2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Hickenlooper makes it to the debate

Status
Not open for further replies.

higemaru

Member
Nov 30, 2017
1,448
You are leaving out a big detail. He hired this person to be “mean” and then lied to the press about it so he can pretend to keep his promise not to be “mean”.

You are completely missing why this is a big deal. It’s because he lied to the press and tried to cover it up.

The only reason sirota was announced today is because they knew the Atlantic figured out what they were doing in secret.
Where did you get this information that Bernie hired Sirota to be "mean." Was that in the article? Did they specifically say "Bernie Sanders sat down with David Sirota and asked him "Do you wanna be mean for me. On a probationary basis?"

Oh gee that's ok then. They don't give a Nobel Prize for Attempted Chemistry after all.
If you really don't think that Politico, MSNBC, and other news outlets didn't put out hit pieces on the Sanders campaign in 2016, I'd give it another look over. Or check out the cuts made against Obama by the Clinton campaign in 2008. Political journalism is ostensibly sports journalism but it's playing with human lives. With the exception of the in-depth investigative pieces, it's just filler bullshit designed to build cults of personality and tear down others. Which is one reason why the Trump campaign was unstoppable in 2016. His campaign managers understood that political journalists just wanted to see blood in the water and took full advantage of that.
 

ThomasJames

Member
Jan 15, 2019
1,803
The DNC rigged the debate schedule, the anti-democratic superdelegates all went for hillary, the Congressional Black Caucus smeared Bernie saying he never did anything for civil rights, Donna Brazile leaked a question to Hillary and then you have elite snobs on CNN like Andrea Mitchell (who's married to Alan freakin' Greenspan) bashing Bernie left and right.

But oh noes, David Sirota who's been tweeting mean things about Democratic candidates has been working for Bernie, wow
You're conflating actions in the 2016 primary with actions in the 2020 primary.
 

Tukarrs

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,232
I don't follow politics broadly enough to know who this Sirota guy is, but come on, if the guy deleted 20,000 tweets overnight that should be enough to convince even the most ardent Sanders supporters that none of this is above board.
It's just good policy to erase your social media history whenever looking for a new job.
 

RailWays

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
5,654
The DNC rigged the debate schedule, the anti-democratic superdelegates all went for hillary, the Congressional Black Caucus smeared Bernie saying he never did anything for civil rights, Donna Brazile leaked a question to Hillary and then you have elite snobs on CNN like Andrea Mitchell (who's married to Alan freakin' Greenspan) bashing Bernie left and right.

But oh noes, David Sirota who's been tweeting mean things about Democratic candidates has been working for Bernie, wow
How about both are bad and need to be addressed?
 

brainchild

GameXplain
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
7,065
Minnesota
The article has evidence of this....Sirota was on the payroll for MONTHS all the while he was attacking Beto and Kamala endlessly and the campaign kept it secret so he could pledge to not do this.

Are you seriously claiming no proof when The Atlantic explains how exactly this happened?

You are seriously calling this report from the Atlantic misinformation?
Under no reasonable axiom of logic does the available evidence constitute that Bernard Sanders personally and directly told David Sirota to attack other Democrats. There's nothing to suggest that at all. What we can reasonably take away from the evidence is that Bernie's team was happy to hire someone who was critical of Democrats, but that's not the same thing in the legal sense, and you know it.
 

Dream Machine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,552
We've known Sirota was a former Bernie aide and vocal defender since like 2015, so it's not exactly a shocking reveal.

Bernie still should have disclosed all of this.
 

weirder

Avenger
Oct 31, 2017
2,708
Ethics are for centrist neoliberals
...to be used against them.

