2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumDonna Brazile: 'We Democrats Don't Call Each Other Evil'
https://www.yahoo.com/news/brazile-democrats-dont-call-other-162429510.html?nhp=1
The RW punditocracy is happy to push the RW talking points that Clinton is the epitome of evil (which Sanders is in full parrot mode for), but Ms. Brazile put them firmly in their place.
bonemachine
(757 posts)When did Sanders call Clinton evil?
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)LoverOfLiberty
(1,438 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Which is nicer than what most people would call a corrupt corporatist DINO.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)She has not mentioned his name in public for a while now.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Things that Presidents should NEVER lie about.
Things that have killed a lot of poorer Americans.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)asuhornets
(2,405 posts)tazkcmo
(7,306 posts)How the hell does that work? In my world, if I vote for something it means I had something to do with it. In fact, it means I supported it.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)tazkcmo
(7,306 posts)Thanks for clearing that up!
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)tazkcmo
(7,306 posts)And here I thought we were talking about actual votes that then Sen Clinton cast, namely that authorizing the Iraq War.
As far as decisions go, this was pretty shitty one.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)But I've never heard him claim to be responsible for it or the damage he claims it caused.
Instead, he blames it on Hillary - who did not for it.
Go figure...
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)Bernie is a ....I can't think of a word bad enough.
tazkcmo
(7,306 posts)You do yourself injustice.
bonemachine
(757 posts)I feel like there's a substantive rhetorical difference between saying that someone is "the lesser of two evils" and straight up identifying them as evil, but I recognize that that will sound suspiciously like splitting hairs to some folks.
reddread
(6,896 posts)there is another difference as well, when you couch the expression while describing the public perception of lesser (and presumably greater) evils as opposed to proclaiming them as such.
so if you prefer, you can take the ginned up pearl clutching as substantive, rather than imaginary.
but I think I can see the difference.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)speak for all the "we democrats" because you sure as hell don't.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)dragonfly301
(399 posts)GWB for president - such a strategizer :/
mmonk
(52,589 posts)we are divisive. Sorry, left out misogynists.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)we all remember president Gore, don't we?
Demsrule86
(68,825 posts)Nader was a spoiler...I hope Bernie won't be this years Nader...time will tell.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)Either do I. Remember how well Gore did in Tennessee his home state? I do. remember how 250,000 Floridian democrats voted for Bush? I do. Accountability, get some.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Love it when people here just make up shit. Seriously, look stuff up first.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)did I make up Gore's home state? or 250,000 dems leaving in Florida for bush... I love it when people overlook shit, that's why we have Hillary now.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Sorry if you'd rather have Trump, but it ain't going to happen.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)I also pointed out how Donna Brazile failed in earlier posts. Reading comprehension may not be your strong suit. We all have weaknesses I guess. Your poutrage is noted, as is your lack of reading comprehension skills. Bernie's free education platform would probably work wonders for some, wouldn't you think?
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)could be a laziness, seems a bunch of Hillary supporters lack an intellectual curiosity.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)timmymoff
(1,947 posts)don't we.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)not being able to deliver more than 1/10 of what he has promised. Losing as he is, you'll still be able to look up to him and his untested ideals. So there is that.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)won't it be great when the Clinton's make deals with the republicans to give us a "progressive agenda" We all know the gop loves the Clintons. She will probably get everything through first time without threat of veto they love her so much. You sound less and less intelligent with each post. We need more compromise towards the right, and Clinton will give us just that.. wooohoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)it means you get around. Now you are being deliberately insulting, so good bye.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)fun n serious
(4,451 posts)Big MISTAKE imo
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Yup.. and never forget the USSC, or Harris, or Jeb bush.
Yuo
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)OH wait... Nader DIDN'T win Tennessee. Bush did. Al Gore couldn't even win his own fucking state. HAD he won his own fucking state, he would have won the fucking election HANDS DOWN.
Mike Nelson
(9,990 posts)...say support Hillary because she's the lesser of two evils, I think she should consider telling Bernie she doesn't accept his endorsement. Hillary would look better and less political.
timmymoff
(1,947 posts)MFM008
(19,837 posts)he continues along these lines. Fine say your not for her, say you don't like her policy but she is NOT on the level of evil as Trump and the republican party.
Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)We've been complaining for decades! And we are Democrates.
BootinUp
(47,221 posts)bonemachine
(757 posts)SANDERS: We need a campaign, an election coming up, which does not have two candidates who are really very, very strongly disliked. I don't want to see the American people voting for the lesser of two evils.
I want the American people to be voting for a vision of economic justice, of social justice, of environmental justice, of racial justice. That is the campaign we are running and that's why we are getting the support we are.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Is that how you would describe Hillary Clinton against Donald Trump, the lesser of two evils?
SANDERS: Well, if you look at -- no, I wouldn't describe it, but that's what the American people are saying. If you look at the favorability ratings of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, both of them have very, very high unfavorables. You're not going to disagree with me on that...
STEPHANOPOULOS: There's no question about that.
I would say that this is a damn accurate assessment of how a huge portion of voters feel about a Clinton/Trump matchup, and a far cry from saying "Hillary Clinton is evil".
