2020 Democratic Nominee

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

39 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

So are we going to coalesce around Warren or what?

 

 

The Berners are cracking.  I applaud their loyalty but the savior complex they have with Bernie is really something.  As if electing Bernie Sanders president is going to end poverty. 

[tantric superman 4668]

1 hour ago, RayDog said:

538 had an article that the liberal wing of the party which is also the most active is increasingly for Warren. The moderates and conservatives favor Biden but they are still working off name recognition.

I don't think Biden has any upside over the next 5 months as more moderate Democrats learn more about the candidates.

Yep.

I actually thought more Bern folks would have turned to Liz by now.  She's just a more attractive candidate all around plus hook 'em.  

I was hoping that Biden would be in full panic mode by now, but I think that is just going to take a bit more time. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I don't know if Warren 2020 would be possible without Bernie mainstreaming liberal ideas like he did in 2016. The Bernie Bros should be proud of what their movement has accomplished over the last four years regardless of how this nomination process shakes out. 

There are no wasted political movements. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Continued...

Back in early August, the Bernie campaign came up with the idea of pushing people to record and publish videos of their “Bernie Stories”.

They were supposed to be poignant personal vignettes of how Bernie taught them to love again and blah blah blah. 

 

I wrote a single tweet using the campaign’s hashtag.

It generated 15k likes - far, far more than nearly any of the real ones - and got picked up by Brian Williams on MSNBC. 

That made Bernie’s two senior communications people super duper extra mad.

It’s a conspiracy! The deep state is out to get Bernie! Hoarse is a rogue actor backed by evil forces! We must dox him!

 

So they revved up angry dumbalinas to “come after me” and out the deep secret that I worked in marketing.

Note: I talked about working in marketing and communications numerous times but let’s just pretend it was a secret. It’s better that way.

 

Then they suggested some secret cabal of haters must have engineered my tweet being read on air.

Umm, you dumb putzes, it was literally one of the most popular tweets on your dumb hashtag. 

Anyway, back to our story, as it turns out, Bernie’s people apparently don’t know shit about communications because if they did, they would have known that a campaign of “user-generated brand endorsements” was the dumbest idea in every agency brainstorm between 2005 and 2010.

“Oh my god! I’ve got it! Let’s get a lot of people to record a video of how much they love Tide’s new Bacon n’ Springtime fabric softener and we’ll promote them all!

That’ll really get people talking!”

 

Those campaigns never actually “get people talking.”

1) They’re super labor intensive.

2) The coordination makes them feel inorganic and inauthentic

3) Nobody watches the videos

And most importantly:

4) It only takes one response lampooning the effort to tank the whole thing

 

They are a tremendously dumb idea. 

Any effort to “make something go viral” is generally a dumb idea.

Things go viral organically. They don’t go viral because a client really, really wants them to.

If Bernie had any comms talent on staff, they’d know this.

So, my one tweet threw a wrench in the dumbest campaign communication effort of the year... 

And its engineers naturally blamed that on...Uh. Me. 

Now let’s just run with that one. 

Let’s assume I truly was an evil genius and not a dude on a couch. 

If I were your adversary, would you really want to make me more famous by throwing a hissy about me?

 

Of course not.

It is the very height of political incompetence to spotlight a critic. All it does is raise their profile and amplify their criticism.

Bernie’s campaign drove 15k more followers to my account while looking like petulant babies.

Genius.

So in review, Bernie’s campaign came up with the kind of idea people inside ad agencies violently roll their eyes over... and it went exactly as those ideas go... and they had no idea it was their own fault... so got me a mention in Rolling Stone.

 

I am *literally* a fucking guy in a pair of flip-flops writing whatever the hell I want on Twitter. Yet, the campaign of a prominent candidate for President of the United States so lost their shit over one of my tweets, they wet their pants for weeks.

You can’t make this up.

 

p.s. I never particularly cared about being anonymous.

I made up a screenname when I joined. It stuck. So I stuck with it.

If I had valued being anonymous, I wouldn’t have left so many breadcrumbs that made it possible to figure out who I am.

Another thing Berners got wrong.

p.p.s. If Tide ever introduced Bacon n’ Springtime, I would absolutely wash my clothes in it.