Bernie stans will justify anything in furtherance of their cult of personality. His stans are the mirror image of Trump cultists, willingly twisting their already malleable ethical standards to whatever shape the moment demands.
That's exactly how it looks sometimes. The normal reasonable supporters want to get rid of Sirota.
However, the mental gymnastics in this thread rn by the hardcore cultists are hilarious. "What about this. What about that." lol
 

LinktothePastGOAT

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,879
The DNC rigged the debate schedule, the anti-democratic superdelegates all went for hillary, the Congressional Black Caucus smeared Bernie saying he never did anything for civil rights, Donna Brazile leaked a question to Hillary and then you have elite snobs on CNN like Andrea Mitchell (who's married to Alan freakin' Greenspan) bashing Bernie left and right.

But oh noes, David Sirota who's been tweeting mean things about Democratic candidates has been working for Bernie, wow
Poor little bernard and his fans.
 

Haubergeon

Member
Jan 22, 2019
543
Most people who support Bernie here agree that hiring Sirota probably shouldn't have happened or at the very least that it shouldn't have happened under these circumstances. There's like a 10-to-1 post ratio of people here furiously trying to pick fights with Bernie supporters over this for some reason. I support Bernie and agree the campaign should totally ditch Sirota. It was a bad judgment call.
 

Tomohawk

Member
Oct 27, 2017
740
"He's the only one. I don't care about what he's done in the past. The other side is worse anyway. No one's perfect. His message is more important. It's worth it to stop the opponents. It didn't work so it's ok. Both sides. He didn't know, it was all his team, not him. He's right on this one issue I care about so that's all that matters. They deserved it anyway. What about ____"

When your rhetoric starts to become indistinguishable from that of Trump supporters about their cult leader, take a step back and reevaluate.
I mean this is true for all candidates when their faults are brought up, I think it's healthy to weigh pros and cons instead of just going their all crooked, however some people are being a little dismissive.
 

Cheebo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,767
Ann Arbor, MI
Under no reasonable axiom of logic does the available evidence constitute that Bernard Sanders personally and directly told David Sirota to attack other Democrats. There's nothing to suggest that at all. What we can reasonably take away from the evidence is that Bernie's team was happy to hire someone who was critical of Democrats, but that's not the same thing in the legal sense, and you know it.
They kept his hiring secret for months. And didn’t announce it until Atlantic told them they were going to reveal it. That is a fact.

Sirota attacked the other candidates while secretly under payroll by Bernie for months. That is fact.

Bernie pledged his campaign wouldn’t attack other Dems in the way Sirota was doing at the same time Sirota was doing so under payroll of the campaign. That is a fact


Which of these points do you deny?
 

Dream Machine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,552
Most people who support Bernie here agree that hiring Sirota probably shouldn't have happened or at the very least that it shouldn't have happened under these circumstances. There's like a 10-to-1 post ratio of people here furiously trying to pick fights with Bernie supporters over this for some reason. I support Bernie and agree the campaign should totally ditch Sirota. It was a bad judgment call.
It's much easier to debate strawmen that you put in quotes, though
 

Midnight Jon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,431
Ohio
There's like a 10-to-1 post ratio of people here furiously trying to pick fights with Bernie supporters over this for some reason.
Kinda seems like there's something like a 5:5:1 ratio of people responding to the ones trying to make excuses for it, to the people thinking Sirota needs to be let go (or at least that it's pretty fuckin' weird that this wasn't disclosed much earlier), to the people making excuses for it

This is still more accurate than the argument that Cheebo was making.
At this point for a lot of things I just take whatever Cheebo's posting, divide it in half so it's less cartoonishly hyperbolic, and then argue against that half.
 
Last edited:
Mar 9, 2018
2,339
Then yes, if that becomes the framing over the actions of Bill himself, I absolutely do think there's sexism involved in that. And my feelings on this go beyond the Clintons. Who are we to say how Hillary, or any wife, should feel or respond to accusations against their husbands? People like to forget that, unless we're talking something on a new level of vile, wives tend to also be victims in these situations. Not just in terms of vows broken, but wives often have an emotional (and religious) incentive to believe their husbands, and that's also completely taken advantage of.

So, yeah, I like to keep my thoughts on what I know Bill should have done, versus what I think Hillary should have done. Because how the heck can I know that?

