Support NeoGAF

[User 463088]

Let's go over this part by part.

Bernie being a sore loser, being petulant, being an independent up until recently, or anything else people have complained about has not caused nearly as much damage as the Democratic Party giving lip service to liberal issues while getting cozy with the rich.

We're talking damage to Bernie the man as opposed to the Democratic party. Him being a sore loser or whatever has absolutely nothing to do with the Democratic Party at the moment. He's only hurting himself and people's perception of him. I came into the 2016 race with a rather favorable opinion of Bernie. I liked the guy. I wasn't going to vote for him, but I had no issues with him. He's managed to tarnish that opinion, and I'm not the only one who feels that way.

Health care? Even the version of the ACA with a public option got nixed fast. And to say it's because of Republicans is missing the story. Every Republican in the House and Senate voted against the version of the ACA that did pass and it still passed. That proves the Democrats didn't need to please any Republicans to get it passed. Yet they STILL voted in a bill that made health insurance companies even stronger. Even with the GOP too few in number to stop the Democrats, the Democrats still didn't pass single payor. So it rings hollow when the Democrats say Bernie's plan can't pass. They had a supermajority and chose not to even push it. Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining. Lives could be saved if we didn't put profit before health. But nope. Let's get hung up on a Bernie Staffer copying tables while a firewall is down and a lawsuit he filed, resulting in zero deaths. Great sense of priorities.

Well, we actually didn't have a fillibuster proof majoriy for as long as people thinkw e did. However, "Democrat" is not some monolithic group of people, even in the Senate. You have people from different ideological backgrounds. Part of being a leader is getting people to support your position, no question. However, single payer was simply not going to pass, when we couldn't even get a public option through. The votes weren't there, and magically electing Bernie Sanders isn't going to make the votes appear, either...especially when no one in the Senate has endorsed him.

But you don't get to move the goal posts like that. The data breach was effing stupid. The guy was fired. That's great. The thing Bernie's campaign fails to realize is that the person who wins the argument isn't always the person who is 100% right, especially in politics. Optics matter. This came about at a time when he was trying to show the Democratic party he was a serious member, and was here to support the goings on. And what did he do? Sue the party for a 24 hour loss of access to data that was restored once we were sure they couldn't access the data anymore.

Now, he's continuing the issue (even though it's really a non-story at this point) at a time where his only path to victory is to somehow get the Super Delegates to go against the person with the popular vote and delegate vote total and to support him. You know, the Suepr Delegates that he spent months bitching about, but now suddenly wants to woo because it's his only shot. Those Delegates are members of the Democratic Party and he should, therefore, be slightly concerned with the optics and perception of the entire thing.

Get your priorities right. It's about the people, not your party.

It's actually about who can win and further the progressive agenda. The best and only way, for that to happen is through the Democratic party. That's why Bernie ran as a Democrat. Well, that and he knew he could make more money if he did.

 

[Shaffield]

I didn't realize there were so many defense attorneys on Gaf.
24 hours in breach of a contract? That's a small number! How could it possibly be illegal?

 

[Damaniel]

Wow, you guys. This thread is a perfect example of why so many liberals are upset with the Democratic Party.

Bernie being a sore loser, being petulant, being an independent up until recently, or anything else people have complained about has not caused nearly as much damage as the Democratic Party giving lip service to liberal issues while getting cozy with the rich.

Health care? Even the version of the ACA with a public option got nixed fast. And to say it's because of Republicans is missing the story. Every Republican in the House and Senate voted against the version of the ACA that did pass and it still passed. That proves the Democrats didn't need to please any Republicans to get it passed. Yet they STILL voted in a bill that made health insurance companies even stronger. Even with the GOP too few in number to stop the Democrats, the Democrats still didn't pass single payor. So it rings hollow when the Democrats say Bernie's plan can't pass. They had a supermajority and chose not to even push it. Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining. Lives could be saved if we didn't put profit before health. But nope. Let's get hung up on a Bernie Staffer copying tables while a firewall is down and a lawsuit he filed, resulting in zero deaths. Great sense of priorities.

