If your preferred Dem candidate does not get the nomination, what do you do?

[bad_teammate 13561]

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

[Brisketexan 106952]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Look at the "depends" number. They're ready to listen to any Dem who beats Bernie. Can't ask for much more than that.

False.  We have several on this thread who have stated, unambiguously, they are NOT ready to listen to any Dem who beats Bernie.  You've already said Bloomberg is an absolute "no."  And we have every reason to believe you'll find a similar excuse not to support some other Dem, too.

You aren't interested in beating Donald Trump.  You're interested in vindicating a cult that you've joined, because anything less than full vindication would mean that perhaps you were wrong, and THAT can't be it...

[henrygandorf 29228]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

They're ready to listen to any Dem who beats Bernie.

[Brisketexan 106952]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

What's worse is being a Bernie terrorist.  And what's mind-numbingly, breathtakingly stupid is being so fucking tone-deaf that you don't realize that fucking attitude is going to COST Bernie support, not gain it.  You and those like you are Bernie's worst enemy.

Edited February 13, 2020 by Brisketexan

[bad_teammate 13561]

What does "depends" mean?

If they weren't listening, why not just say "no"?

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

What's worse is being a Bernie terrorist.  And what's mind-numbingly, breathtakingly stupid is being so fucking tone-deaf that you don't realize that fucking attitude is going to COST Bernie support, not gain it.  You and those like you are Bernie's worst enemy.

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

[henrygandorf 29228]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

most of the non-bernie folks on this thread have already said we’re a full-go for bernie if he wins. including me and brisket. that’s not really the conversation we’re having here. 

[Brisketexan 106952]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

What does "depends" mean?

If they weren't listening, why not just say "no"?

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

Tone deaf.

You really don't understand how many people out there hear asinine shit like this from Bernie supporters, over and over, and are pushed away from Bernie, do you?

If you wanted to drive people away from Bernie, you couldn't do a much better job than you're doing now.

I don't negotiate with terrorists.  The answer is for you fuckholes to stop being terrorists.  No "it depends."  Don't be fucking assholes.  Try it, just for a day -- it will be a shock to your system at first, but you'll get used to it.

[washparkhorn 9974]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

False.  We have several on this thread who have stated, unambiguously, they are NOT ready to listen to any Dem who beats Bernie.  You've already said Bloomberg is an absolute "no."  And we have every reason to believe you'll find a similar excuse not to support some other Dem, too.

You aren't interested in beating Donald Trump.  You're interested in vindicating a cult that you've joined, because anything less than full vindication would mean that perhaps you were wrong, and THAT can't be it...

 

Not a good take. 

And - as expected - this little thread was designed to create disunity. 

How about you pick a candidate and support that candidate.

[henrygandorf 29228]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

What does "depends" mean?

depends = depends who the winning candidate is. 

bernie supporters are engaged and active and have been for a long time. you think they don’t know who’s who among the other contenders?

if biden and bloomberg are the other two top contenders, that “no” number becomes 47% and most of us are not ok with that. 

[Brisketexan 106952]

Just now, washparkhorn said:

Not a good take. 

And - as expected - this little thread was designed to create disunity. 

How about you pick a candidate and support that candidate.

I have.  I do.  And I'll support whoever gets the nomination.

You won't.  Because your principles are more important.  This thread doesn't create disunity -- it simply exposes the disunity most any sensible person has known was there all along, and was ALWAYS going to guarantee a second Trump term.  We didn't learn anything new about y'all on this thread - we just confirmed what we all already knew: the Democratic Party is incapable of defeating Donald Trump, because it's much more important to be smug assholes than to win.

[bad_teammate 13561]

2 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

most of the non-bernie folks on this thread have already said we’re a full-go for bernie if he wins.

That's not the question I'm asking him. (After all, I will vote for Pete if he wins. We're not very different in that regard.)

I'm trying to interrogate how much he (and I guess others) actually believe that (1) Bernie supporters will want the election to be thrown to Trump and (2) Bernie supporters have the power to throw the election to Trump.

I don't think he actually believes it. I think he's just having fun being a drama queen. I think this is the case for 8+ other posters here.