Besides, it doesn't help that in a lot of these conversations, the implication is pretty naked. Hillary stayed with him...so that must mean Hillary was ok with it...and that must mean Hillary was complicit the whole time. Yeah, gross.

EDIT: Aaand this is what I get for writing a post on mobile walking down the street as a major story breaks.
Who are "we"? People who care about holding rapists accountable. And holding them accountable often entails dealing with people who have supported the rapists and even promise to elevate the rapists in the future, like Hillary Clinton did when talking about what she would do if she won the White House.

I mean, sure. There are a lot of things that disincentivize relatives and friends and colleagues of people accused of rape to dismiss the accusations. That doesn't erase their complicity when credible allegations emerge -- patterns, strings of them -- and they turn their ire to the accusers. Nothing you said is very meaningful in the context of this particular case: a rich, political superstar who could have left her credibly accused rapist husband while still living a safe and purposeful life. She hasn't and that says something about her.

Sexism also comes from women who are willing to throw other women under the bus to preserve their marriage, to preserve their sanity, to preserve their political aspiration, to preserve their home. I think that's what Hillary Clinton is. A prolific misogynist and rape enabler. She and her husband should be unwelcome in a party that cares about survivors.
 
Nov 6, 2017
339
The DNC rigged the debate schedule, the anti-democratic superdelegates all went for hillary, the Congressional Black Caucus smeared Bernie saying he never did anything for civil rights, Donna Brazile leaked a question to Hillary and then you have elite snobs on CNN like Andrea Mitchell (who's married to Alan freakin' Greenspan) bashing Bernie left and right.

But oh noes, David Sirota who's been tweeting mean things about Democratic candidates has been working for Bernie, wow
Jesus christ

All of this shit is exhausting and I can't stand the vitriol coming from everyone. The more we prop up people as these beacons of morality with cult-like devotion, the worse off we are. Everyone needs to fucking calm down.
 

brainchild

GameXplain
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
7,065
Minnesota
They kept his hiring secret for months. And didn’t announce it until Atlantic told them they were going to reveal it. That is a fact.

Sirota attacked the other candidates while secretly under payroll by Bernie for months. That is fact.

Bernie pledged his campaign wouldn’t attack other Dems in the way Sirota was doing at the same time Sirota was doing so under payroll of the campaign. That is a fact


Which of these points do you deny?
None of that says, "Bernie told Sirota to be mean to other Democrats", which is what I was calling you out on. If I didn't check you on this kind of language, you would continue to get more and more hyperbolic to the point of disinformation, as you've done in the past.
 

Raster

Member
Feb 28, 2018
1,974
Most people who support Bernie here agree that hiring Sirota probably shouldn't have happened or at the very least that it shouldn't have happened under these circumstances. There's like a 10-to-1 post ratio of people here furiously trying to pick fights with Bernie supporters over this for some reason. I support Bernie and agree the campaign should totally ditch Sirota. It was a bad judgment call.
Being a Bernie supporter here means getting shamed on the daily and being equated to a MAGA supporter.

It sucks but there's clearly an agenda being pushed here.
 

abellwillring

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,636
Austin, TX
It's just good policy to erase your social media history whenever looking for a new job.
I mean I sort of get that and honestly don't necessarily disagree, but this is clearly a very pointed response. He was either tipped off on the piece coming out or asked by them for a response and did it in turn because he knew how bad stuff would look.

I have 53k tweets in nearly 11 years. If I was an athlete in college and on the cusp of superstardom or an unknown actor who had just been cast in some incredible role then I'd probably just erase them all to get a fresh start and try and avoid there being anything in my history that could be used against me, but a when you do it in a case like this -- it's obviously super duper shady.
 

ThomasJames

Member
Jan 15, 2019
1,803
Also, DNC actually addressed these concerns.
2016 will forever be invoked
Right, that's why the conflation is silly. I don't think anyone here denies that various organizations/people had their thumb on the scale for Hillary in 2016, even if there's still a debate as to the extent which that favoritism changed any outcomes. Nonetheless, until these same concerns become relevant in 2020 (and I've seen people try to make that case by suggesting the identity of a town hall questioner is material to the validity of her question) it isn't a very compelling argument.
 
