Why do Bernie Babies deny helping Trump get elected?

C

Chezus

Well-Known Member
Why do all the Bernie Babies deny doing everything they could to get Trump elected last year when Sanders lost the primary? I just don't get it.

You spent all your time after Sanders legitimate primary loss campaigning against Clinton, you even propagated false news and Russian propaganda.

Day after day you sat here and told everyone to either stay home, write in Sanders or vote 3rd party.

Clinton lost the election by 77000 key votes. Why aren't you talking about your success.
You got what you wanted. Trump got elected
 
Grandpapy

Grandpapy

Well-Known Member
Chezus said:
Why do all the Bernie Babies deny doing everything they could to get Trump elected last year when Sanders lost the primary? I just don't get it.

You spent all your time after Sanders legitimate primary loss campaigning against Clinton, you even propagated false news and Russian propaganda.

Day after day you sat here and told everyone to either stay home, write in Sanders or vote 3rd party.

Clinton lost the election by 77000 key votes. Why aren't you talking about your success.
You got what you wanted. Trump got elected
Click to expand...
That's a question that could be answered by an educated person.
I'm just glad Russia or any other outside source didn't have any influence over our western style govt.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Chezus said:
Why do all the Bernie Babies deny doing everything they could to get Trump elected last year when Sanders lost the primary? I just don't get it.
Click to expand...
As a Sanders supporter, I deny it because it isn't true. Sanders supporters did everything they could to ensure Trump didn't win, it simply wasn't enough.
Chezus said:
You spent all your time after Sanders legitimate primary loss campaigning against Clinton, you even propagated false news and Russian propaganda.
Click to expand...
It's been proven the Democratic primary wasn't legitimate. What "false news" or "Russian propaganda" have I propagated?
Chezus said:
Day after day you sat here and told everyone to either stay home, write in Sanders or vote 3rd party.
Click to expand...
Meanwhile, more Sanders supporters voted for Clinton in 2016 than Clinton supporters voted for Obama in 2008. Clinton didn't lose because of Sanders or his supporters. She lost because she was unable to cultivate and sell a viable political message to her base.
Chezus said:
Clinton lost the election by 77000 key votes. Why aren't you talking about your success.
You got what you wanted. Trump got elected
Click to expand...
Maybe she should have focused on economics. She tried to steal conservative votes from Trump by moving to the center during the general election and failed. She ignored the progressive base hoping to bank off the issue you raise, that if you don't vote for Clinton, somehow, that means you support Trump. You don't win votes by using subtle political extortion. You can win my vote by offering me something I want. If you don't have anything to offer me, why would you feel like I have an obligation to vote for you?

People who voted for Clinton during the primary are to blame for Donald Trump. They propelled a more unpopular candidate to the general election and she lost against the weakest opponent in history. They can blame Russia, Stein, 3rd party candidates, Sanders, Comey, etc. all they want. The fact is Clinton didn't offer progressives the change they were promised.

None of us wanted Trump to win. We just knew he had a much better shot against Clinton than he did against Sanders, that's what we were trying to tell you all along.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Chezus said:
Sanders was so popular he was losing by almost 2.5 million votes in the primary

You are fucking delusional
Click to expand...
You're the one running around with your hair on fire, trying to find excuses for Clinton's miserable performance, so you can tell us who you think is delusional all you want- but actions speak louder than words.

Yours say, 'desperate to avoid resistibility.'
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
As a Sanders supporter, I deny it because it isn't true. Sanders supporters did everything they could to ensure Trump didn't win, it simply wasn't enough.

It's been proven the Democratic primary wasn't legitimate. What "false news" or "Russian propaganda" have I propagated?

Meanwhile, more Sanders supporters voted for Clinton in 2016 than Clinton supporters voted for Obama in 2008. Clinton didn't lose because of Sanders or his supporters. She lost because she was unable to cultivate and sell a viable political message to her base.

Maybe she should have focused on economics. She tried to steal conservative votes from Trump by moving to the center during the general election and failed. She ignored the progressive base hoping to bank off the issue you raise, that if you don't vote for Clinton, somehow, that means you support Trump. You don't win votes by using subtle political extortion. You can win my vote by offering me something I want. If you don't have anything to offer me, why would you feel like I have an obligation to vote for you?

People who voted for Clinton during the primary are to blame for Donald Trump. They propelled a more unpopular candidate to the general election and she lost against the weakest opponent in history. They can blame Russia, Stein, 3rd party candidates, Sanders, Comey, etc. all they want. The fact is Clinton didn't offer progressives the change they were promised.

None of us wanted Trump to win. We just knew he had a much better shot against Clinton than he did against Sanders, that's what we were trying to tell you all along.
Click to expand...
Your appeal to reason is laudable and will convince the choir.

It is, however, wasted on those with the same disease as right wingnuts, that is the disease of, 'support my confirmation bias or bust!'
 
Justin-case

Justin-case

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
You're the one running around with your hair on fire, trying to find excuses for Clinton's miserable performance, so you can tell us who you think is delusional all you want- but actions speak louder than words.

Yours say, 'desperate to avoid resistibility.'
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but receiving three million votes more than your opponent, isn't miserable, ya dumb goon. Remember when all the misogynist assholes said the same about Gore? Me neither.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Your appeal to reason is laudable and will convince the choir.

It is, however, wasted on those with the same disease as right wingnuts, that is the disease of, 'support my confirmation bias or bust!'
Click to expand...
Nice.

Meanwhile, your choir "quite laudable and convincingly" says "kick social justice warriors to the curb." We sjw are in the way, aren't we? Soooo very tired your gullible and oblivious choir is. So, then, kick Black Lives Matter to the curb and call symbolic healthcare bills progress.

 
dagwood45431

dagwood45431

Well-Known Member
Chezus said:
As first lady. HILLARY CLINTON advocated for universal healthcare before Congress.

Fact
Click to expand...
And that's about when the now decades long RWNJ hatchet job against her reached full force. Coincidence? Hardly. She payed dearly for her advocacy and action.
 
C

Chezus

Well-Known Member
dagwood45431 said:
And that's about when the now decades long RWNJ hatchet job against her reached full force. Coincidence? Hardly. She payed dearly for her advocacy and action.
Click to expand...
You know. The only reason I don't like her is because of that? I didn't think it was her job as first lady to push for such a lofty goal. Plus I voted for Perot at that time.
Everything else about her has been made up bullshit. Limbaugh launched his career on her.
 
st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Chezus said:
As first lady. HILLARY CLINTON advocated for universal healthcare before Congress.

Fact
Click to expand...
Why did she not stick with that then?? It meant nothing as First Lady, and meant everything as a nominee. She could have owned that issue, and been a trail blazer that fought for what she believed in in spite of the opposition.

Was it a political calculation that made her change positions, or was it the obscene amount of money that she accepted from the insurance industry?
 
C

Chezus

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
Why did she not stick with that then?? It meant nothing as First Lady, and meant everything as a nominee. She could have owned that issue, and been a trail blazer that fought for what she believed in in spite of the opposition.

Was it a political calculation that made her change positions, or was it the obscene amount of money that she accepted from the insurance industry?
Click to expand...
How do you know she truly changed positions? If you aren't elected. You can't do shit. Why did you vote for Trump?
 
travisw

travisw

Well-Known Member
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top