The polling provided shows Bernie supporters planning to defect at a historically normal rate (QPoll) or in line with other candidates' supporters (the one you provided). My own discussions with Bernie supporters (which I know more of than all of you) also show no desire to defect in the general or to have Trump win. The exit polling of 2016 shows this, as does the exit polling of 2008.

This is all just kabuki theater for people who want a candidate other than Bernie to win the primary and are feeling angry or hurt that it doesn't look likely right now. Stages of grief kind of thing, but the patient isn't even dead yet.

Just now, Brisketexan said:

Tone deaf.

You really don't understand how many people out there hear asinine shit like this from Bernie supporters, over and over, and are pushed away from Bernie, do you?

If you wanted to drive people away from Bernie, you couldn't do a much better job than you're doing now.

I don't negotiate with terrorists.  The answer is for you fuckholes to stop being terrorists.  No "it depends."  Don't be fucking assholes.  Try it, just for a day -- it will be a shock to your system at first, but you'll get used to it.

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

[bad_teammate 13561]

5 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Not a good take. 

And - as expected - this little thread was designed to create disunity. 

How about you pick a candidate and support that candidate.

100% truth

[washparkhorn 9974]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I have.  I do.  And I'll support whoever gets the nomination.

You won't.  Because your principles are more important.  This thread doesn't create disunity -- it simply exposes the disunity most any sensible person has known was there all along, and was ALWAYS going to guarantee a second Trump term.  We didn't learn anything new about y'all on this thread - we just confirmed what we all already knew: the Democratic Party is incapable of defeating Donald Trump, because it's much more important to be smug assholes than to win.

Then you did not answer the question correctly. 

The question asked you to consider whether you would support the eventual nominee if "your preferred" candidate is not the final choice.

Who is your preferred candidate?  Thanks.

[troph 25238]

Then you did not answer the question correctly. 
The question asked you to consider whether you would support the eventual nominee if "your preferred" candidate is not the final choice.
Who is your preferred candidate?  Thanks.

Warren preferred, I’ll vote for the democrat no matter what.

[troph 25238]

Then you did not answer the question correctly. 
The question asked you to consider whether you would support the eventual nominee if "your preferred" candidate is not the final choice.
Who is your preferred candidate?  Thanks.

Now my question to you:

Sanders goes into the convention with a plurality but not a majority of delegates. Anyone of the top candidates emerges from the convention as the nominee and let’s not consider Bloomberg for now - just Pete, Amy, Uncle Joe, and Liz Warren.

Who do you vote for?

[washparkhorn 9974]

1 minute ago, troph said:

Warren preferred, I’ll vote for the democrat no matter what.

Sensible. Thank you. I will definitely back and support Warren with all my might if she is the nominee. 

My preferred candidate is Sanders? Will you support him if he is the nominee?

[washparkhorn 9974]

Just now, troph said:

Now my question to you:

Sanders goes into the convention with a plurality but not a majority of delegates. Anyone of the top candidates emerges from the convention as the nominee and let’s not consider Bloomberg for now - just Pete, Amy, Uncle Joe, and Liz Warren.

Who do you vote for?

Sorry - responded too quickly. 

I will support any of them even if Sanders comes in with a plurality of delegates to the convention. No hesitation. 

[Brisketexan 106952]

13 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

 

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

I don't negotiate with terrorists.  Ask the question all day long, I won't answer.  Threaten to shoot my kids if I don't vote for Bernie, and I still won't answer your question -- I don't negotiate with terrorists.

The fact that you are so comfortable even asking that asinine question reveals more than enough about you and those like you.  How many folks do you think this approach turns into being MORE likely to vote for Bernie?  I mean, that is your goal, right -- for more people to support him?  How is this sort of attitude helping your cause?  Got any data on that?

"Hey, guys....I know how we'll get supporters!  Let's be the most asinine, insufferable fucks imaginable!  People will flock to our guy in droves, compelled by the delightful nature of our insufferable assholery!"  Has anyone ever framed that up as a winning political strategy? I'm curious.

Edited February 13, 2020 by Brisketexan

[bad_teammate 13561]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

I don't negotiate with terrorists.  Ask the question all day long, I won't answer.  Threaten to shoot my kids if I don't vote for Bernie, and I still won't answer your question -- I don't negotiate with terrorists.

