations against actual Democrats.

Not to be too on the jaw, but the guy really is your typical socialist shitweasel who has to play underhandedly because they know the intrinsic unpopularity (compared to the alternatives) of what he’s selling.

I mean, a political revolution that will not be able to decisively win two states? Yeah. That’s not a revolution. That’s a meh campaign with an inflammatory slogan.

Ya it's a big grift. Bernie only uses his super PAC to grind all his old grudges against Dems. The spigot always goes dry soon as it's time to unify against trump.

Bernie Sanders, answer why your presidential campaign even needs a dark money group
Common Cause has filed a formal complaint against Our Revolution with the FEC. It is not easy for a Democratic candidate to get on the wrong side of Common Cause:

Ten years ago, when the Supreme Court struck down a bipartisan campaign finance law and opened up the spigots for political giving, experts predicted what this would mean. Corporations would become important brokers by using their new powers to spread money around. And Republicans would be the big beneficiaries.

In reality, the biggest legacy of the Citizens United ruling has been so-called dark money — money raised by independent groups from unknown donors spent on behalf of a candidate, multiple candidates, a party or cause.

And the biggest user of this dark money — at least until this fall when President Donald Trump is expected to release a torrent of it — has been Democrats. In the 2018 midterm elections, dark money groups spent about $150 million. Liberal groups accounted for 54% of that, and much of it from a single organization called Majority Forward.

Sanders founded Our Revolution
This year brings a new chapter in the story. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has created, and is the beneficiary of, a new kind of dark money group called Our Revolution.

OUR REVOLUTION:Our mission is much more than electing Bernie Sanders

What makes Our Revolution different is that it is designed to advance Sanders’ cause against other Democrats in the primaries, rather than against a Republican in a general election. It’s one thing to say you have to play the dark money game because the other side surely will. It is quite another to be first off the mark in bringing its corrosive powers into a new area.
Sanders has long been a big critic of money in politics, often criticizing political action committees and the candidates who benefit from them. To then go out and found a group like Our Revolution is hypocritical.

Before and after Iowa caucuses
Our Revolution claims to voluntarily report all donors who give more than $250. But it doesn't file documents with any agency, provide identifying information about individuals or specify how much they gave.


Last month, Common Cause — a watchdog group that fights against gerrymandering, voter suppression and the role of money in politics — filed a formal complaint against Sanders and Our Revolution with the Federal Election Commission. It is not easy for a Democrat to get on the wrong side of Common Cause.

[draynay]

Bernies Bros is increasingly becoming another unless term that I roll my eyes at whenever I read due to the way people throw it around feely often to over generalize and pop fun like 7th graders.

Its right there with: cuck, SJW, incel, thot/egirl, normie, etc.

If someone openly supports Sanders they are a 'Bernie Bro' and since nothing nice is ever said about a 'Bernie Bro' then they must be as bad as the bad faith 'Bernie Bros'. It's getting ridiculous.

It isn't just for Sanders supporters either, people here throw it around whenever they want to denigrate someone else's opinion.

[Orange Joe]

Does it matter?

There's not a justification for that sort of behavior. It's a simple question of them cutting it the fuck out.

So why can't you "cut it the fuck out" and stop treating them the way you claim they are treating you?

[Milchshake]

So why can't you "cut it the fuck out" and stop treating them the way you claim they are treating you?

Seriously, people tried.

Go back to the Hillary 2016. You'll see them repeating the same BS.
They refused to change. Repeating the same "enjoy 4 years of trump".

Please tell us your "one magic trick" that makes them reasonable.

[Kaleredar]

Because Warren and Sanders policies are nearly identical? I wouldn't care which of these two would win, as long as one of them wins. Warren seems slightly relaxed in her policies compared to Bernie, but still a vast difference from other Democrats and Republicans.

Because she "isn't Bernie."

Personally I don't think Trump has a chance if the Democrat party is united, which it currently isn't. Trump is so idiotic that I wouldn't worry about "if" we can replace it, but I wouldn't want something as bad or worse to take his place. Hillary to me would have been as bad or worse.

So Hillary would have wholesale sold out South korea and the kurds to American enemies, routinely alienated American allies, engendered radical right-wing violence, shut down the government on multiple occasions over pet projects, stuffed children into cages to die, and worked tirelessly to disassemble every last vestige of progressive US policy passed in the last 20 years?

Because I don't think she would have done any of that.

Not really. If we had Hillary we would have to have 8 years of her corporate bought center left ass running the show, which could have pushed us into a war with Russia.

Uhhh... what?

Is this coming from the same Trump schlock as "Hillary is a warhawk that's going to start a war with Syria?"

Four years later not only we have Bernie but Warren as well, and both are very popular. I claim that Trump served a purpose four years ago, and that's to teach voters that you should have voted for Bernie. Trump would have been responsible for Bernie becoming president or someone like Bernie, which we now know is Warren. That was a prediction I made back in 2016. Trump would also be responsible for the death of the Republican party. Do Republicans think that by voting to not impeach Trump that it won't have dire consequences?