Wall Street? The media and everyone else is asking the wrong question about Hillary's speeches. It's about whether she openly promised Wall Street anything. It's not about if any of the money they donated to her were direct transactions serving as bribes. It's about the longstanding relationship that Hillary has with the people running Wall Street, and how we can possibly expect her to make unbiased decisions on whether or not they should be investigated and prosecuted. She points out how Obama got more Wall Street donations than anyone else and still passed reforms. Bernie points out that no Wall Street executives were prosecuted. And the response from Hillary (or anyone) on that point? None. No response. What difference does it make to pass new laws if you don't enforce them? Prosecution of white collar crime hit a twenty-year low during Obama' administration, with Eric Holder as AG. This coincided with the rise of non-prosecution and deferred prosecution agreements. People lost their homes over this. We could be backing the candidate who doesn't have relationships with the white collar criminals that would divide loyalty to friends from loyalty to his job. But nope. Let's get hung up on a Bernie Staffer copying tables while a firewall is down and a lawsuit he filed, resulting in zero homes lost. Great sense of priorities.

I won't say this is the only reason, but I think it's one of the reasons why a lot of liberals don't have loyalty to the Democrat Party and don't turn out in mid-terms. The Democrats operate on "Don't let this crazy Republican be President" to get votes. Naturally, they don't get so many votes when the Presidential Office isn't up for grabs. If you want to win elections, you need mid-term votes. And if you want mid-term votes, give people something to vote for, not just someone to vote against.

Get your priorities right. It's about the people, not your party.

If his message is so important (it is), then why can't they find a messenger who can actually say something other than 'something something oligarchy' all day long? Preferably a Democrat and not a 'Democrat' - a guy who can't even bother to be gracious enough to congratulate an opponent who wins primaries - a guy who encourages his crowds of young white voters to boo Hillary's name every time it's mentioned - a guy who steals campaign data and then has the chutzpah to sue the people he stole it from.

At least we won't have to worry about him winning. Democrats have spoken, and they're not feeling the bern. If by some miracle he were to win, he'd get my vote and nothing more - no money, no volunteer work - absolutely nothing. You don't reward children for poor behavior, and the salt from Bernie's losing campaign makes him look more childish than ever.

 

[royalan]

Someone in his campaign did wrong, and was fired and dealt with accordingly. Who has been fired or held respond for any subsequent wrong doing at the DNC? Surely you can see the ramifications of wrong doing or corruption at the DNC poses a much bigger issue and implication?

Four people did wrong. Only one was fired.

Pretty sure Hillary's data was breached by 4 separate accounts.

 

[boiled goose]

Bernie's campaign staff does something that's clearly reprehensible. DNC takes precautionary measures for < 24 hours to ensure that everything's sorted technically and with Bernie's corrupt staff.

idk, seems reasonable to me.

See, the problem is the course of events dont match what you describe.

The breach happened in part because of a technical issue that affected both sides. If the precaution was for technical reasons, access would have been withheld for both campaigns for 24 hours.

To clarify, i dont Think the breach, the punishment, or the lawsuit are that big of a deal. My biggest issue is with the absurd gaf outrage. It's pathetic.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

Non of this explains how bernie is a sore loser. It's basically pointing to rationalizing by his campaign or his supporters.... which is necessary to running a campaign.

Spin is part of campaigns.

Bernie only ran as a progressive challenge to Clinton because no one else did.

The sore loser narrative really reaks of projection..

Sanders is wise enough to know the stakes. I've always appreciated him in the Senate, but he has a bad reputation for being a know it all, 'always has to be right about everything' kind of prick.

 

[ElFly]

Was the knee jerk reaction illegal and/or wrong or not? If the answer to that is yes, there's either negligence, incompetence, malice, or corruption involved, and someone should answer for it. Fact of the matter is, Bernie has a case and every reason to pursue it.

The only way ahead for Bernie is somehow convincing would-be-Hillary voters to vote for him instead.

There's no way that suing the DNC helps this objective and thus it's a dumb move. Does he have a right to sue? Maybe. Does it serve his campaign? Hell no.

Let's say he wins the lawsuit and loses the nomination? Good fucking job everyone concentrating on the wrong objective. If he loses the lawsuit it's even worse.