What am I threatening you with? What power do I have? I don't have the power to make candidates win anything.

I'm just asking you a question, which you can't answer because you're actually more prideful than the demons you've invented in your mind.

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

How many folks do you think this approach turns into being MORE likely to vote for Bernie?

lol yes yes this guy who is melting down hysterically is certainly persuadable

How many folks do you think your approach turn into being MORE likely to vote for literally anyone the DNC puts in front of them?

[troph 25238]

b_t - your unwillingness to support the nominee in a brokered convention where Sanders has the most going in but not a majority - a nominee that would make my life better and make the lives of the trans women of color better - is by its very nature a conditional support of trans rights. I know you are going to tell me I’m wrong, but I’m telling you right here and now without equivocation that my people will be worse off with 4 more years of trump compared to a decent but not sanders level of purity democrat in the White House next term. Trumps threat is visceral, palpable, and demonstrable. Bloomberg is a straw man. The front runners are all 10x better than trump. You go out of your way to be a supporter of LGBTQ rights here, but if you sit this example out or write in Bernie or you vote for the Libertarian then you are effectively voting for Trump. And if you think not, so be it, but every single LGBTQ person I know that is not a Bernie supporter will vote for him and we all agree a refusal to support the nominee for any reason is a vote against us. I’m sure you can tell me why I dunno 2000 LGBTQ folks I know across the country are wrong about that, but that’s my sample size and that’s what we think about your “it depends answer” so excuse my hostility but I think it’s very well deserved given a brokered convention is part of this landscape, it’s not a screw job, it’s politics, it’s within the rules, and it’s quite likely at this point.

[troph 25238]

Sensible. Thank you. I will definitely back and support Warren with all my might if she is the nominee. 
My preferred candidate is Sanders? Will you support him if he is the nominee?

I’ve said that a hundred times. Yes without hesitation.

[hobbes2702 13492]

38 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

But what if you don't vote for Sanders in the primary and Sanders doesn't get the nomination because of 1 vote in Texas and then the Bernie Bros throw the election to Trump as a result? What then?

Will you be responsible for the presidency of Donald Trump?

We don’t want to shoot the hostage but we will if you don’t meet our demands.

[troph 25238]

Sorry - responded too quickly. 
I will support any of them even if Sanders comes in with a plurality of delegates to the convention. No hesitation. 

Then I have zero issue with you or your vigor for Sanders.

[washparkhorn 9974]

Brisket - who is your preferred candidate you will set aside in order to answer the question in the poll as posed.

[Brisketexan 106952]

1 minute ago, washparkhorn said:

Brisket - who is your preferred candidate you will set aside in order to answer the question in the poll as posed.

Warren.  And I will support any of the other candidates.  Including Sanders.  Including Bloomberg.  Because I'm not a fucking asshole (well, I am, but it's mostly marriage-related).

[EuroHorn 3295]

I love these cloak room polls.  You know exactly the majority outcome before the first post.  
 

did I just hear an echo ?

[troph 25238]

I don't negotiate with terrorists.  Ask the question all day long, I won't answer.  Threaten to shoot my kids if I don't vote for Bernie, and I still won't answer your question -- I don't negotiate with terrorists.
The fact that you are so comfortable even asking that asinine question reveals more than enough about you and those like you.  How many folks do you think this approach turns into being MORE likely to vote for Bernie?  I mean, that is your goal, right -- for more people to support him?  How is this sort of attitude helping your cause?  Got any data on that?
"Hey, guys....I know how we'll get supporters!  Let's be the most asinine, insufferable fucks imaginable!  People will flock to our guy in droves, compelled by the delightful nature of our insufferable assholery!"  Has anyone ever framed that up as a winning political strategy? I'm curious.

Without their approach I would expect a significant portion of the LGBTQ vote to be with him. He doesn’t get it, the purity test they require is a vote against my people and we live it see it and try to explain it. Bernie is dangerous to us because of his supporters “it depends” position on supporting the nominee if it isn’t Bernie. Because of that position, a significant number of LGBTQ voters support Warren and Pete even though sanders is the O.G. ally.