[bad_teammate 13225]

"I've been laughing for a month"

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

 

The Berners are cracking.  I applaud their loyalty but the savior complex they have with Bernie is really something.  As if electing Bernie Sanders president is going to end poverty. 

Bernie and his supporters seem to take it on faith that he speaks for a silent majority and that his words alone will spark a revolution by the masses.  But his polling numbers have been flat for months, aside from a big drop after Biden entered the race from which he hasn't recovered at all.   Warren just passed him for the first time in the RCP average.   Maybe I'm missing the coming tidal wave, but it seems like his campaign is doing something wrong. 

[bad_teammate 13225]

The candidate with the most donors and volunteers by far should probably shut it down because of some polls half a year out that, at worst, show him 3rd out of 20+ candidates.

lol

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Bernie is great at raising money.  Revolutions? Not so much. 

[RayDog 682]

While purely anecdotal several commenters on dailykos have estimated that half of the people who supported Bernie in 2016 now support Warren. That would not surprise me, and I don't see those people going back to Bernie as nothing bad is sticking to Warren.

[Bozo_Casanova 26580]

And libs are going to be happy to learn that Liz has been a Republican for most of her life and remains committed to her right-wing capitalist roots?  Shit, they probably will be. 

Speaking as a lib, I know I am

[Js1 85612]

I'd take Fozz more seriously if he a) wasn't an obvious troll and b) actually mixed in a few reasons why he likes a certain candidate (trash Tulsi) instead of literally shitting on everyone else.  At least when b_t shits on everyone else not named Bernie, every other post is him actually discussing Bernie.  

[Fozzz 152]

I've explained why I like Tulsi multiple times - mainly because she has the balls to say things about our foreign policy that no one else will say.  If she were in the next debate she would probably bring up the recent revelation that the US has been smuggling weapons to ISIS in Syria.  

[Mojo Hand 4580]

I don't think Bernie should shut it down.  I just think the 6 month trend of his polling numbers are a big warning sign for his campaign and something significant needs to change:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

 

[Tom 2959]

Be careful trusting Elizabeth Warren. She's evolved as a human and changed some of her ideas and beliefs from where they were decades ago.   Very dangerous stuff.

Meanwhile, less than a year ago Fozz was on the first page of the Tulsi thread calling her garbage and a bigot.  Now she's the best candidate. 

#Fozztrolllogic

 

[GSU&UT 1798]

10 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Bernie is great at raising money.  Revolutions? Not so much. 

Could your weird-ass at least stop posting random tweets in this thread? I'm sure we could all find randoms on twitter that say some annoying shit for any candidate.

[Fozzz 152]

2 minutes ago, Tom said:

Be careful trusting Elizabeth Warren. She's evolved as a human and changed some of her ideas and beliefs from where they were decades ago.   Very dangerous stuff.

Meanwhile, less than a year ago Fozz was on the first page of the Tulsi thread calling her garbage and a bigot.  Now she's the best candidate. 

#Fozztrolllogic

 

Has she evolved?  Pretty sure she's still a capitalist to her bones and has no interest in demarketizing healthcare.  

[Dropout 355]

4 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Could your weird-ass at least stop posting random tweets in this thread? I'm sure we could all find randoms on twitter that say some annoying shit for any candidate.

Idk I’m looking for the first sign of the Warren Bro narrative wherever I can find it.

Since Warren’s base is more bro than Bernie’s base ever was or currently is. Is that a media thing that was manufactured? I’ll take a random tweet from anyone at this point. Help me out Hugo.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

7 minutes ago, Dropout said:

Idk I’m looking for the first sign of the Warren Bro narrative wherever I can find it.

Since Warren’s base is more bro than Bernie’s base ever was or currently is. Is that a media thing that was manufactured? I’ll take a random tweet from anyone at this point. Help me out Hugo.

It's a Hillary/PUMA thing. 

[Dropout 355]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

It's a Hillary/PUMA thing. 

That is to say an establishment thing. A control every narrative thing. A corporate media thing. So why no Warren Bro narrative? Does it not at least arouse people’s suspicions? Ask why. Don’t be afraid of the answer you come to.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

My Warren Bro narrative is Liz is just a better candidate, straight up.  She works harder, she connects better, she has the best chance of winning and moving the country in the right direction.  I also happen to agree with many of her solutions to our problems.