There's nothing to be gained from this and will only polarize more each side. Except Bernie's side is already losing. Maybe...MAYBE this would have some purpose if he had better chances of winning the nomination, but that's not the case.

 

[Steel]

I didn't realize there were so many defense attorneys on Gaf.
24 hours in breach of a contract? That's a small number! How could it possibly be illegal?

No one's saying it's not illegal.

 

[Alrus]

I judge the campaign by what volunteers do, what Bernie says and what the end goal is. It's not by any stretch the best run campaign of all time but considering the obvious problems with Sanders as a candidate. On the other hand it's the first campaign to show people who intend to run for office in the future that they can forsake corporate money if they are able to channel today's technology with a powerful message. The campaign is unparalleled in terms of fundraising, there is no other campaign that has been financed by such a proportion of small donors. To only concentrate on the close advisors of Sanders is to downplay what the campaign is actually founded on - people who went out of their way to be part of the campaign. People who have created hundreds of organizational, promotional and fundraising applications for free, they have donated their hours behind a goal not a candidate. The goal is pretty clear moving the focus on what these people care about whether that's money in politics, healthcare, education, maternity leave, equal pay, stopping the drug war, immigration reform, higher wages, removing the surveillance, a different foreign policy where intervention is the last option, trade agreements, fighting institutional corruption, sexism, racism and classicism, dealing with the addiction in a more humane way. Believe me there is a variety of reasons why I'm absolutely ecstatic with this campaign and frankly I find the idea that is a trainwreck in an election featuring Jeb hilarious. What the Sanders campaign has achieved is remarkable and I only imagine what would have happened if Warren was running instead of sitting out this election because of inevitability.

Why isn't Sanders using his amazing fundraising abilities to help the downballot tickets? You know, the people that would be needed for him to put his amazing reforms in place?
This always felt so hypocritical to me, you're selling amazing stuff to people but you're not doing anything to actually make it happen.

 

[boiled goose]

Sanders is wise enough to know the stakes. I've always appreciated him in the Senate, but he has a bad reputation for being a know it all, 'always has to be right about everything' kind of prick.

The bad optics critiques are fair. The evidence is this thread haha

 

[Douglas Quaid]

Fuckin NeoGAF, never been on a forum with so many corporate apologists. "Fuck you Bernie" for suing the DNC? Who gives a shit? Like you have skin in the fucking game. Disgusting people here. Keep making posts about the latest McDonald's menu addition and other nonsense for your rat race delusional bullshit lives.

 

[User 463088]

See, the problem is the course of events dont match what you describe.

The breach happened in part because of a technical issue that affected both sides. If the precaution was for technical reasons, access would have been withheld for both campaigns for 24 hours.

To clarify, i dont Think the breach, the punishment, or the lawsuit are that big of a deal. My biggest issue is with the absurd gaf outrage. It's pathetic.

While the breech may have been on both sides, the logs proved that not a single person from Hillary's campaign accessed a single bit of data they weren't supposed to have.

This was, unequivocally, Bernie's campaign screwing up and getting caught doing it.

That said, it's not a huge deal, considering he went on to lose most of the states the accessed anyway.

 

[excelsiorlef]

See, the problem is the course of events dont match what you describe.

The breach happened in part because of a technical issue that affected both sides. If the precaution was for technical reasons, access would have been withheld for both campaigns for 24 hours.

To clarify, i dont Think the breach, the punishment, or the lawsuit are that big of a deal. My biggest issue is with the absurd gaf outrage. It's pathetic.

Only one side stole data.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Fuckin NeoGAF, never been on a forum with so many corporate apologists. "Fuck you Bernie" for suing the DNC? Who gives a shit? Like you have skin in the fucking game. Disgusting people here. Keep making posts about the latest McDonald's menu addition and other nonsense for your rat race delusional bullshit lives.

lol whut?

 

[nib95]

AH the desperate turn to insults. The Bernie supporter cycle.

Yes, because nobody has been held responsible for or answered for it yet. So until we know why it happened, and whether or not it was either a knee jerk move in negligence or incompetence, or actual corruption or malicious intent, there's some serious questions raised.