...You do know that Hillary won the popular vote, right? This revisionist history of "Bernie was at the top of the world, and the democrats STOLE his RIGHTFUL PRESIDENTIAL VICTORY AWAY FROM HIM!" is some serious projection. You don't know that Bernie would have won.

Trump hasn't been voted out of anything yet. He WILL be the death of the Republican party if he's removed from office. But if he remains? He becomes the new NORM of the republican party.

You should very much know by now that no "legal machination" is going to rein Trump in. Republicans are wary about supporting him and his policies right now because they're fearful he WILL be removed. But if he isn't removed? It's all-in on Trump crazytown.

That is too dangerous for America, and the world, to be ignored on the pretense that "well this one candidate didn't immediately offer free college."

If we don't get Bernie or Elizabeth Warren then I personally won't vote during these elections. I'm not voting for Pete Buttigieg or Joe Biden, as I see them learning too far to the right to justify putting them in office. I would rather let Trump win for another 4 years, just to teach another lesson to the Democrat party. Trump would destroy the country in those four years, but sometimes we need things to break all the way before anything can actually be fixed.

You aren't "teaching" a lesson to anybody. All you're demonstrating is that the republicans are allowed to do whatever they want because the democrats are too caught up in purity tests to care about actually moving the country forward. They wont "respect you" for making an ideological choice as they work to dismantle and block progressive laws, install crony judges and officials, and work to gerrymander away the ability for liberals to cast meaningful votes.

They'll laugh at you and be thankful you were so easy to remove from the political stage.

And you presume that things will be easy to "fix" with a Bernie or Warren in the white house after the republicans have had four MORE free years to work on gerrymandering, court packing, and getting whatever laws they want passed through the supreme court?

Like I said: An absolutely fucking idiotic political strategy. I think it comes from an abject lack of adequately appreciating how BAD Trump is for the United States.

"If I can't get everything I want, I'd rather get NOTHING I want, have the things I like actively taken away from me, and make it more difficult to ever get those things I want in the future. That'll teach... someone... not to respect my opinion enough!"

That is so absolutely, self-defeatingly, self-righteously backwards that I cannot abide by it. There will be no "ancestors smiling at you." All you'll have done is lost.

- - - Updated - - -

It's more about punishing a nation of people because they keep supporting a very corrupt and very violent status quo.

Make no mistake, you -are- being held hostage: "Bernie or Trump" is your choice while they're holding a gun to your head.

The sooner democrats realize that the better. There is no nicey-nice here or pleas for unity. This is political war.

If you don't realize it, well... you can keep calling everyone idiots for 4 more years and after that you'll be offered the same choice again, and again, and again... The people holding you hostage believe you're idiots too btw.

I don't know what kind of nonsense you're on about here, and I really don't... care.

Apparently you don't appreciate the difference between Republicans and Democrats. If you haven't noticed it thus far, no amount of me explaining it to you will do anything, but here goes:

Look at the conduct of the Republicans and Democrats just in the impeachment hearings. Look at the conduct of Republicans and who they have driven to violent action. Look at the backwards slide of the power of the United States under the Republican party on the world stage and the rise of tin-pot nationalists and dictators to fill that void.

I see a stark difference in the two, and I find the Democratic party far more suited to governing the United States. No ifs, ands or buts about it.

[Orange Joe]

Seriously, people tried.

Go back to the Hillary 2016. You'll see them repeating the same BS.
They refused to change. Repeating the same "enjoy 4 years of trump".

Please tell us your "one magic trick" that makes them reasonable.

99% of bernie supporters I have met are reasonable. Maybe it's time to look in a mirror?

[Milchshake]

99% of bernie supporters I have met are reasonable. Maybe it's time to look in a mirror?

So you find it totally reasonable when a Bernie supporter says,

I would rather let Trump win for another 4 years just to teach another lesson to the Democrat party.

.

You might not be as reasonable as you think. Anyways, enjoy your foxhole friends.

[Orange Joe]

So you find it totally reasonable when a Bernie supporter says, .

You might not be as reasonable as you think. Anyways, enjoy your foxhole friends.

My friends aren't out here insulting others because they support different candidates. If that is a bad thing I'm perfectly ok with that.

[Kaleredar]

I do not disagree with that, but it's not enough.

It's actually a very sad state of affairs when you only get to choose between absolute authoritarian impotence and maliciousness (Trump) and the status quo of continuous decline for everyone who isn't in the top 10-1% of earners within the USA.

But if you do, your choice is clear.

Don't get me wrong. I like liberalism, I like it's emphasis on personal freedoms, but I don't like how all of those freedoms and regulations have been skewed to only benefit a small exclusive elite while everything just keeps getting worse and in decline for everyone else ('moderate' Democrats).

More progressive candidates can succeed when they're able to become a driving force force in the democratic party. The thing is, the democrats have to be in power for that to mean anything.

You know when they can't succeed? When they're being driven back and their voters actively suppressed by an actively hostile republican party you let assume power, their initiatives are challenged by republican supreme court judges you let happen, and the system slowly becomes more and more bent towards not only condoning but encouraging the republican style of manipulation and law-breaking.

Your desire to "shake up the system" is meaningless if your constant refusal to engage in the system only makes it more difficult for you to change anything further down the road.