That’s not a knock on Bernie but it’s my armchair observation that I believe is proving itself out in this campaign.

You are free to disagree. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

23 minutes ago, Dropout said:

That is to say an establishment thing. A control every narrative thing. A corporate media thing. So why no Warren Bro narrative? Does it not at least arouse people’s suspicions? Ask why. Don’t be afraid of the answer you come to.

Not really.   Hillary owned the establishment, but the hard-core Hillary PUMAs are their own subgroup of people.   Hence the origin of "PUMA," while the establishment moved on to Obama.  And there's no  "Warren Bro" narrative because there isn't an opponent trying to portray support for Warren as sexist against women (and it wouldn't stick).   There's nothing more sinister going on here.   

Edited September 6, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[GSU&UT 1798]

32 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

My Warren Bro narrative is Liz is just a better candidate, straight up.  She works harder, she connects better, she has the best chance of winning and moving the country in the right direction.  I also happen to agree with many of her solutions to our problems.

That’s not a knock on Bernie but it’s my armchair observation that I believe is proving itself out in this campaign.

You are free to disagree. 

That's fine, you're just being annoying as everyone else claims the Bernie supporters are by posting random tweets from DSA twitter in this thread to try and start arguments.

Edited September 6, 2019 by GSU&UT

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

4 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

That's fine, you're just being annoying as everyone else claim's the Bernie supporters are by posting random tweets from DSA twitter in this thread to try and start arguments.

You never call out Bernie supporters for engaging in the same behavior.  I wonder why that is?  You see how this works? 

[GSU&UT 1798]

9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

You never call out Bernie supporters for engaging in the same behavior.  I wonder why that is?  You see how this works? 

Most of that has been rightfully put in the appropriate threads where it belongs, I think most of us would be appreciative if you'd keep your drive-by shit in the Bernie thread like you've done in the past.

I'm not even referring to tweets of articles that are critical, but just random-ass twitter users who have no real influence over anything.

Edited September 6, 2019 by GSU&UT

[bad_teammate 13225]

43 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

My Warren Bro narrative is Liz is just a better candidate, straight up.

You repeatedly called Bernie a Communist. You're not some dispassionate arbiter of candidates, you're a serial monogamist for power daddies and mommies and your infatuations are as longterm as the horniness of a high schooler.

Quote

You never call out Bernie supporters for engaging in the same behavior.

I challenge you to find anything I've ever said about Warren that is 1/100th as deranged as the nonsense you rant about Bernie.

My critiques of Warren are actually lighter than many others here who seem far more convinced than me that she's being duplicitous in the primary.

11 hours ago, longhornmatt said:

Jim Jones also had a lot of donors and volunteers.  It is possible, and not even really uncommon, for a leader to have extremely high enthusiasm amongst his followers, but for his followers to be a narrow group that is not representative of the majority.

[cue poll numbers showing a majority of people would like it if healthcare were free, and if they were richer and handsomer, and if pollution didn’t exist, as proof that everyone agrees with Bernie Sanders and wants to elect him President]. 

Always good to have the Republican insight. Thanks, man.
 

[Dropout 355]

39 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Not really.   Hillary owned the establishment, but the hard-core Hillary PUMAs are their own subgroup of people.   Hence the origin of "PUMA," while the establishment moved on to Obama.  And there's no  "Warren Bro" narrative because there isn't an opponent trying to portray support for Warren as sexist against women (and it wouldn't stick).   There's nothing more sinister going on here.   

So you think sexist against women is where Bro originated from? Bro is used to mislead and falsely claim supporters of Bernie Sanders are predominately white males. Never mind that it’s 50/50 male/female. Fact is his base is the most racially diverse and Warren’s the least. Bro is intentionally used to make minorities (women included) feel as if they aren’t there. It’s a narrative that is obviously verifiably false. There is no way it is not sinister. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Dropout

[bad_teammate 13225]

Bernie's favorables are super high.

Bernie's donor and volunteer numbers are bigger than the next 3 candidates combined.

Bernie's got strong organization from coast to coast.

Bernie's base (so far) is extremely diverse and represents the most important populations of non-voters needed to win big in 2020.