If (big if) it was corruption or malicious intent in play, then the DNC being involved in that does indeed hold much more dangerous ramifications and implications than some lone criminal who has already been dealt with. The DNC is orders of magnitude more prominent and established than some random employee working for some primary campaign.

See this shit right here.

Calling people shills.

That's why Bernie be losing. Because of bad optics and vitriolic supporters.

I'd argue Bernie is more likely losing the way he is because the establishment and mainstream media favours Hillary, and because Bernie is too leftwing for America. Optics in this instance mostly (but not completely) boils down to how the mainstream media frame things.

 

[boiled goose]

While the breech may have been on both sides, the logs proved that not a single person from Hillary's campaign accessed a single bit of data they weren't supposed to have.

This was, unequivocally, Bernie's campaign screwing up and getting caught doing it.

That said, it's not a huge deal, considering he went on to lose most of the states the accessed anyway.

My response was to dispel the claim that it was done to ensure things on the technical side were sound.

 

[Piecake]

See, the problem is the course of events dont match what you describe.

The breach happened in part because of a technical issue that affected both sides. If the precaution was for technical reasons, access would have been withheld for both campaigns for 24 hours.

To clarify, i dont Think the breach, the punishment, or the lawsuit are that big of a deal. My biggest issue is with the absurd gaf outrage. It's pathetic.

I think the outrage is that Bernie (at least in the beginning) and some of his supporters are trying to portray themselves as the victims in this scenario. I find that rather ridiculous and pathetic.

Bringing this thing up again by suing the DNC just reminded people of that. It especially doesnt look good when some supporters and staff are blaming some of his loses on voter fraud, corruption and conspiracy either. A whole lot of blaming and playing the victim.

 

[ant1532]

When you play Street fighter, you play to win

based tesseract


bless me.

 

[You Are Viewtiful]

He is getting beyond desperate.

 

[Frozenprince]

Fuckin NeoGAF, never been on a forum with so many corporate apologists. "Fuck you Bernie" for suing the DNC? Who gives a shit? Like you have skin in the fucking game. Disgusting people here. Keep making posts about the latest McDonald's menu addition and other nonsense for your rat race delusional bullshit lives.

badassoverhere.jpg

Bernie lost. On the 1/1000000 miracle chance he won, or wins, it doesn't matter. He will never get 95% of the shit he wants done passed through the house and senate, he's an idealist who isn't willing to play the game.

The game is the game, you either play or get out of the way, you can either accept it and live in the real world where the actual domestic changes will be negligible at best, or you can continue to shout "OLIGARCHY, CORPORATIONS, CITIZENS UNITED" until you're blue in the face and get nowhere.

You should probably get off your pedestal and realize those "rat race delusional bullshit lives" are the majority of people living in the US right now. Their voices, opinions, and perspective matter. To just so callously dismiss them is exactly why Bernies pie in the sky idealism, despite how nice it is, was dead before he hit the ground.

 

[Nickle]

Fuckin NeoGAF, never been on a forum with so many corporate apologists. "Fuck you Bernie" for suing the DNC? Who gives a shit? Like you have skin in the fucking game. Disgusting people here. Keep making posts about the latest McDonald's menu addition and other nonsense for your rat race delusional bullshit lives.

It's a forum, dude. Not everything we talk about is going to be vital to the survival of humanity.

 

[boiled goose]

Only one side stole data.

Again... read what I was responding too.

It's like people can't Fucking read.

Everything is a knee jerk counter response. Breath. Think. Then respond.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Fuckin NeoGAF, never been on a forum with so many corporate apologists. "Fuck you Bernie" for suing the DNC? Who gives a shit? Like you have skin in the fucking game. Disgusting people here. Keep making posts about the latest McDonald's menu addition and other nonsense for your rat race delusional bullshit lives.

This guy is about as done as Bernie.

 

[rjinaz]

Fuckin NeoGAF, never been on a forum with so many corporate apologists. "Fuck you Bernie" for suing the DNC? Who gives a shit? Like you have skin in the fucking game. Disgusting people here. Keep making posts about the latest McDonald's menu addition and other nonsense for your rat race delusional bullshit lives.

I kind of agree there is an overeaction going on here, but seriously what are you doing with this?