Cue - Bernie has the most support among LGBTQ folks. No he doesn’t, there are more who don’t support him than do. The others happen to have an openly gay man and other allies worthy of support as well. Why is this? Again, his supporters are conditionally supportive of LGBTQ rights. Sorry, my friends are unconditionally supportive, not conditional upon agreement with other issues.

[Brisketexan 106952]

8 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

Which is the worse outcome?  Not being a fucking asshole, thus not further alienating people who are already iffy about Bernie because of the open and proud assholery of many of his vocal supporters, and thus making it more likely that some of those folks will be at ease with supporting Bernie, or being the prototypical Bernie Bro asshole and alienating multiple voters from supporting Bernie?

 

[hobbes2702 13492]

22 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Then you did not answer the question correctly. 

The question asked you to consider whether you would support the eventual nominee if "your preferred" candidate is not the final choice.

Who is your preferred candidate?  Thanks.

Warren 1, Bernie 2 for me. I’ll be voting for any breathing person that is nominated by the Democratic Party. This isn’t that hard.

[Brisketexan 106952]

4 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Brisket - who is your preferred candidate you will set aside in order to answer the question in the poll as posed.

Oh, and I really, really don't want to hate Bernie.  I don't.  I actually kinda like the guy.

But make no mistake -- I am far from alone in trying REALLY hard not to fucking loathe him because his supporters are fucking assholes.  "Don't be fucking assholes" would be an EXCELLENT place for Bernie supporters to start with their approach to garnering support.  That suggestion will unquestionably fall on deaf ears.

[SydneyCarton 49512]

37 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What does "depends" mean?

If they weren't listening, why not just say "no"?

Which is the worse outcome: Acceding to the Bernie terrorists' demands and pushing for Bernie to become president or a second term of Donald Trump?

So he admits he’s a terrorist. 

[Brisketexan 106952]

4 minutes ago, troph said:

Without their approach I would expect a significant portion of the LGBTQ vote to be with him. He doesn’t get it, the purity test they require is a vote against my people and we live it see it and try to explain it. Bernie is dangerous to us because of his supporters “it depends” position on supporting the nominee if it isn’t Bernie. Because of that position, a significant number of LGBTQ voters support Warren and Pete even though sanders is the O.G. ally.

Cue - Bernie has the most support among LGBTQ folks. No he doesn’t, there are more who don’t support him than do. The others happen to have an openly gay man and other allies worthy of support as well. Why is this? Again, his supporters are conditionally supportive of LGBTQ rights. Sorry, my friends are unconditionally supportive, not conditional upon agreement with other issues.

You just don't understand -- you HAVE to support Bernie, or else you support Donald Trump.  You're just too stupid to get it.  Trust the Bernie Bros.

[washparkhorn 9974]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Warren.  And I will support any of the other candidates.  Including Sanders.  Including Bloomberg.  Because I'm not a fucking asshole (well, I am, but it's mostly marriage-related).

Cool. Love Warren. You will need to help me get to Bloomberg if that is the choice, but I am a gettable on that question. 

[HenryJames 67423]

Should I vote against an existential threat to our Republic, or should I stick it to the Shitlibs? It’s hard being in a cult!

[washparkhorn 9974]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

So he admits he’s a terrorist. 

Sydney - haven't heard your "preferred" Democratic Candidate you will set aside to support the nominee. Who is that?

[SydneyCarton 49512]

If the stakes weren’t so obvious and horrific, I’d be voting for Bloomberg just to spite the few trolls I’ve met here and watch their heads explode. Fortunately I know better. But Jesus these people are on par with Trumpkins. If they’re all like this I can easily see alienating everyone. And on top of that, I can see people voting and continuing to vote right in the senate to “protect us from socialist sanders” or some shit. 

[troph 25238]

Cool. Love Warren. You will need to help me get to Bloomberg if that is the choice, but I am a gettable on that question. 

None of us want him. None of us. We will all address this question if presented but if I have my way not until then.

[SydneyCarton 49512]

3 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Sydney - haven't heard your "preferred" Democratic Candidate you will set aside to support the nominee. Who is that?