Bernie's plans for the real, major issues are the most thorough and detailed (by miles, really).

He's the best candidate.

[bad_teammate 13225]

4 minutes ago, Dropout said:

So you think sexist against women is where Bro originated from? Bro is used to mislead and falsely claim supporters of Bernie Sanders are predominately white males. Never mind that it’s 50/50 male/female. Fact is his base is the most racially diverse and Warren’s the least. Bro is intentionally used to make minorities (women included) feel as if they aren’t there. It’s a narrative that is obviously verifiably false. There is no way it is not sinister. 

It's a coincidence that all the white suburb professional class guys here by far prefer the two candidates whose bases are (so far) lily white and mostly holding post-grad degrees. Pure coincidence.

I don't know why you would think race and class issues dominate the subconscious of the "centrist". Unprecedented. You should be ashamed.

[Dropout 355]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's a coincidence that all the white suburb professional class guys here by far prefer the two candidates whose bases are (so far) lily white and mostly holding post-grad degrees. Pure coincidence.

I don't know why you would think race and class issues dominate the subconscious of the "centrist". Unprecedented. You should be ashamed.

I’m trying to hold up a mirror but they won’t open their eyes. Instead I whine when I live in reality and observe. Or wait I’m better than you. I guarantee I’ve done some not so great things and still do. Just not afraid to open my eyes look in the mirror and try and be better. But it’s too hard and too scary. I should stop and go along w the show but username checks out.

[bad_teammate 13225]

It's actually a sign of Bernie's inherent strength that he's 2nd/3rd in this race despite being universally reviled and unrelentingly attacked by every single player in mass media.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

5 minutes ago, Dropout said:

So you think sexist against women is where Bro originated from? Bro is used to mislead and falsely claim supporters of Bernie Sanders are predominately white males. Never mind that it’s 50/50 male/female. Fact is his base is the most racially diverse and Warren’s the least. Bro is intentionally used to make minorities (women included) feel as if they aren’t there. It’s a narrative that is obviously verifiably false. There is no way it is not sinister. 

Should we call them Bernie hostiles instead? 

Because that description fits much better than “bro”.

Bernie has a more diverse base because he’s been running for President long enough to have “a base”.  Warren is in the process of building a base.  It’s kinda how this whole campaign thing works. Bernie folks are starting to sound a lot like Biden people, relying entirely on polls and the past as the best indicator of future results.  It doesn’t work that way.  You have to move the needle with people during the process to be successful.

[Dropout 355]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Should we call them Bernie hostiles instead? 

Because that description fits much better than “bro”.

Bernie has a more diverse base because he’s been running for President long enough to have “a base”.  Warren is in the process of building a base.  It’s kinda how this whole campaign thing works. Bernie folks are starting to sound a lot like Biden people, relying entirely on polls and the past as the best indicator of future results.  It doesn’t work that way.  You have to move the needle with people during the process to be successful.

Call them whatever you want. Then be sure to come up w a false snarky name for everyone and get it mainstream. This is what’s done to Bernie. It won’t happen to another candidate because the powers that be aren’t fucking scared of anyone else. They have that part right as they usually do. Who to worry about and who not to worry about.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

29 minutes ago, Dropout said:

So you think sexist against women is where Bro originated from? Bro is used to mislead and falsely claim supporters of Bernie Sanders are predominately white males. Never mind that it’s 50/50 male/female. Fact is his base is the most racially diverse and Warren’s the least. Bro is intentionally used to make minorities (women included) feel as if they aren’t there. It’s a narrative that is obviously verifiably false. There is no way it is not sinister. 

Yes, I think the PUMA crowd used "Bernie Bro" to push a narrative that Bernie supporters were aggressively misogynistic dudes who supported him because his opponent was a woman (Hillary).   I don't agree with that narrative.   (I also supported Bernie over Hillary with my vote and donations.)   But that's what it was about. 

I hardly even hear the term any more or see it on Facebook/Twitter, and when I do it's usually from defensive Bernie supporters who can't get over it.   Otherwise it's from Hillary dead-enders, but it doesn't seem to be part of the mainstream strategy of any current candidate. 