Bernie had my support, but he's just about lost it. I thought he would go down with some dignity but he's not and it's looking bad on all that he was trying to accomplish. Just stop Bernie.

 

[Fat4all]

Keep making posts about the latest McDonald's menu addition and other nonsense for your rat race delusional bullshit lives.

Fuckin' lolol.

 

[TheOohChild]

God, Bernie is just going to linger around all spring making things weird

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Wow, you guys. This thread is a perfect example of why so many liberals are upset with the Democratic Party.

Bernie being a sore loser, being petulant, being an independent up until recently, or anything else people have complained about has not caused nearly as much damage as the Democratic Party giving lip service to liberal issues while getting cozy with the rich.

Health care? Even the version of the ACA with a public option got nixed fast. And to say it's because of Republicans is missing the story. Every Republican in the House and Senate voted against the version of the ACA that did pass and it still passed. That proves the Democrats didn't need to please any Republicans to get it passed. Yet they STILL voted in a bill that made health insurance companies even stronger. Even with the GOP too few in number to stop the Democrats, the Democrats still didn't pass single payor. So it rings hollow when the Democrats say Bernie's plan can't pass. They had a supermajority and chose not to even push it. Don't piss on me and tell me it's raining. Lives could be saved if we didn't put profit before health. But nope. Let's get hung up on a Bernie Staffer copying tables while a firewall is down and a lawsuit he filed, resulting in zero deaths. Great sense of priorities.

Wall Street? The media and everyone else is asking the wrong question about Hillary's speeches. It's about whether she openly promised Wall Street anything. It's not about if any of the money they donated to her were direct transactions serving as bribes. It's about the longstanding relationship that Hillary has with the people running Wall Street, and how we can possibly expect her to make unbiased decisions on whether or not they should be investigated and prosecuted. She points out how Obama got more Wall Street donations than anyone else and still passed reforms. Bernie points out that no Wall Street executives were prosecuted. And the response from Hillary (or anyone) on that point? None. No response. What difference does it make to pass new laws if you don't enforce them? Prosecution of white collar crime hit a twenty-year low during Obama' administration, with Eric Holder as AG. This coincided with the rise of non-prosecution and deferred prosecution agreements. People lost their homes over this. We could be backing the candidate who doesn't have relationships with the white collar criminals that would divide loyalty to friends from loyalty to his job. But nope. Let's get hung up on a Bernie Staffer copying tables while a firewall is down and a lawsuit he filed, resulting in zero homes lost. Great sense of priorities.

I won't say this is the only reason, but I think it's one of the reasons why a lot of liberals don't have loyalty to the Democrat Party and don't turn out in mid-terms. The Democrats operate on "Don't let this crazy Republican be President" to get votes. Naturally, they don't get so many votes when the Presidential Office isn't up for grabs. If you want to win elections, you need mid-term votes. And if you want mid-term votes, give people something to vote for, not just someone to vote against.

Get your priorities right. It's about the people, not your party.

Wrong on all accounts. The operating story here is that the Democratic primary race is coming to a close and yet Bernie Sanders insists on going down kicking and screaming. This thread is about another action that does nothing to help progressives or the Democratic party and is all about being sore.

Why help the Democratic party? Because parties get things done, not people. Political coalitions are what get legislation passed. Politicians come together and form a big grand alliance and support each other and stick together. That makes them efficient so that they ultimately can get things accomplished. Like it or not, there are only two relevant parties in this country and the Democrats are the progressive one. And like it or not, but some democrats (myself included) are progressives who also don't support single payer. Like it or not, not all of us are out to punch big banks in the nose, considering the chaos that led to the financial crisis wasn't illegal. You can't put people in jail retroactively.

You sink-the-ship types are like the I've-had-it-up-to-here crowd on the right.

 

[User 463088]

Yes, because nobody has been held responsible for or answered for it yet. So until we know why it happened, and whether or not it was either a knee jerk move in negligence or incompetence, or actual corruption or malicious intent, there's some serious questions raised.

If (big if) it was corruption or malicious intent in play, then the DNC being involved in that does indeed hold much more dangerous ramifications and implications than some lone criminal who has already been dealt with. The DNC is orders of magnitude more prominent and established than some random employee working for some primary campaign.