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Bernie Sanders has jumped the shark.
Qutzupalotl
(14,344 posts)but that the American people might see the election as a choice between two unfavorables.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Sanders wants to have it both ways: to be able say Clinton is evil, but without having to take responsibility for saying such an outrageous statement. What a weasel.
Qutzupalotl
(14,344 posts)as I pointed out.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)When Trump contradicts himself within 30 sec of making a statement, he's correctly and resoundingly mocked. When Sanders does it, his fans defend his contradictory statements (as is being done in this very thread).
The fact is Sanders says Clinton is evil. If you have a problem with him saying that, then take it up with the people agreeing with him.
bonemachine
(757 posts)I guarantee you I can dig up a handful of examples, if it will make any difference in your rhetoric, but I suspect it will not.
It's a common idiom, and it's perfectly relevant.
And the reverse of it, which he also describes, is exactly the sort of energy that has been fueling his campaign.
So there's no doubt that he (along with millions of other Americans) is painfully frustrated to see a rare breath of actual optimism in American politics turning right back into the status quo of voting for which politician you think is going to lie to you and fuck over your interests the least...
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)But, he could not be bothered. He feeds it.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)aikoaiko
(34,186 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...doesn't mean that the candidates are evil.
It means that there would be terrible effects from either of them winning.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Chan790
(20,176 posts)If we won't call out bad Democrats in our midst, that's how we end up the party of fungible values lead by weather-vanes.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)From thin skinned Clinton surrogates
Tom Rinaldo
(22,919 posts)Sanders specifically said that he would not describe Clinton as a lesser evil, but noted the obvious. When strong majorities of voters have unfavorable opinions of both candidates they are being asked to choose between, the choice that they are forced to make (since they are unhappy with either one of them) is called "a lesser of two evils" choice.
Have we forgotten how to even use everyday speech around here, and is Donna playing dumb?
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)comeback. Seriously?
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)The man needs an intervention. He is becoming a danger to himself, to the party and to his cause.
Yurovsky
(2,064 posts)Donna is just a typical Clinton hack. She's cashed in, and damned if she'll let those pesky progressives derail her gravy train!
Autumn
(45,120 posts)Grow up, the lesser of two evils is a term that has been used for years.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)Except on DU,Facebook,Online.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)I find it interesting that this label,is not used against the RWers instead
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Figures of speech are not meant to be taken literally, but don't let that get in the way of your narrative.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)It's exactly that type of argument Trump uses when trying to avoid speaking with any decency and political correctness.
We have lots of figures of speech that are abhorrent and are finally starting to fade away
"Jew them down"
"Thugs", a dog whistle for PoC
"boy", demeaning title used for PoC
so you can take you excuses and shove it.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"It may be hard for your viewers to remember how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/AIDS back in the 1980s and because of both president and Mrs. Reagan in particular Mrs. Reagan we started a national conversation, when before nobody would talk about it, nobody wanted to do anything about it, and that too is something I really appreciate with her very effective low-key advocacy. It penetrated the public conscience and people began to say, hey, we have to do something about this too."
What she does there is lie about the gay community's courageous and enormous political actions in response to AIDS and claims we did nothing until Reagan, the actual villain of the AIDS crisis, bravely lead the way. It's bigoted, horrific lies told in order to praise a Republican for doing the very things he did not do, which he criminally did not do.
It's not even a dog whistle, it's like a giant billboard touting the Glory of Reagan.
What excuses will you offer for that one today? Hillary sought out cameras to say that, no one asked her. She offered it. What's the excuse of the say? Too many cocktails with W?
bonemachine
(757 posts)Aren't they the greater of two evils?
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)but exclusively at Republicans.
That you continue to claim there is a lesser Dem evil is pathetic.
bonemachine
(757 posts)is nonsense on it's face.
Is the Democratic party more aligned with my worldview? Sure! Are they better than Republicans? Without a doubt.
Are they immune from criticism just because they have a D after their name? Hell no!
Shit - intentionally or no, you are the one implying that sometimes a Republican could be the lesser evil.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)She is speaking as a Clinton partisan here, don't be fooled into thinking she is somehow neutral on the matter.
I say that not calling evil by its name is how we got into this mess in the first place. Sanders' comments are a breath of fresh air.
QC
(26,371 posts)is treated as an expert on politics.
tazkcmo
(7,306 posts)We do reserve Special Places In Hell for some.
TheKentuckian
(25,035 posts)circle D next to your name that transforms bad policy to good and erases sellouts or makes dangerous warmongering into peace.
Don't want to be "lesser evil" then serve the needs of the people rather than selling out to, reaching out, and assimilating the positions of our enemies over and over again.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)aikoaiko
(34,186 posts)dubyadiprecession
(5,739 posts)That is why he isn't going to be our nominee.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)increase LGBT participation in the Democratic Party. I liked her prior to seeing her act like a smug bigot. She flips off her fellow Democrats and says we don't need you. She is hateful.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Ron Green
(9,825 posts)as anybody running around loose, and yet they pose on TV as people who shape public opinion. THAT is evil.