I will vote for WHOEVER. I don’t have a preferred candidate, I came to the CR a few days ago to learn and do my due diligence. I do have major concerns about Sanders ability to win in the general election. I liked Pete early before he apparently became a milquetoast “rat.” But I don’t think he can win either. I’m still registered as a Republican in Texas. Gun to my head I guess Pete, but honestly I’m evaluating solely on the best shot to displace Trump. 

[bad_teammate 13561]

28 minutes ago, troph said:

b_t - your unwillingness to support the nominee in a brokered convention where Sanders has the most going in but not a majority - a nominee that would make my life better and make the lives of the trans women of color better - is by its very nature a conditional support of trans rights. I know you are going to tell me I’m wrong, but I’m telling you right here and now without equivocation that my people will be worse off with 4 more years of trump compared to a decent but not sanders level of purity democrat in the White House next term. Trumps threat is visceral, palpable, and demonstrable. Bloomberg is a straw man. The front runners are all 10x better than trump.

What does this even mean?

If you took a step away from your emotional investment in this conversation and honestly placed Michael Bloomberg into the spectrum of potential leaders you would realize that he would only perpetuate the oppressive and brutal system and, given his managerial efficiency, would make it markedly worse.

Quote

You go out of your way to be a supporter of LGBTQ rights here...

Do I? I have the beliefs I have and something you really should know about me at this point is that none of it is performative. I have zero interest in making friends or being popular or having a positive reputation.

Quote

... but if you sit this example out or write in Bernie or you vote for the Libertarian then you are effectively voting for Trump. And if you think not, so be it, but every single LGBTQ person I know that is not a Bernie supporter will vote for him and we all agree a refusal to support the nominee for any reason is a vote against us. I’m sure you can tell me why I dunno 2000 LGBTQ folks I know across the country are wrong about that, but that’s my sample size and that’s what we think about your “it depends answer” so excuse my hostility but I think it’s very well deserved given a brokered convention is part of this landscape, it’s not a screw job, it’s politics, it’s within the rules, and it’s quite likely at this point.

Yes, it is.

One of my purposes in driving Brisket into the asylum by bringing up the BERNIE BROS ARE TERRORISTS argument is to reveal that this is what you guys are doing in this thread.

Either I accept an undemocratic system or I am an enemy to the LGBT and apple pie and freedom.
Either I accept a billionaire Republican oligarch or I am an enemy to the LGBT and apple pie and freedom.
Do it or the babies on the border will die.

Shoot the hostage. I'm not sure what it accomplishes, but go ahead.

I'm not going to accept or support a political party that ignores the democratic will of the people. I'm not going to support billionaires.

If your goal is to win me over, then listen to the ideas and show me the problems with them. Or shoot the hostage, whatever.

21 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Which is the worse outcome?  Not being a fucking asshole, thus not further alienating people who are already iffy about Bernie because of the open and proud assholery of many of his vocal supporters, and thus making it more likely that some of those folks will be at ease with supporting Bernie, or being the prototypical Bernie Bro asshole and alienating multiple voters from supporting Bernie?

If you're scared of what Bernie supporters will do, are you doing an effective job of winning them over?

18 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

So he admits he’s a terrorist. 

A terrorist has control of whether or not the terrorist attack happens. If I'm holding someone hostage, I either have the gun or can tell the guy with the gun what to do.

I don't.

I can't make tens of thousands of Bernie supporters vote for Mike Bloomberg. I can't stop them staying home.

So if I ask that question, I'm not asking with my finger on the button. I'm just wondering if the internal logic you guys are working from is consistent. And it's clearly not.

[Hornius Emeritus 12807]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What does this even mean?

If you took a step away from your emotional investment in this conversation and honestly placed Michael Bloomberg into the spectrum of potential leaders you would realize that he would only perpetuate the oppressive and brutal system and, given his managerial efficiency, would make it markedly worse.

Do I? I have the beliefs I have and something you really should know about me at this point is that none of it is performative. I have zero interest in making friends or being popular or having a positive reputation.

Yes, it is.

One of my purposes in driving Brisket into the asylum by bringing up the BERNIE BROS ARE TERRORISTS argument is to reveal that this is what you guys are doing in this thread.

Either I accept an undemocratic system or I am an enemy to the LGBT and apple pie and freedom.
Either I accept a billionaire Republican oligarch or I am an enemy to the LGBT and apple pie and freedom.
Do it or the babies on the border will die.