You seem to believe there is a massive establishment conspiracy behind it, but it's just politics as usual.  You just look stupid trying to compare the diversity of his base versus Warren, because it was never really about demographic facts.  Warren's base isn't susceptible to an attack on grounds of sexism against women for obvious reasons, so it's a losing exercise.  Defensiveness only keeps these kinds of narratives alive, and nobody is keeping the "Bernie Bro" narrative alive more than the Bernie supporters who constantly reference it. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[Dropout 355]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

You seem to believe there is a massive establishment conspiracy behind it, but it's just politics as usual.  You just look stupid trying to compare the diversity of his base versus Warren, because it was never really about demographic facts.  Defensiveness only keeps these kinds of narratives alive, and nobody is keeping the "Bernie Bro" narrative alive more than the Bernie supporters who constantly reference it. 

Well good thing you’re here to set me straight. It was all about demographic facts and the truth trying to be kept under wraps. Bernie Bro is used without a second thought all throughout this thread and everywhere else by random people to describe pretty much any supporter of Bernie Sanders. But csb you sure won’t have to face reality if that’s what you’re going with.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

5 minutes ago, Dropout said:

Call them whatever you want. Then be sure to come up w a false snarky name for everyone and get it mainstream. This is what’s done to Bernie. It won’t happen to another candidate because the powers that be aren’t fucking scared of anyone else. They have that part right as they usually do. Who to worry about and who not to worry about.

Believe it or not but there is still a significant group of Hillary hostiles too. The common nomenclature is "Hillary die hards".  These folks argue Warren is too close to Bernie, she betrayed Hillary by not endorsing her soon enough, and saying the primary process was rigged last time. 

It's funny because the Bernie hostiles are claiming Warren is just like Hillary, "she's a sellout to the establishment and used to be a Republican." 

None of the accusations are based in good faith.  They're just talking points each faction wants people to believe in the hopes people will turn on Warren and support their preferred candidate.  

[Js1 85612]

Quote

The common nomenclature is "Hillary die hards".  These folks argue Warren is too close to Bernie, she betrayed Hillary by not endorsing her soon enough, and saying the primary process was rigged last time. 

It's funny because the Bernie hostiles are claiming Warren is just like Hillary, "she's a sellout to the establishment and used to be a Republican." 

Both of these candidates have trashed Hillary's 2016 corpse for their own self interest.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Both of these candidates have trashed Hillary's 2016 corpse for their own self interest.  

Or maybe they were just telling the truth as they knew it?  Do you have any examples?

[Dropout 355]

15 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Believe it or not but there is still a significant group of Hillary hostiles too. The common nomenclature is "Hillary die hards".  These folks argue Warren is too close to Bernie, she betrayed Hillary by not endorsing her soon enough, and saying the primary process was rigged last time. 

It's funny because the Bernie hostiles are claiming Warren is just like Hillary, "she's a sellout to the establishment and used to be a Republican." 

None of the accusations are based in good faith.  They're just talking points each faction wants people to believe in the hopes people will turn on Warren and support their preferred candidate.  

Warren is nothing like Hillary. I’ve questioned why she didn’t endorse Bernie last time if their ideals are so closely aligned. I’ve questioned if she will really fight for everything she says. I’ve questioned why she’s running on Bernie’s platform. I’ve questioned why the powers that be seem a lot more comfortable with her than Bernie. What is bad faith about these questions? I don’t want you to believe anything but what’s actually happening.

Edited September 6, 2019 by Dropout

[Mojo Hand 4580]

13 minutes ago, Dropout said:

Well good thing you’re here to set me straight. It was all about demographic facts and the truth trying to be kept under wraps. Bernie Bro is used without a second thought all throughout this thread and everywhere else by random people to describe pretty much any supporter of Bernie Sanders. But csb you sure won’t have to face reality if that’s what you’re going with.

No need to get so defensive.  It's just my opinion, the world doesn't end because we disagree.   I just looked back through the last 10 pages or so and only two people used the term:  b_t using it defensively and Hugo, who repeatedly refers to "Kamala bros" too.  You're just so sensitive to this issue that you view it though a weird martyr prism.

[David Dennison 18951]

3 hours ago, Fozzz said:

I've explained why I like Tulsi multiple times - mainly because she has the balls to say things about our foreign policy that no one else will say.  If she were in the next debate she would probably bring up the recent revelation that the US has been smuggling weapons to ISIS in Syria.  