Can you at the very least see the absurdity in saying:

Yes, we stole data we weren't entitled to. Yes, we broke the rules and shouldn't have done that. Yes, if someone else had broken into our data we would have been livid...BUT you have to prove to us your punishment wasn't fraud! corruption! establishment!

Yes, one of the four people involved was eventually fired. But, it is not unreasonable for the DNC to want to make sure that the walls are put back in place. Had they simply refused access to Bernie because YOLO, then yes..that's a problem. But when his people broke the rules, accessed data that is the life blood of a campaign...to then throw up one's hands and say "How very dare you try and stop us from breaking the rules again" just rings hollow to me.

 

[ElFly]

Yes, because nobody has been held responsible for or answered for it yet. So until we know why it happened, and whether or not it was either a knee jerk move in negligence or incompetence, or actual corruption or malicious intent, there's some serious questions raised.

If (big if) it was corruption or malicious intent in play, then the DNC being involved in that does indeed hold much more dangerous ramifications and implications than some lone criminal who has already been dealt with. The DNC is orders of magnitude more prominent and established than some random employee working for some primary campaign.

I'd argue Bernie is more likely losing the way he is because the establishment and mainstream media favours Hillary, and because Bernie is too leftwing for America. Optics in this instance mostly (but not completely) boils down to how the mainstream media frame things.

Do you really, honestly think that suing the DNC is going to help Sanders win the nomination?

Because that should be the only important thing for Bernie right now, not some stupid breach of contract nobody ever cared about.

 

[Frozenprince]

It's a forum, dude. Not everything we talk about is going to be vital to the survival of humanity.

I mean, this is a video games enthusiasts board.

Video games are the most top down corporately bloated entertainment industry to have ever existed. If I had to talk about heavy shit like this every post I wouldn't come here.

Plus, I like McDonalds ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Wrong on all accounts. The operating story here is that the Democratic primary race is coming to a close and yet Bernie Sanders insists on going down kicking and screaming. This thread is about another action that does nothing to help progressives or the Democratic party and is all about being sore.

Why help the Democratic party? Because parties get things done, not people. Political coalitions are what get legislation passed. Politicians come together and form a big grand alliance and support each other and stick together. That makes them efficient so that they ultimately can get things accomplished. Like it or not, there are only two relevant parties in this country and the Democrats are the progressive one. And like it or not, but some democrats (myself included) are progressives who also don't support single payer. Like it or not, not all of us are out to punch big banks in the nose, considering the chaos that led to the financial crisis wasn't illegal. You can't put people in jail retroactively.

You sink-the-ship types are like the I've-had-it-up-to-here crowd on the right.

Nice post.

A lot of people just aren't willing to accept nuance.

 

[Adaren]

See, the problem is the course of events dont match what you describe.

The breach happened in part because of a technical issue that affected both sides. If the precaution was for technical reasons, access would have been withheld for both campaigns for 24 hours.

To clarify, i dont Think the breach, the punishment, or the lawsuit are that big of a deal. My biggest issue is with the absurd gaf outrage. It's pathetic.

And my biggest problem is with the absurd accusation that the DNC did something unreasonable in this situation. Do the people who make up the DNC generally have a Hillary bias? Probably. Hard not to when she's been the figurehead of your party for 25 years, supporting it at every turn.

The DNC was polite enough to let Bernie caucus with them. If he had won the popular vote, I have no doubt they'd give him their presidential nomination. But when his staffers are discovered to be stealing data from their databases, and they briefly take reasonable precautions while Bernie sorts out his corrupt staff, suddenly they're the devil incarnate.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Fuckin NeoGAF, never been on a forum with so many corporate apologists. "Fuck you Bernie" for suing the DNC? Who gives a shit? Like you have skin in the fucking game. Disgusting people here. Keep making posts about the latest McDonald's menu addition and other nonsense for your rat race delusional bullshit lives.

 

[Frozenprince]

Fuck now I want a Double Quarter Pounder.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Again... read what I was responding too.

It's like people can't Fucking read.

Everything is a knee jerk counter response. Breath. Think. Then respond.

You wouldn't need to revoke access to both sides to fix a technical issue when only one side is at risk of committing data thievery

 

[User 463088]

Let's also not pretend this is the only slightly unethical thing the campaign has done.