Shoot the hostage. I'm not sure what it accomplishes, but go ahead.

I'm not going to accept or support a political party that ignores the democratic will of the people. I'm not going to support billionaires.

If your goal is to win me over, then listen to the ideas and show me the problems with them. Or shoot the hostage, whatever.

If you're scared of what Bernie supporters will do, are you doing an effective job of winning them over?

A terrorist has control of whether or not the terrorist attack happens. If I'm holding someone hostage, I either have the gun or can tell the guy with the gun what to do.

I don't.

I can't make tens of thousands of Bernie supporters vote for Mike Bloomberg. I can't stop them staying home.

So if I ask that question, I'm not asking with my finger on the button. I'm just wondering if the internal logic you guys are working from is consistent. And it's clearly not.

Dude ... you are talking about other people having "an emotional investment."  I just counted. You have 98 posts in the last 24 hours.  How is that humanly possible?  It is seemingly impossible for you to let a single post go unanswered.  

[troph 25238]

Dude

 

You said if Bernie had a plurality but not a majority and any of the candidates not named Bloomberg got the nomination in a brokered convention you said you would sit out, write in Bernie or vote Libertarian.

 

Stop with the Bloomberg red herring. I get it he’s worse than Trump. Fine. That wasn’t the question I asked.

 

In the question I asked, if Pete were the victor from a brokered convention where sanders started in the lead and he ran against Trump you would not vote for Pete.

 

That - among the activist LGBTQ folks I know - is a conditional support for our rights. Accuse me of being too emotionally invested (in my people) or not. That’s how we see it.

 

Now get back to BUT BLOOMBERG all you want.

 

[HenryJames 67423]

15 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I came to the CR a few days ago to learn

[washparkhorn 9974]

19 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I will vote for WHOEVER. I don’t have a preferred candidate, I came to the CR a few days ago to learn and do my due diligence. I do have major concerns about Sanders ability to win in the general election. I liked Pete early before he apparently became a milquetoast “rat.” But I don’t think he can win either. I’m still registered as a Republican in Texas. Gun to my head I guess Pete, but honestly I’m evaluating solely on the best shot to displace Trump. 

Cool. I will work for and support Pete if he is the nominee. And I am gettable on Bloomberg, but not now. Thanks. 

[washparkhorn 9974]

7 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

Dude ... you are talking about other people having "an emotional investment."  I just counted. You have 98 posts in the last 24 hours.  How is that humanly possible?  It is seemingly impossible for you to let a single post go unanswered.  

HE (I miss your photography, which you did so well if I recall correctly) - Who is your preferred Democratic candidate at this point? 

[HenryJames 67423]

Bernie in the primary, nominee in the general.

[bad_teammate 13561]

7 minutes ago, troph said:

You said if Bernie had a plurality but not a majority and any of the candidates not named Bloomberg got the nomination in a brokered convention you said you would sit out, write in Bernie or vote Libertarian.

 

I think you should be arrested for this.

How fucking dare you.

The absolute gall.

Quote

In the question I asked, if Pete were the victor from a brokered convention where sanders started in the lead and he ran against Trump you would not vote for Pete.

That - among the activist LGBTQ folks I know - is a conditional support for our rights. Accuse me of being too emotionally invested (in my people) or not. That’s how we see it.

OK

I respect that.

[bad_teammate 13561]

I'm going to find troph and pee all over her car for daring to say I would ever vote Libertarian

my GOD

[henrygandorf 29228]

so here's the question (although i'm sure it's already been asked)...

what if bloomberg has the plurality heading into the convention, but bernie ends up being the nominee.  does bt write in bloomberg instead of pulling the bernie lever?

[Biff Tannen 46175]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

But what if you don't vote for Sanders in the primary and Sanders doesn't get the nomination because of 1 vote in Texas and then the Bernie Bros throw the election to Trump as a result? What then?

Will you be responsible for the presidency of Donald Trump?

Don't be fatuous B_T

[troph 25238]

Bernie in the primary, nominee in the general.

I would love to see more folks on this board that take this position. Washpark has changed my mind about him. And these types of posts make Bernie more palatable. I genuinely want to like the guy and the movement. These posts help.