3 ms·
> I think what really happened is that Democratic insiders, both in the media and the DNC, did their best to sideline his campaign, possibly even with some hank
by avgcorrection 3y ago
> I think what really happened is that Democratic insiders, both in the media and the DNC, did their best to sideline his campaign, possibly even with some hanky-panky in the SC and Super Tuesday elections. The "Bernie Bros" narrative is perhaps part of that, but just as a Red Herring. Why did they engage in this evil plot? Not because they dislike Sanders so much, as because he would have been hopeless in the General.
This narrative (not good for the General) is of course their preferred one. But I am not inclined to take them on their word when they chose to smear him with a “red herring” (your words) in the first place.
The 2016 election was when people started complaining about Populism, and both Trump and Sanders were populists in rhetoric, although very different in their substance. But the Dems would still have us believe that a non-populist, completely Establishment candidate (Clinton) was what the Dems needed for the General.
The more likely explanation is that the Dems would rather lose rather than run with a social democratic candidate.
- SantalBlush 3y ago>The more likely explanation is that the Dems would rather lose rather than run with a social democratic candidate. Their behavior does suggest this. It's why they're propping up an octogenarian who is one "senior moment" away from handing the presidency to the other party. "Electability" was a ruse in 2016 and 2020 that they no longer need to keep up.