And if she became president, all of that would go right out the window after her first intelligence briefing. 

[Fozzz 152]

Why even breathe if you're gonna be that cynical, David.  

[Dropout 355]

4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

No need to get so defensive.  It's just my opinion, the world doesn't end because we disagree.   I just looked back through the last 10 pages or so and only two people used the term:  b_t using it defensively and Hugo, who repeatedly refers to "Kamala bros" too.  You're just so sensitive to this issue that you view it though a weird martyr prism.

Defensive? Maybe I should of went with you look stupid bc you view it through a weird sexual assault prism instead of idk explaining my viewpoint. A quick google search of Bernie Bro leads to this article as the creation.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/here-comes-the-berniebro-bernie-sanders/411070/

Odd it doesn’t mention sexual assault. There is this tho

The Berniebro is not every Bernie Sanders supporter. Sanders’s support skews young, but not particularly male. The Berniebro is male, though. Very male.

The Berniebro is someone you may only have encountered if you’re somewhat similar to him: white; well-educated; middle-class (or, delicately, “upper middle-class”); and aware of NPR podcasts and jangly bearded bands.

[David Dennison 18951]

Just now, Fozzz said:

Why even breathe if you're gonna be that cynical, David.  

How can you if you're not?

[Mojo Hand 4580]

5 minutes ago, Dropout said:

Defensive? Maybe I should of went with you look stupid bc you view it through a weird sexual assault prism instead of idk explaining my viewpoint. A quick google search of Bernie Bro leads to this article as the creation.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/here-comes-the-berniebro-bernie-sanders/411070/

Odd it doesn’t mention sexual assault. There is this tho

The Berniebro is not every Bernie Sanders supporter. Sanders’s support skews young, but not particularly male. The Berniebro is male, though. Very male.

The Berniebro is someone you may only have encountered if you’re somewhat similar to him: white; well-educated; middle-class (or, delicately, “upper middle-class”); and aware of NPR podcasts and jangly bearded bands.

What does "odd that it doesn't mention sexual assault" mean?   I didn't say it had anything to do with sexual assault.  

[Dropout 355]

4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

What does "odd that it doesn't mention sexual assault" mean?   I didn't say it had anything to do with sexual assault.  

My mistake. Sexist against women. The article doesn’t mention sexist against women but white middle class perhaps upper middle class male.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Dropout said:

My mistake. Sexist against women. The article doesn’t mention sexist against women but white middle class perhaps upper middle class male.

The article coined the term, but then it took on a life of its own, leading the original author to apologize and try to rein it back in.  If you don't think it was used as part of a push by Hillary PUMAs to paint support for Bernie as sexist, I don't know what to tell you.   I'm surprised to see a Bernie supporter giving the Hillary side a pass on that, but you're entitled to your opinion.   We'll just have to disagree. 

[bad_teammate 13225]

"Obama Bros" were a thing, too. I was one of those, too, in the eyes of Hillary's fanbase.

[Dropout 355]

8 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

The article coined the term, but then it took on a life of its own, leading the original author to apologize and try to rein it back in.  If you don't think it was used as part of a push by Hillary PUMAs to paint support for Bernie as sexist, I don't know what to tell you.   I'm surprised to see a Bernie supporter giving the Hillary side a pass on that, but you're entitled to your opinion.   We'll just have to disagree. 

I’m giving no pass. In fact the way I view it it’s worse bc women are included in minority when it comes to power. We will have to disagree bc the moment you admit Bernie Bro is code for white male you have to start asking uncomfortable questions.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

6 minutes ago, Dropout said:

I’m giving no pass. In fact the way I view it it’s worse bc women are included in minority when it comes to power. We will have to disagree bc the moment you admit Bernie Bro is code for white male you have to start asking uncomfortable questions.

What uncomfortable questions?  I haven't denied that it's code for white males.  That's the very basis for it being an accusation of sexism:   aggressively misogynistic frat dudes who wouldn't support Hillary simply because she's a woman.   It was a caricature pushed by Hillary PUMAs for political benefit.  That's what I've been saying. 

Do you even know what you're arguing against?   Because it doesn't resemble anything I've said. 

Edited September 6, 2019 by Mojo Hand