AARP had to release a statement asking Bernie to remove their logo from his promotional materials because it gave the impression that they endorsed him. The same thing happened with the environmental group that endorsed Hillary. Or when his campaign staff were caught pretending to be Union members in NV and accessing areas they weren't allowed to be in.

 

[Tesseract]

Bernie is pissed, the next debate will be epic

Get in that ass, larry

 

[nib95]

Can you at the very least see the absurdity in saying:

Yes, we stole data we weren't entitled to. Yes, we broke the rules and shouldn't have done that. Yes, if someone else had broken into our data we would have been livid...BUT you have to prove to us your punishment wasn't fraud! corruption! establishment!

Yes, one of the four people involved was eventually fired. But, it is not unreasonable for the DNC to want to make sure that the walls are put back in place. Had they simply refused access to Bernie because YOLO, then yes..that's a problem. But when his people broke the rules, accessed data that is the life blood of a campaign...to then throw up one's hands and say "How very dare you try and stop us from breaking the rules again" just rings hollow to me.

Everything you're saying is besides the point though. The way the DNC reacted is potentially wrong or illegal, hence why he's bringing the case forward. The rest is semantics. This isn't about whether he is being petty or not, it's whether the DNC followed the proper protocol or rules in how they handled the situation, and if not why not?

Two wrongs don't make a right. One was dealt with, the other is not. The implication from some posters here seems to be that because someone in Bernie's campaign fucked up, the DNC should be allowed to break rules and protocol, and Bernie (or by virtue anyone else) shouldn't have the right to challenge that. In law, there's due process. Someone commiting a crime, doesn't absolve the powers that be of having to follow that process.

 

[Shaffield]

And my biggest problem is with the absurd accusation that the DNC did something unreasonable in this situation. Do the people who make up the DNC generally have a Hillary bias? Probably. Hard not to when she's been the figurehead of your party for 25 years, supporting it at every turn.

The DNC was polite enough to let Bernie caucus with them. If he had won the popular vote, I have no doubt they'd give him their presidential nomination. But when his staffers are discovered to be stealing data from their databases, and they briefly take reasonable precautions while Bernie sorts out his corrupt staff, suddenly they're the devil incarnate.

it doesn't matter if it was reasonable or unreasonable. this is a lawsuit. it is about whether or not the actions of the DNC were an illegal breach of their contract. they are suing the DNC for $75k, not trying to kick them out of Heaven.

p.s. i would argue that denying the Sanders campaign access to voter data for 24 hours was not nearly as unreasonable as the rigged debate schedule.

 

[Wafflecakes]

Everything you're saying is besides the point though. The way the DNC reacted is potentially wrong or illegal, hence why he's bringing the case forward. The rest is semantics. This isn't about whether he is being petty or not, it's whether the DNC followed the proper protocol or rules in how they handled the situation, and if not why not?

Two wrongs don't make a right. One was dealt with, the other is not. The implication from some posters here seems to be that because someone in Bernie's campaign fucked up, the DNC should be allowed to break rules and protocol, and Bernie (or by virtue anyone else) shouldn't have the right to challenge that. Just like in law, there's due process. Someone commiting a crime doesn't absolve you of having to follow that process.

Bernie still doesn't have access? Wait.... he does?

bubububu DNC conspiracy!

 

[Makai]

See this shit right here.

Calling people shills.

That's why Bernie be losing. Because of bad optics and vitriolic supporters.

If you're British you can help Hillary by donating Shillings.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Get your priorities right. It's about the people, not your party.

I'm a left-wing voter living in Mississippi. The party donating a little money to candidates here and there, and keeping at least Blue Dogs viable in this state, is the only reason my state isn't 100% controlled by insanely regressive politicians.

So no, you shouldn't tell people about their priorities. If dealing with things like free college or single payer are your big voting interests, vote. But don't sit here and act like people in Clinton's firewall aren't voting for good reason. We need organization down here to help when the majority vote isn't on our side. Statements like yours just reek of uber-white Seattle (for example) liberals who, quite literally, don't know what they're talking about when they refer to most of the country.