Oct 27, 2017
437
I find it difficult to fathom how an intellectually serious person could countenance voting for Sanders in the primary after this latest round of horrific hires.
 
Last edited:

Tomohawk

Member
Oct 27, 2017
740
Where did you get this information that Bernie hired Sirota to be "mean." Was that in the article? Did they specifically say "Bernie Sanders sat down with David Sirota and asked him "Do you wanna be mean for me. On a probationary basis?"


If you really don't think that Politico, MSNBC, and other news outlets didn't put out hit pieces on the Sanders campaign in 2016, I'd give it another look over. Or check out the cuts made against Obama by the Clinton campaign in 2008. Political journalism is ostensibly sports journalism but it's playing with human lives. With the exception of the in-depth investigative pieces, it's just filler bullshit designed to build cults of personality and tear down others. Which is one reason why the Trump campaign was unstoppable in 2016. His campaign managers understood that political journalists just wanted to see blood in the water and took full advantage of that.
That's true and while there may be revolving doors and journalist jockeying for favor by writing hit pieces, having some one on staff while simultaneously writing hit pieces is alot more explicit. Unless Sirota wasn't paid and was just asked for advice this is worse.
 

ZealousD

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,859
The original poster I responded to did say Bernie would have won and almost any other candidate.
Hirok2099 said that "almost any other candidate" would have won. I don't see any direct claims about Bernie. They only responded to you characterizing somebody else's argument that way.

Their argument also has nothing to do with the things I'm discussing with you, which you've been LOLing at the entire time.
 

B-Dubs

Oh well, what the hell?
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
15,957
ok everyone needs to chill for a minute, gonna go through this mess
 
Mod post - chill out

B-Dubs

Oh well, what the hell?
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
15,957
Official Staff Communication
I know this is a primary and it's going to get heated, but the level of animosity in this topic is unsustainable and unacceptable. Chill out, dial it back a few notches, and get back to your discussion. We won't last the remaining year and change if this keeps happening.
 

medinaria

Member
Oct 30, 2017
325

whether or not sirota's an acceptable hire from a "is this the kind of person you want to be your comms director" perspective is still up for debate, and people can have different opinions on that.

it appears the claims of "severe corruption" may have been a bit premature, however. (john mulholland is the editor of guardian US)

e: further tweets specify that sirota's last piece for them was in december, and he was approached by the sanders campaign in january (go to the tweet author's TL for more, trying not to embed a million things here)

second edit: this also kinda makes the thread title a lie, doesn't it?
 

weirder

Avenger
Oct 31, 2017
2,708

The way Mika's eyes lit up when mentioning this at the end of Yang's interview yesterday made it appear she really likes him as a candidate.
 

lmcfigs

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
6,851

whether or not sirota's an acceptable hire from a "is this the kind of person you want to be your comms director" perspective is still up for debate, and people can have different opinions on that.

it appears the claims of "severe corruption" may have been a bit premature, however. (john mulholland is the editor of guardian US)
oh wow would you look at that.
 

Raster

Member
Feb 28, 2018
1,974

whether or not sirota's an acceptable hire from a "is this the kind of person you want to be your comms director" perspective is still up for debate, and people can have different opinions on that.

it appears the claims of "severe corruption" may have been a bit premature, however. (john mulholland is the editor of guardian US)

e: further tweets specify that sirota's last piece for them was in december, and he was approached by the sanders campaign in january (go to the tweet author's TL for more, trying not to embed a million things here)

second edit: this also kinda makes the thread title a lie, doesn't it?
The title of this thread is sensationalistic and spreading misinformation. It should to be edited immediately.
 

lmcfigs

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
6,851
Yeah the title of this thread is needlessly inflammatory. especially compared to the other titles in the past.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.