I posted it earlier in the thread, but I really liked Bernie late last year, but it's pretty clear that his revolution was never for people living in red states. We're just living in the Old Confederacy, or we're low information, or we're establishment shills, or ..... Anything we can be called other than "not interested in Bernie Sanders" voters.

More on-topic: Bernie was certainly "wronged" in that he didn't have access for 24 hours ahead of when the DNC was contractually allowed to take away his access. But this nonsense about that being anything more than a minor setback is what makes Bernie look petty. His campaign factually committed theft, and suffered a really minor punishment for it. It was a win for them that they came out unscathed from theft, and now he's snatching a defeat from the jaws of victory on this one. There's no way at all for him to look good for this.

 

[boiled goose]

And my biggest problem is with the absurd accusation that the DNC did something unreasonable in this situation. Do the people who make up the DNC generally have a Hillary bias? Probably. Hard not to when she's been the figurehead of your party for 25 years, supporting it at every turn.

The DNC was polite enough to let Bernie caucus with them. If he had won the popular vote, I have no doubt they'd give him their presidential nomination. But when his staffers are discovered to be stealing data from their databases, and they briefly take reasonable precautions while Bernie sorts out his corrupt staff, suddenly they're the devil incarnate.

I dont think the reaction was THAT unreasonable. Was it somewhat biased and unfair? Probably.. imo

Wasn't it like one new dude fired immediately?
Wasn't it a clear technical issue fixed pretty much immediately?

To me, there was no precaution. It was clearly punitive. I dont anything is that big of a deal. But I can see the bias and call it out. Would i sue? At this point? Meh.

 

[Arkeband]

If it was about corruption Bernie would've been permanently banned from the servers. What does kicking him off for 24 hours even do?

It was an indefinite ban until the lawsuit was dropped, then they revoked the ban.

 

[HariKari]

DNC has had it out for Sanders from Day 1. He pushes back ever so slightly and people flip their shit?

 

[Kaladin]

DNC has had it out for Sanders from Day 1. He pushes back ever so slightly and people flip their shit?

People are flipping their shit because the original OP made it out like this was the action of a sore loser candidate.

 

[Arkeband]

Bernie is pissed, the next debate will be epic

Get in that ass, larry

 

[nib95]

Bernie still doesn't have access? Wait.... he does?

bubububu DNC conspiracy!

Did the DNC breach their contract and break proper protocol or not?

 

[User 463088]

Everything you're saying is besides the point though. The way the DNC reacted is potentially wrong or illegal, hence why he's bringing the case forward. The rest is semantics. This isn't about whether he is being petty or not, it's whether the DNC followed the proper protocol or rules in how they handled the situation, and if not why not?

Two wrongs don't make a right. One was dealt with, the other is not. The implication from some posters here seems to be that because someone in Bernie's campaign fucked up, the DNC should be allowed to break rules and protocol, and Bernie (or by virtue anyone else) shouldn't have the right to challenge that. In law, there's due process. Someone commiting a crime, doesn't absolve the powers that be of having to follow that process.

I've never said he doesn't have the right to bring the case.

What I have said from the very beginning, and will continue to say, is that it's an entirely asinine thing for him to do. He is suing the party he is trying to run to lead! For something that was rooted in his campaign's unethical behavior. The optics on that are absolutely shit. It's so stupid on so many levels.

He has access back. He got it back in less than 24 hours. It doesn't matter how right or wrong the DNC was in this instance. The lawsuit pissed a lot of people off. I know a lot of Bernie supporters have disdain for those of us who have been active in the party for a long time, but there was legit anger about it. My bf's mom has been working for our local democratic party since Carter ran. Shit like this? It pisses her off. The DNC, and people who get out there and do the grunt work for the party, would have been needed by Bernie if he was actually going to win this thing. Since he's probably not going to, it doesn't matter....but the audacity of suing the party you are trying to lead is just ridiculous.

 

[A Link to the Past]

DNC has had it out for Sanders from Day 1. He pushes back ever so slightly and people flip their shit?

The reason why the DNC revoked access is because Sanders' campaign factually did something that it shouldn't have done. Sanders is not exactly a hero in this situation, and for all you can say of establishmentism, this is the worst hill to die on.